Are theistic evolutionists too aggressive to creationists?

[Notedstrangeperson]

(I also posted this down in the Creation & Evolution section. Hope the OP isn't too long.)

Should christians criticise with one another? I think we should. If we didn't, the Reformation wouldn't have happened. The problem I suspect is that creationists and theistic evolutionists aren't really debating or criticising each other any more.

TEs often complain about how creationists say they are not "true christians", but sadly in my experience TEs can be just as bad. We are so desperate for the approval of atheists that we're willing to stomp on other christians in order to get it. We try to distance ourselves from creationists so we can pretend creationism is not our problem.

Consider this: for almost 30 years, as the number of creationists in the US went down, the number of atheistic evolutionists went up, while the number of theistic evolutionists remained roughly the same. This suggests that people were being turned away from religion by the dogmatic nature of creationists.

Yet according to the latest figures (June 2012) for the first time the number of theistic evolutionists has gone down while the number of creationists has gone up.

This could just be a statistical anomaly. But if it isn't, then what is causing it? Are people being put off evolution by dogmatic atheists? Perhaps, but if that were true we would expect to see a decrease in the number of atheistic evolutionists. So are they being put off by people who supposedly share their faith? Maybe they think "All evolutionists act the same way regardless of whether they call themselves christians or atheists."

 

[troodon]

It looks like the most recent information on that graph is an anomaly in what otherwise shows mostly steady levels of creationism and TE with a steady rise in atheistic evolution. Western society is increasingly secular so I think the rise in atheistic evolution is 100% expected in a world that's less and less devout.

But it's a very complex subject and the reasoning for each person is going to be very much dependent on the individual. And as I pointed out in the CREVO thread the question itself does not preclude the existence of God in the "atheistic evolutionist" response.

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

i think that both TEs and YECs get upset by each other. i had a debate with a TE over on the evo forum, and he showed a collection of human/hominid skulls lined up to show evolution. but i still think that that dosn't show evolution, it just shows that there were many types of hominids running about at one time. i suspect at the moment, that all these hominids and modern humans existed at the same time, and some hominids have survived, perhaps australopithecus robustus, and nearndethal. it bothers me that denisovans, nearndethals and humans seemed to have interbred, showing that they were not separate genus, or biblical kinds.

the evidence for human evolution appears to be overwhelming, at first, and that is what is giving rise to both TE and atheistic evolution. i don't think the YEC dogmatic approach is helpful, and is probably causing a lot of people to lose faith altogether, as the scientific evidence shows an earth older than 6000 years.
in my opinion the YECs are similar to the catholic church, back in the times of luther... it says so in the bible, so it must be correct. ken ham seems to have the same sort of worldview.
i think that 'reasons to believe' are some way towards getting at the truth, although they have a similar dogmatic approach to the bible, and i think that they also compromise too much with the naturalistic worldview. but it's a start i suppose.

but i watched a lecture the other day by a YEC, who was right about this; that atheists don't care if a christian is a TE or not, they want to get christians to abandon belief in god, and one way is to ease in that belief system, by encouraging TE, that's a gentle way to get atheism to replace faith, and they are aware that outright atheistic evolution is too offputting for many people, especially religious people in america. that's a contentious thing to say, but i think it is the truth.

 

[Papias]

NSP wrote:

TEs often complain about how creationists say they are not "true christians", but sadly in my experience TEs can be just as bad.

I agree that as humans, any of us can lose sight of our common status as children of God, and be too mean. Me too, I'm sure.

We are so desperate for the approval of atheists that we're willing to stomp on other christians in order to get it.

Why would any of us want approval from atheists? I don't. Creationism bothers me because it hurts the body of Christ by driving rational Christians into atheism. Creationism impedes the Great Commission just as geocentrism and other forms of reality-denial do. - Just as St. Augustine noticed 1,500 years ago, and wrote about. Just google (Augustine, "about the kinds of animals"), and read that quote from St. Augustine). The denial of reality based on a cherished (but wrong) scripture interpretation hobbled the Great Commission then, and it still does today.

Yet according to the latest figures (June 2012) for the first time the number of theistic evolutionists has gone down while the number of creationists has gone up.

Your statement is false. The same thing happened in 1994, 2006 and 2008. It certainly wasn't the "first".

This could just be a statistical anomaly.

My guesses are:

1. Most likely - just noise, like the same thing in 1994, 2006 and 2008. Similarly, when the exact opposite happened in 1998, 2007 and 2011 that looks like just noise too.

