|
Theistic Evolution Debate vi
|
|||
|
ThePhoenix said: This ir ridiculous. God did not create a world that is variable, a world in which anything can change at any moment. God created perfectly. You're saying God had to create the entire universe wholescale, planet by planet, sun by sun. I simply think that God is so perfect that he was able to create a universe where the existance of life was not only possible, it was inevitable. And yet another stray brother. Yes, it is ridiculous to say you believe in God and that He used a method which excludes Him. And yes He did create a perfect world - as it is what scripture tells us. I am saying what scripture tells me and am not interested in what you think how God could have created, only in what His word plainly tells me. But I do. Where does Jesus refer to creationism? Where does he refer to evolution? He doesn't. Therefore it is for man to discover. You do what? Put your trust in the word of God or in that of man? And so Jesus was not speaking then of the creation when He spoke this: "But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.” in Mark 6: 10? Truth cannot be determined by man for He is a fallen being remember – but you don’t believe in a literal Genesis so maybe that is where the problem lays. Of course only God determines truth since He is our creator, so why would He allow man to determine their own version of truth? God has chosen to speak with us! Look at the world, the trees, the birds, the plants, everything about you? How can that not be God speaking to us? And it was written down in scripture. If you disagree then go listen to the trees, birds, plants and whatever else you wish – if you think that will bring you closer to God – perhaps you could even worship them. As for me, give me the word of God any day for it is what I meditate on day and night - not songs that birds sing or the wind blowing through the trees. SCIENCE is agnostic, because it makes neither statements for nor statements against the existance of god. Scientists can believe whatever they want. Yes it is. Don’t mention God, therefore He does not exist. What better way than to deny His existence than to doubt it – simple enough. Of course anyone can believe in anything they want, my belief happens to have its foundations on the absolute authority of His word. How can we truly be Christ's followers if we do not believe His word? Where does Christ speak on evolution? Why should He since it was not the method God had used, as scripture contradicts your evolutionary timeline. But why would God's word only refer to one situation? If God created his word to be absolutely true for every time then you can't discard one section with the arguement that it's "taken out of context." God is omnipotent. Don't tell me he couldn't have figured out how the verse would be interpreted, and have rephrased it to avoid misinterpretation. So that we would understand in plain language what it says. And yet what does faith in God tell us? It is in plain language the scripture is written in so that we would have no doubt as to what God has said. It is only when we have allowed the wishful thinking of men to pollute the wholesomeness of God’s word that we become blind to the truth of God. He is definitely omnipotent, but also a God of so much love that you or I could never comprehend. He did create man with the ability to choose to love Him or rebel against Him. And we know the rest of the story. And if He were to make it impossible to doubt God, how would that show that we have genuine faith? A belief in evolution does not destroy a belief in god. No it does not destroy belief in a god, but in God as it is not what scripture tells us. Oh please, evolution is a VERY sound theory. The theory of gravity is on MUCH weaker footing (look up the massive problems with quantum gravity and you'll have an idea of how shaky the theory of gravity is, especially when compared with the theory of evolution). Very sound indeed if you believe that the process requires an increase in information and complexity where there is no guidance nor direction. But lets say to an extent that evolution is true, it goes against the very laws of nature – mainly the one law that life only comes from life. For have you any undisputed proof that long expanses of time coupled with randomness will result in the codes that biological life consists of? That is exactly what evolution teaches us that through eons and natural selection complexity can be achieved where there is none to begin with – the information required for this to occur had to have come from somewhere? But where? Don’t tell me it was God. For if you say it was God who first jumpstarted the first life – then you might as well say He created everything else as no life has ever been witnessed to have arisen from slime anywhere – whether it be in a test tube or in nature. Linkage. You do not make a statement like that without links, and many of them. How can you possibly look at the evidence and state that this is the case? Or is drdino the beginning and end of your search? Or that it really requires no linkage, for much of it are my own thoughts coupled with literature I’ve read over the years. It is however not the evidence I am in disagreement with, it is the evolutionists interpretations there of. Who? WHO?!? Lupasca studies in that field he should know him. As one well-know theologist said "Anyone who believes in god is a delusional moron." Of course I'm joking, no theologist ever said that, much less a "well-known" one. Maybe you should ask lucas what he believes in? I have, and by the way no replies yet. A sense of humor, how nice. However first take your foot out of your mouth – so I can understand you. A belief in evolution allows me to murder, steal, rape, loot, and generally do whatever I want? That's the strangest arguement I've seen so far. You forgot it is also the breeder of communism, Marxism, atheism, homosexuality, racism, and abortion. That is exactly what I am talking about, for without God such are your only options. And mind you that no where does God play a role in your sacred theory of evolution, does He? Only in this country can you speak against God and would not be frowned upon, but one must never speak against the sacred cow of evolution or one is ostracized for being intellectually dishonest. Plan9 said: - is it perhaps impossible for him to answer? Have some faith brother, for with faith in God all things are possible, or do you doubt in what scripture tells you? Or perhaps it is that I was not the one who coined the term? If you really want to know what it means perhaps you should ask the person who used it in the first post. ------------------------------------------- Plan9 said: You know, I had previously thought you were simply contentious and rude, but if you can't define a phrase in your own OP (and even suggest that I pray in order to learn its definition), or understand that it speaks against God outright and that by posting it, you help his atheistic cause, I'm now drawn to the theory that you're just not not the sharpest knife in the drawer. You forgot spiritually dogmatic, God trusting, and a bible believing young earth creationist. But really I do not need your approval to do what I do and could care even less what you think of me. However being the “rude” person that I am - I am not going to make any assumptions about you (as you have done me) since I don't know who you are nor what you believe. However, what I do care about is believers who reinterpret scripture simply because they are unable to accept that which is plainly written in scripture perhaps due to a lack of faith or outside influences and then the gumption of trying to pass that off as the truth of God. In their attempt to justify evolution as the process in which the God of the bible would use they become schizophrenic in thought and in faith – as they can justify neither. If you really want to discuss the meaning of "intellectually schizophrenic" in the light of scripture, then lets first look at what scripture says about it.
Since from the beginning God’s creation already testifies to His glory why does he need man’s fallacious reinterpretation of it in that of man’s theories? But what causes the vial things we see in all of life? It would seem that the further we remove ourselves from God and His truth, the more we lust after our own hearts and the more we require justification for what we do and evolutionary myth is simply that – moral justification for that which is not of God, as evolution most certainly does not require Him. The schizophrenia here is that some have attempted to cram God into a process that does not require Him, and now are simply running around proclaiming that the Word of God is simply allegorical when it touches on origins. Any attempt to cram God into the evolutionary timeline ends in futility as scripture plainly contradicts it. From His word alone we are clearly told that it was not the process God used – what the theistic evolutionnuts have done is simply compromise the authority of scripture with theories of men, but does God really compromise His truth with men? And evolution is a concoction of entirely of man. Throughout man’s brief history we have seen that it is not the case where God allows man to determine his own truth without repercussions, what makes anyone so sure it is any different today? In examining the meaning of intellectual schizophrenic, we must look at the character of God as scripture tells us. It goes to say that the methods we use in life reflect most of all our innermost character. Since we were created in God’s image we reflect everything that is of God, our intellect, our compassion for others, our reasoning, our love and so on – unfortunately not our hate and thirst for blood and destruction and darkness, these come from being without God. The methods God used reflect His inner most character. And what is represented by the evolutionary process – a slow painful process, survival of the fittest, the weak die, the strong live on to breed where death is the preferred mechanism of choice – everything that God is not. You must ask yourself - is this method consistent with what scripture tells us? Does this show us a God of so much love as He tells us? This brings us to the schizophrenia of trying to harmonize evolution with Christianity. But first however let us look at natural selection as evolution tells us. It is unguided, unchecked, and unsure of what will be the outcome. From a purely philosophical point of view there is nothing which says that God could not have used this slow process – as long as it was not purely an undirected process. But I do not care about what God could have done or not have done. What I am interested in is how He did create as He has revealed to us in His word. Which brings in the question of how much of a role can we allow God to have? How much credit can we give God for this method of creation? According to modern evolutionary text books fresh off the press – zero. The schizophrenia is in trying to justify God through a process that scripture mentions nothing of, nor is represented in the character of God. Some of us do need to work you know. Just out of curiosity, for an assistant professor at NYMC, how is it that you have so much time to spare? Don’t you have classes to teach, lectures to prepare for, papers to grade, research to do – or maybe something else better to do with your time then waste it on us bible believing literalists? I don't consider saving people from losing their faith a waste of time. Still I wonder just how do you have so much time to spare to make 14.89 posts a day when I can’t even make one posting a week? This is on your own time I hope – I mean it would jeopardize your career if you were to use school property and school time to promote your religious views – as it almost did mine. So have you saved any one from losing their faith lately? And what is it that you use to witness to people who are non believers lucaspa – the book of creation? I thought that was what the word of God was for? What you trust is what you say it says. That's not authority. It's wishful thinking. And there is no wishful thinking more imaginative than that of evolution as it never occurred. Nice try at changing the subject. But it won't work. The subject was can we trust what the word of God says when it touches on morality and salvation or anything else? Where is the consistency if you cannot trust the very foundation where the cause of moral decay and the need for salvation is rooted? You seem to think we can’t hence your subscription into the evolutionary propaganda. We are still dealing with the fact that "what the Bible says" is what you say it says. That's not authority. Actually what we are really dealing with is what you are saying that the Bible clearly does not say. The Word of God is the final authority in and of itself. You cannot give authority where there is already authority to begin with.