2. If it isn't noise, then I think it is because that poll was taken during the height of the gay marriage/DADT/Chik-fil-A, etc. watershed. Suddenly, we realized as a country that a majority supported gay marriage, and even Obama announced on TV that he did too - the first president ever to say so.

In such an environment, there were many Christians who reluctantly decided to listen to those they loved who were gay, and stop opposing gay marriage. The natural response in their minds is to affirm that they are still just as Christian, and committed to their chosen Bible, as anyone. So if someone in that state is asked if they support the literal story in Genesis, it seems likely to me that they would say they did (even if they were on the fence or slightly didn't) just to affirm to themselves that they weren't becoming "too liberal".

If so, one would expect a poll taken in June of 2012 to show anomalously high support for creationism.

The real test will be the next point in a year or so.

Overall, people take a long time to accept a big change in how we see the world around us. It took 200 years for heliocentrism to be accepted - even Martin Luther was clear that he thought the sun went around the earth because that's what Genesis says.

It'll take 200 years for evolution too, but it'll happen, just as it did for heliocentrism, germ theory, and more. If we Christians allow the "Creationism or atheism" approach of the Creationists to dominate, then there might not be much left of Christianity in 100 years.

Papias

 

[hiscosmicgoldfish]

Why would any of us want approval from atheists? I don't. Creationism bothers me because it hurts the body of Christ by driving rational Christians into atheism. Creationism impedes the Great Commission just as geocentrism and other forms of reality-denial do.

I agree, but i think it is YEC 6000 years creationism that is driving people to atheism. There is also old earth creationism, which isn't quite so dogmatic about the bible.

Overall, people take a long time to accept a big change in how we see the world around us. It took 200 years for heliocentrism to be accepted - even Martin Luther was clear that he thought the sun went around the earth because that's what Genesis says.

the catholic apologetics society dosn't go along with heliocentrism. i read their book, but there seems to be too much evidence that heliocentrism is correct, although they made a good case for geocentrism... i am still not sure it is wise to write off geocentrism.

It'll take 200 years for evolution too, but it'll happen, just as it did for heliocentrism, germ theory, and more. If we Christians allow the "Creationism or atheism" approach of the Creationists to dominate, then there might not be much left of Christianity in 100 years.

i don't think so. i think that in 200 years time, the ID will have made some progress. perhaps YEC will have been in crisis, by then.
but i think that is a risk, that christianity will go away altogether. but that might be inevitable, whatever about evolution and creationism.

Papias

...

 

[jilfe]

Well when you read the account in Genesis:
you always come to the light of truth, that science laws were NOT in effect during the time of origins, God did everything supernaturally, there is not one naturalistic means of anything originating, it all came about supernaturally.

When God spoke light to appear, it appeared without the natural light from the sun or stars, on day one, that was the light of God's glory, illuminating the expanse. Try to explain that glory light scientifically:

2Cor:4:6: For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

There was no speed of light during the origins of light sources, light instantly appeared when God spoke it to be.

Can anyone explain the scientific means of the mans body being formed from the dust of the earth, as well as explain the science needed to make the first womans body from a rib taking from the mans body, can those things be explained scientifically.

Explain scientifically how all the plants originated fully grown with seed of there OWN kind in them, which proves right there that nothing can produce species of other kinds, (macroevolution), due to the fact that God made sure that seed of there OWN kind would originate with all living systems.

So when you look at all there arguments for debunking creation, you realize, they are totally mislead in there science, because science was not involved in the originatin of everything, they really have no concept of science in its purity, only in there own false imaginations, but when the Holy Spirit brings to light of how science works, then we have all the truth about origins, as well as the science that is put in motion by God the creator of all science phenomena.

That's why those who have the Holy Spirit, cannot accept the origination of things by naturalistic means.

Everything came into existence by the SUPERnatural workings of God.
Just as it is written in the Biblical account.

I've been reading the book titled "The Blessing of the Lord",

And as I have been getting a better understanding of the Biblical account through this, even the ministry of Christ as a Human being the seed of Abraham, that every thing Jesus did in His miracles, He did only by walking in the Blessing that was originally given to Adam, for all human decendants after Him, but Adam lost it to satan.

Jesus was the only human being, that walked in perfect harmony with all creation, just as Adam and His wife did before the fall into sin.

Every miracle that jesus did, was a result of living in the Blessing given to Adam and isha, (woman), the name Eve was given to the woman after the curse.'

Now all this introduction to say, since Jesus operated outside of the cursed creation, then in order to see how the laws of physics worked in the time of it's perfect state, (before the curse of the law)
is to study out every miracle Jesus did.