Now how much I would pay for that which can sustain me forever! Actually it is free, but you have to believe in it you know.
Nowhere in this verse does it say anything about my words, or the word of man.
Now imagine that, the power of the Word of God able to bring forth things out of nothing. I would shudder in awe of anyone who can do that. It's either wishful thinking or apostasy. I was being kind and going for wishful thinking. Wishful thinking is to say the least about evolutionism, an abandonment of faith and trust in the authority of the Word of God it clearly shows. ------------------------------------------- lucaspa: Christians have long acknowledged that, if God really did create, then Creation is also a book of God. Then what you are saying is that by looking at creation we can come to an understanding that we are sinners and need Christ to redeem us – without ever reading scripture? No. Didn't say that at all. This is what you are trying to say Different book. Different messages. What we can do is look at the book of Creation and learn how God created. Genesis tells us the who and why of Creation. God's Book of Creation tells us how He created. The fact that God did really create is shown by creation being the result of an instantaneous command. But that isn't what it shows. Scripture says otherwise: “For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” Romans 1:20 It would be illogical to say that since we are without excuse how thus can we use God’s method of creation as in that of evolution also to deny His existence? It is however your word against the word of God. I’ll let you figure which has more authority. And actually you got it the other way around. If it really had shown that we wouldn't be having this disagreement. And creationism wouldn't have been falsified by Christians almost 200 years ago. If scripture is the word of God, can it really be falsified by those followers who have simply compromised His word? Did you ever think that it may have been the truth that is the reason why it has been compromised, and thus confirming what scripture says, that many are indeed called but only few are chosen. I suppose you do have reasons for your insistence that creationism has been falsified by so called “Christians”. It is however simply your own delusion, as real science does support God creating as Scripture tells us. Scripture however tells us that these “Christians” have simply fallen into disbelief or have simply sought something much more to their liking to justify themselves before men rather than God - after all it was a time when man was beginning to advance in understanding the things that God has made – but then the gumption of some to attribute it all to have been the result of a blind process. As Karl Popper, a science philosopher and evolutionist states in his autobiography “Unended Quest.” “This is of course the reason why Darwinism has been almost universally accepted. Its theory of adaptation was the first nontheistic one that was convincing; and theism was worse than an open admission of failure, for it created the impression that an ultimate explanation has been reached.” What Popper seems to be saying is that evolution not only became an alternative to Biblical Creationism, it provided a purely naturalistic explanation of origins without invoking God. What would be the implication if one could justify not needing God as the source of life? A justification in doing what anyone wishes to do without worrying about future retribution? In denying that God created as scripture tells us we are in fact denying life, which is God, as He is the only source of life and without Him we are dead – physically and spiritually. It would seem you are much more inclined to believe man’s interpretation of a fallen creation than that which is inspired by God. Genesis 3 does not say all creation was changed. That's your man-made theory. Snakes lost legs, childbirth became painful, it was hard to grow crops. That's it. God never said that what He put into Creation got changed. If you rely on the Bible, then you can't add things to it that aren't there. There is no doubt that creation has changed as we are reminded of this everyday, as the whole creation has been groaning and travailing in pain as Roman 8:22 tell us. "the great book ... of created things. Look above you; look below you; read it, note it." St. Augustine, Sermon 126 in Corpus Christianorum The result of which many a stray paths that man has taken throughout his brief existence – to worship the creation rather than the Creator. There's no worship of the creation here. Simply saying that God really did create. Um hum, through a process that does not require Him and claiming that it was the way He created. I would rather think that Augustine was referring to an instantaneous creation. However you forget he was simply a man of God and nothing more. The great book of creation, and where can I find salvation in this great book he refers to – for I to want to believe. You are going to try to ride this distraction as long as possible, aren't you? The idea that you get salvation from Creation is yours. Not mine. I'm not going to let you lose sight of that. I'm simply saying that Creation is also from God and by God. You keep trying to dodge that, but you can't, can you? So I see, there is no message of salvation in the fossil record – could all those fossil be a clue perhaps of what happens when men turn away from God and seek not His provision of salvation – as He has brought His judgment upon man once and will again. So now that the ride is over, just how does one come to Christ simply by looking at God’s fallen creation? "Man learns from two books: the universe for the human