Gravity as we know it today, is in it's cursed state, and in this it has influence on every thing and everybody. Gravity in its created perfect state, only had effect on inanimate objects, but Human kind was not under its influence totally. Human beings had the option to use gravity or not to.

Look at Jesus accension into Heaven, His physical body defied gravity to ascend.

also look at how Jesus was able to walk on the water, at will.

He defied not only the physical nature of gravity, but also the physical nature of bouyancy, was under Jesus's command.

Jesus used His physical body to walk into a room through the walls, the laws of physics that state that no two objects can ocuppy the same place at the same time, well that law did not adhere in that instant.

The laws of physics of the weather, in it's perfect state, humans would controle the weather by speaking to it.
Jesus proved that several times.

The laws of physiscs that is involved in water changing to wine, by the will of a human being.

Jesus multiplied food, several times, what law of physics worked in that situation.

Jesus demonstrated, that every natural law, was under the command and will of human kind, that human beings were to be able to use the physical laws or suspend them at will.

That's why to try to explain the origins in scientific matter, cannot be done by looking at the physical laws of nature, these laws are working in a cursed state, so naturally there is going to be all kinds of tales about evolution and the like, because evolution and other tales like it could work with the cursed laws in effect, but the cursed laws were not in the original creation.

The laws of physics was a completely different form at the time of it's perfect state.

As Jesus demonstrated the physical laws of nature were under the will of human kind, before sin entered in.

But He also demonstrated that we too can walk in that Blessing, and suspend the natural laws of physics, to the extent of our faith, by recieving Him as our Lord and savior, by being born again, we are redeemed from the curse of the law, we can live out our lives in the Blessing of the Lord as Jesus said we could.

 

[Aman777]

The only way to defeat Evolutionism is to show that it is Wrong. For too long Christians have been repeating the same old story which is proven wrong by both science and history. The Bible is not wrong, but the traditional interpretation of ancient people is seriously in error. We've got to believe that either God or science is only interested in discovering lies to throw at each other.

When one actually reads Genesis, it's easy to see that the traditional story is wrong. The first thing which has been neglected is the story of the formation of the firmament, or first heaven, which happened on the 2nd Day. Gen 1:6-8 The traditional view is that it is the story of the formation of our world, but it could NOT be, since the firmament has water above and below it, revealing that it was surrounded by water. Any child could understand that a firmament or solid object which has water above and below it is totally surrounded by water. It's the nature of water.

Our world was NOT made the 2nd Day, and neither was the third heaven. Both are shown as being made on the 3rd Day, the SAME day the first earth was made. Gen 2:4 When you continue with the events of the 3rd day, it is found that man was also made on the 3rd day and NOT the 6th, as tradition teaches. Gen 2:4-7 Man was "created in God's Image" or born again Spiritually, on the 6th day, but was formed physically on the 3rd day. Adam, like ALL men, was first made physically and later Spiritually, Eternally.

Overcoming the traditional view of ancient men is a challenge, but Christians will continue to be unable to support our views until we realize that something is wrong with the traditional religous view. It does NOT agree with science, history, NOR Scripture.

In the last days Scoffers will be "willingly ignorant" that the first earth was totally and completely destroyed in the Flood and that our present earth is destined to be burned. The Scoffers are ignorant of this Scriptural fact, but not "willingly ignorant" since NO one is telling them God's Truth. The reason ll Peter 3:3-7 tells us this fact is that when Darwinists are made aware of this Truth, they rebel against something which threatens their beloved Theory of Evolution.

The Scriptural fact that Adam lived on another earth and had a higher intelligence level than ANY natural creature on our Earth, is exposed when one sees that God tells us the reason for this happening. It is because we did NOT evolve our human intelligence through mindless nature, but inherited it from Adam's descendants who arrived on our Earth in an Ark, some 10k years ago. ALL of human civilization can be traced to Noah.

It's the Scientific and Historic Proof that God's Truth refutes the false notions of the Darwinists. They will be "willingly ignorant" of this Fact, since it destroys their false ideas in the last days. Godless evolutionism is an incomplete, untrue, idea which God's Truth refutes completely. God set a Snare or trap with the Flood, and understanding this reveals that God is smarter than ALL of the scientists in the world.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Why would any of us want approval from atheists? I don't. Creationism bothers me because it hurts the body of Christ by driving rational Christians into atheism.

It's probably just my personal experience on this particular forum, but I often find theistic evolutionists are more likely to defend evolution than they are to defend their religion. I've even seen a few parroting the same anti-christian arguments I hear atheists use (although these are mostly about history rather than evolution).