study of things created by God; and the Bible, for the study of God's superior will and truth. One belongs to reason, the other to faith. Between them there is no clash." Pope Pius Xii, Address to the Pontifical Academy of Science, Dec. 3, 1939. Here you have the refutation of your idea above. Didn't pay attention, did you? One book is filled with words that are written into the hearts of men, the other tells him there is no escape from death, pain suffering and all atrocities man has brought upon himself unless he finds the truth in the word of God which leads him Christ – the answer to all his sorrows. LOL! Not what Pope Pius said, is it? Now really, who are we going to believe in lucaspa, the almighty “dead” pope or the living Word of God? Of course we already know the answer to that question don’t we. The other tells us how God created. But you seem to be denying your own position: And what position might that be? That creation points to God or that it points to message of salvation? "Then what you are saying is that by looking at creation we can come to an understanding that we are sinners and need Christ to redeem us – without ever reading scripture?" You seem to be answering "yes" to your own question! And how do you suppose I did that? So, since you find the Book of God's Creation so spiritually reliable, why do you reject the Book when it tells you how God created? What book are you referring to that tells of how God created? I know of no such book except perhaps the one you obviously made up. So, you are 1) denying the existence of the second book on false criteria and 2) making up a false theology and trying to pawn that off as "God's word". And which book tells us the message of salvation given to us by God our creator? Show me the message of salvation in the fossil record as you claim your sacred theory of evolution does. And besides there is no denial for there is no such book – how can you deny something that does occur nor exist as that of evolution? I never claimed it did. But you did. See your quote above. Of course you only claim God wrote a second book – something in which the first book mentions nothing of. Now I wonder who is really bearing false witness to God here? Just as I figure. It shows rather a record of the assumed Bolivians in Oblivions of years of the earth with nothing but evidence of death, diseases, maiming, struggling, destruction thorns and all manners of suffering. Where is the God of love that the Bible teaches in all of this? Where is the God of love that let the Hebrews languish in slavery for hundreds of years? The same place He was when He created the universe as according to scripture and knowing all along that He would one day die to for His creation. How many Hebrews died of disease, maiming, and struggle during that slavery? The same God who also made them into a mighty nation despite their status of being former slaves –their struggle however was not senseless as true character and trust is derived not from times of prosperity and joy but from being broken and humiliated. How many died in the Conquest of Canaan? As many as is needed to show that those who opposed the will of God nor does not worship Him as the one true God will in the end receive the same fate. Where is the God of love that inflicted the Plague of the Firstborn on the Egyptians? The same place when the Egyptians killed all the Hebrew male children, who I would say dealt justice in his own way. How about the suffering from the Babylonian Captivity? What about it? How many Christians were martyred by the Romans in order to bring the gospel? And yet the more the were slaughtered, the more that believed. God uses death and suffering all the time for His purposes. Not as a creative process but as consequence of sin. Pain and suffering is only meaningful if it is curative and as a reversal of a wrong choice. No I deny your schizophrenic attempt to reconcile evolutionary hogwash as the process in which God would use. Why? It's no more cruel than the processes God has used in the Bible. If you would read your scripture correctly you will note that every instance had a reason and it was that man was the cause of his own demise – whereas the process of evolution is intentional. Where is the meaning of atonement when death and suffering has been going on for billions of years? for if I were still pleasers of men I would not be bond servant of Christ would I? I'm going to be kind and not get into that claim. This is simply too self-serving in this context and there is no way to check the claim. I am wondering if you could have simply cut and paste an appropriate response here lucaspa - after all it is what you seem to do best. I would think that a servant of Christ would be a bit more humble about the position, but hey, I only look at Christ washing the feet of the disciples. And I wonder how many times Jesus rebuked those who were supposedly men of God. He wasn’t too humble then was He – as the reason was they have perverted the Word of God with the word of man – just as theistic evolutionists have done. It is just a shame we cannot see into the heart of men – but Christ can and He is taking note. What do I know? Obviously not much, but then neither do I – only what the love of God reveals to me. However you would impress me very much if you are able to reconcile the evolutionary process with scripture by answering why we are even given the option of praying for relief from pain and suffering if they are the process God uses? Simple. Is it really that simple? 