Your statement is false. The same thing happened in 1994, 2006 and 2008. It certainly wasn't the "first".

I should clarify a little: in 2012 the significant increase in the number of creationists seemed to come at the expense of theistic evolutionists.

In 1994 for example, there was a 3% decrease in the number of TEs. At the same time there was a 3% increase in the number of creationists and a 2% increase in the number of atheistic evolutionists (AEs). So the decrease in the number of TEs could be attributed to either more people becoming AEs or more people becoming creationists. This was a bit of an odd year anyway, since there was an 8-year gap between polls.

In 2006, 2008 and 2012 there was an increase in the number of creationists and a decrease in the number of TEs, without a large decrease in the number AEs. The numbers are more significant in 2012 however, with a 6% increase in the number of creationists matching the decrease in the number of TEs exactly. So no, it wasn't the "first" time, but it was the most noticeable.

But of course, as you say, this could just be noise. Generally the percentage increases / decreases are pretty small.

 

[Papias]

I often find theistic evolutionists are more likely to defend evolution than they are to defend their religion.

I more often see evolution being attacked than Catholicism, but that's probably because I frequent this forum more than main origins one.

But of course, as you say, this could just be noise. Generally the percentage increases / decreases are pretty small.

Yes, I think so. Small wiggles like that which go back and forth I don't think are meaningful. Long term averages are better at showing trends, I think.

Papias

 

[Aman777]

Noted:>>It's probably just my personal experience on this particular forum, but I often find theistic evolutionists are more likely to defend evolution than they are to defend their religion.

Dear Noted, I don't understand how TEs explain Genesis 2:4-7 which clearly shows that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day BEFORE any other living creature. How can man have evolved from other creatures since he was the FIRST made?

In Love,
Aman

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

Dear Noted, I don't understand how TEs explain Genesis 2:4-7 which clearly shows that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day BEFORE any other living creature. How can man have evolved from other creatures since he was the FIRST made?

My own interpretation is that it shows that that man is created from the same matter as all living things - which originally came from non-living matter.

--------------------------------------

By the way if you want you quote somebody, write this (without the gaps):

[ quote = randomuser ] Here is the quote [ / quote ]

It will look like this:

Here is the quote

 

[mark kennedy]

Should christians criticise with one another? I think we should. If we didn't, the Reformation wouldn't have happened. The problem I suspect is that creationists and theistic evolutionists aren't really debating or criticising each other any more.

The culture wars are over, the contest was an exhausting tie. It's a lot like the Presidential elections where the Democrat gets the vast majority of the popular only to lose the electorial college in a landslide. The Christian faith has always enjoyed widespread acceptance because the message is to who so ever will, there's a reason that's significant but more on that later.

TEs often complain about how creationists say they are not "true christians", but sadly in my experience TEs can be just as bad. We are so desperate for the approval of atheists that we're willing to stomp on other christians in order to get it. We try to distance ourselves from creationists so we can pretend creationism is not our problem.

You must be a creationist in order to be a Christian, the Nicene Creed is crystal clear on this point of doctrine. Theistic evolutionists are making a major mistake when they are venomously antagonistic toward creationism. The problem isn't so much that the debates get nasty, they often do. The problem for them is that they are being shunned by evangelicals and fundamentalists which is alienating them from traditional Christian scholarship. The lose for them is far more tragic then they realize.

Consider this: for almost 30 years, as the number of creationists in the US went down, the number of atheistic evolutionists went up, while the number of theistic evolutionists remained roughly the same. This suggests that people were being turned away from religion by the dogmatic nature of creationists.

Yet according to the latest figures (June 2012) for the first time the number of theistic evolutionists has gone down while the number of creationists has gone up.

Creationism as we know it (aka Creation Science) didn't really happen until some time in the 60s. Up until then the church was oblivious to the claims of the secular world regarding the Scriptures. In the wake of the drama that unfolded the Intelligent Design movement brought tremendous credibility to many of the key principles of Creationist thinking. I think what you are seeing in the poll is a slight fluctuation resulting from the apologetic effort of Creationists. I don't think the significance is earth shaking but still it's significant and important.

This could just be a statistical anomaly. But if it isn't, then what is causing it? Are people being put off evolution by dogmatic atheists? Perhaps, but if that were true we would expect to see a decrease in the number of atheistic evolutionists. So are they being put off by people who supposedly share their faith? Maybe they think "All evolutionists act the same way regardless of whether they call themselves christians or atheists."

I did a study of Church history once spanning the 2000 years of the church. I found a lot of interesting trends but the one I found most striking is the swinging pendulum of the doctrinal extremes. Basically what I saw was that the church tends to go from the super intellectual (like the Gnostics) to the super spiritual (like the Montanists), the trend seems to follow 200 year cycles.

If my little theory is right were are on the crest of the last trend that was toward the super spiritual, some would call it revivalism. Now we are seeing the pendulum swing to the other extreme, I think the advent of Liberal Theology, Theistic Evolution and even Creation Science are part of the momentum.

Half baked theories aside, the culture war is over. The secular forces won their public victories while the church has managed to persuade people on a more personal level. It's nothing new but at least it's not as nasty as the Protestant/Catholic wars that resulted from the political upheaval at the end of the late Middle Ages.

Oh and by the way, if you were to include Theistic Evolution and Creationism as one camp we would represent like 80%. While we are sitting around figuring out how to effectively refute one another we should be looking far more diligently for common ground. Then we could put an end to the mindless trampling of the genuine article of faith and science that is the inevitable collateral damage that follows in the wake of this kind of controversy.

Being critical and skeptical is healthy, even vital. Banning together like armed camps with bunker mentalities does neither true faith or real world science any justice worth the mounting costs.

At any rate, that's my two cents worth.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[verysincere]

Noted:>>It's probably just my personal experience on this particular forum, but I often find theistic evolutionists are more likely to defend evolution than they are to defend their religion.

I can explain that. This forum thread is about ORIGINS, not "defending their religion". If you want "defending their religion", you need to go to where that is the thread topic!

 

[verysincere]

Noted:>>
Dear Noted, I don't understand how TEs explain Genesis 2:4-7 which clearly shows that man was formed of the dust of the ground on the 3rd Day BEFORE any other living creature. How can man have evolved from other creatures since he was the FIRST made?

I have no idea where you got the idea that Genesis says (a) man was made on the 3rd day, and (b) before any other creature.

Do you understand that the account in Genesis 2 is not a chronological presentation.

 

[Aman777]

I have no idea where you got the idea that Genesis says (a) man was made on the 3rd day, and (b) before any other creature.

Dear verysincere, Here is where I get the idea.

4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

This verse is speaking of the THIRD day, the SAME day the earth was made. According to Genesis 1:9-10 the earth was made the 3rd day.

5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

This verse is confirming the 3rd day since the plants grew on the 3rd day. Genesis 1:12

6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Conclusion: On the 3rd day, after the Lord had made the earth but BEFORE the plants grew, and before the rain, the Lord formed man of the dust of the ground.... Correct?


Very:>>Do you understand that the account in Genesis 2 is not a chronological presentation.

God tells us the entire history of the 7 days of creation from Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:3. At Genesis 2:4 we are taken BACK to the events of the 3rd day and information is added to Genesis 1. This shows that there is but ONE account of the creation, and not two. The events are in perfect chronological order.

In Love,
Aman

 

[Fascinated With God]

Notice how the USA is down there on the end with Turkey. ->

 

[Fascinated With God]

BTW, that was from Level of support for evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Here are some interesting breakdowns from the 1991 Gallop poll:

College graduates) Creationist: 25% TE: 54% AE: 16.5%
No high school diploma) Creationist: 65% TE: 23% AE: 4.6%

Income over $50,000) Creationist: 29% TE: 50% AE: 17%
Income under $20,000) Creationist: 59% TE: 28% AE: 6.5%

 

[Fascinated With God]

.

 

[Fascinated With God]

Here are shocking statistics from Pew in 2009. Notice the sharp increase in belief in God among scientists as you get to YOUNGER age groups! Quite the opposite of the trend in the public as a whole.

Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press



Notice the sharp decline in belief in God amongst the youngest age group in the 2012 Pew results:

Belief in God Low Among Young Americans


So it is a fact that science today actually has a very positive effect on spiritual outlook and encourages a belief in God. Quite to the contrary of what Creationists would like to believe.








.

 

[jilfe]

Mark Kennedy

Here's a good one, how did Theistic evolution come about in the first place, amongst christians,
when there is not any thing in the Holy Scriptures that even points towards it.

It is understandable for secular scientists, and secular cultures to fall into it, because they worship false gods any how, so when they use the term theistic evolution, there referring to there own imaginatins of god, rather than the Biblical account of the true God.

So how did Christians get caught in this trap, when they have the Bible, it's hard to comprehend.

They seem to belive the secular over the written word of the Bible.
Where in the Bible is there any scripture pointing towards God using evolution.

Yet the Bible teaches plainly about God doing creation.

Especially with a verse as this:

Jesus Himself speaking these very words.

Mk:10:6: But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.