1. Is death bad? You seem to think so, maybe inflammed by your fear of death. But death is just part of life. Not a "bad" think you make it out to be. After all, don't you think you will be united with God after death? Then why is death bad? Is it lucaspa? So where scripture says that death was brought into the world by the man Adam it was obviously only spiritual death right? Wait a minute I thought Scripture tells us that the soul cannot die, only the body so where does the Bible say we will die spiritually in Genesis? Isn’t spiritual death only separation from God? If that were true which one does man fear most, physical or spiritual death since man does not know if he is spiritually dead, only when he witnesses physical death as he sees this everyday all around him? So what good is a promise of spiritual life when it is physical death that man fears most? And also if the shedding of blood (through death) already existed before Adam and Eve what was the significance of saying that bloodshed was the only way for the forgiveness of sin? Is that not what the whole gospel is about, atonement with the blood and death of Christ? But according to the fossil record, death has been occurring for ages, so where is the logic in using something that means nothing? And me fear death? As a true believer why should I, for have you not read:
God never promised us relief from pain. Pain and suffering are part of what makes us what we are. I wonder how much the word of God really plays a part in your own life? However it does say something quite different:
So where in this scripture passage does it say that prayer for relief from pain and suffering is prohibited. I really wonder what Christians who are afflicted with cancer pray for – a quick and speedy death perhaps? And I suppose you never pray for any relief from pain and suffering do you, you’re a better man than I am if you can bare the pains of growing old or when a child becomes sick. And still why does God promise a new heaven and a new earth where death and suffering will be no more when it is the very things He used in creating this one? If God really took this long in creating this world – I wonder how long we would have to wait to see this new world that He has promised us – another few billion years? If we are to have meaningful lives, then God can't shield us and make it so we never get hurt. What happens to us must be real, not make-believe and all made nicey-nice for us. If we are to have any meaning at all in life we must come to the realization that death and suffering is not a part of the process of creation a loving God uses but as a consequence of man’s rebellion and thus seek Christ – as He is the only one who gives us life and gives it abundantly. I truly love my daughters, but I am not showing my love for them if I shield them from all pain and suffering. I don’t doubt that you do, just as I my own children – which is why they need to experience pain and suffering as it builds their character – but not because such happen to be part of the creative process of a demented sadistic creator, but as a reminder that it was the direct consequence of sin. I am simply being a control freak. Your god seems to be a control freak. I personally am glad that God is not. Now we are bordering the absurd. You do mean the God of the Bible right? And yes God is in total control, of my life and I wouldn’t have it any other way. So how much control does He have over your life? Evolution happens to populations, There is no proof that evolution happens at all is there. praying for relief is for individuals. So when we gather in groups to pray for the sick and the afflicted we are not following God’s imaginary “second book” then? That’s funny because God’s one and only Book says something else.
I guess you made up that praying for relief was only for individuals didn’t you? And the pain and suffering we are praying for relief from has nothing to do with selection. Selection of what? If I pray for relief of the pain of grief for the loss of a loved one, that has nothing to do with whether I am lucky enough to have genes that are beneficial to the population. But if it is the process God uses then why pray for any relief at all, as that would in itself thwarting the purpose and will of God? And what is it that we hope I presume you are impressed now. You presume too much lucaspa, impressed I am not in the least. I will however question you on your gumption to say that your biblically baseless assertions have impressed anyone! It would seem that the heart of man is stubborn indeed even when He believes in God and yet wishes to place his version of truth alongside of God’s truth and say that both have equal footings when there really is only one truth - and it is the Word of God. However we will look further into your spiritually bankrupt reasoning for its justification of pain and suffering, as it would not be very palatable to your die hard non believer who object to a God who claims to be a God of love but then uses a process that totally says the opposite. What is certain is that evolution does not reflect the true nature of God at all, something which I will bring up into discussion later on. Karl said: Crusadar - you seem to have nothing to add to this but self righteousness and complete contempt for others' expressions of faith.
It would seem we have some disagreement here. I have nothing indeed to add
but what the Word of God plainly says. If I am judged because of the
standards I use and if it is no what Christ has commanded then it would
Wrong Karl, it is not I who claim to be right, it is what scripture says. Maybe you should read it more often on your knees, eh?
|
|||
| BACK | |||
|
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]
Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Revelations 4:11 KJV
about site | artworks | e-books | feedback | homepage | links | site map | writings |
|||