Fight for the faith!

[mark kennedy]

The world gives us this elaborate scenerio of ever increasing complexity. Transformations from some nebulas protooraganism comes bacteris and fauna. These single cell living systems gradually transpose into increasingly sophisticated arachae, animalia and plantea cells, how is still unknown. Eventually, they evolve into organs, appendages, clorapasts and a kilidoscope of adaptive traits. ~560 million years ago in a dramatically short space of geologic time every major phylum appears in the geologic strata without precursors.

Some 5-7 million years ago an african ape population develops an upright stance. The structure of the pelvic girdle and the hind limb is adapted to a habitually erect bipedal gait, the forelimb becomes shorter then the hind limb. The opposable grip of this ape develops into a precision grip. These mythic apemen are also thought to have made and used tools something no modern ape can do.

The suddenly about 1 1/2 million years ago the cranial capacity nearly doubles in size from Homo habilis to Homo erectus. From the most recent common ancestor to modern man the size of the brain nearly triples in size yet the genetic basis of this metamorphasis is unknown.

In the process 83% of the protein coding sequences are altered at an amino acid sequence level. There are 95 million base insertions/deletions (indels) at a nucleotide sequence level in 5 million events. In addtion there are 35 million single nucleotides changed. There are also 9 pericentric inversions between ~2-4 megabases long. Tor the indels alone it would require 1 indel (1 base to 15kb) fixed in the respective chimp/human genomes, per year, for 5 million years. This is not only never been obverved or demonstrated it is a modern myth of epic proportions.

In considering the theory of evolution as natural history I looked at all of this and more. Being an evangelical with an avid interest in evidential apologetics I weighed this against Scripture. The Bible is, among other things, a chronocle of the wonderfull works of God down through redemptive history. Young earth creationists are adamantly opposed to the Single Common Ancestor Model described above. The reason for this is largely theological being rooted and grounded in the Gospel.

The central defining tenant of Protestant theology is Scripture alone, faith alone, Christ alone as the fulcrum of our faith. With regards to our view of history God is not a distant disinterested observer. God is Creator. The word of God through whom He made the worlds, co equal, co eternal with the Holy Spirit and the Father, became flesh and dwelt among us.

Just as darkess is the absense of light and atheism is the absense of God, folly is the absense of wisdom and sin is the absense of the righteousness of God. (See Romans 3:10-21; Proverbs 1:1-4; 8:27-31) It is informative to note the Hebrew for wisdom (skill; ie the application of knowledge), Word in John 1 (Logos; rightly ordered reason or reason itself) and science (directly observed and demonstrated properties and functions) appear to be identical.

Redemptive history and evolution as natural history are mutually exclusive. You cannot claim faith in the historicity of the Gospel and disparage the clear testimony of Scipture. Intellectual ascent is not the same thing as faith as described in Holy Script. I have had the debates with evolutionists of every size shape and description. A geneticist, an associate professor of Biology, biology majors, a retired physics professor and one noteable research scientist from the Broad Institute at MIT. After reading the scientific papers, books, websites, diatribes and detailed expostions of scientific literature ad infinitum ad nauseum I have come to a conclusion. The single common ancestor model is a modern mythology and the true history of life on planet earth is contained in the opening pages of the Bible.

In this thread I intend to post expostions of historical and doctrinal texts where the Gospel is expressed in no uncertain terms. Feel free to respond as you see fit but I don't have time for expostive responses. Over the last few months I have tried in find a Biblical basis for anything remotely resembling a theology in theistic evolution without much success. What I have seen instead is a constant barrage of criticism of young earth creationists with arguments that are not very different then the ones offered by secular evolutionists.

Against the backdrop of the Bible as redemptive history I'm going to compare it to the myth of the Single Common Ancestor Model. I welcome the participation of anyone interested in responding.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Over the last few months I have tried in find a Biblical basis for anything remotely resembling a theology in theistic evolution without much success.

TE is a label for people who understand the TofE, accept the evidence for it and think the theories adequately describe life as we see it around us, and are theists. It is not a theological label. AFAIK the only consistent people who use evolution to create their theology are process theologians.

 

[Silent Bob]

I voted neither. Although most of the OT is myth and parable. The NT IS historical and in part verified by extra-scriptual sources.

The central defining tenant of Protestant theology is Scripture alone, faith alone, Christ alone as the fulcrum of our faith.

Ehhh doc.... You have three alones do you realise that? Whatever happened to Christ alone? I have the same issue with my denomination.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Why should it make any difference to you that someone can be a Christain and accept evolutionary thoery at the same time? You don't have to agree with them, but why agonize over it?

 

[mark kennedy]

Over the last few months I have tried in find a Biblical basis for anything remotely resembling a theology in theistic evolution without much success.

TE is a label for people who understand the TofE, accept the evidence for it and think the theories adequately describe life as we see it around us, and are theists. It is not a theological label. AFAIK the only consistent people who use evolution to create their theology are process theologians.

Be that as it may, the Bible makes bold sweeping claims of God's activities in human history. There is the 'In the Begining' creation of Adam and Eve and that is only one of many. Evolution as natural history is simply not consistant with the Bible as redemptive history except in the most rudimentary way.

What I am going to attempt in this thread is to bring out the clear historical character of Scripture from the Pentatauch to the Revelation of Jesus Christ. It is, as I said, Scripture alone, Christ alone and faith alone that is the sole basis of Protestant theology. Furthermore, the theory of evolution as natural history has taken on an impossible burden of proof. I have looked at this both as a theological issue and a scientific one and the Single Common Ancestor Model is inconsistant with both as I elaborated on in the OP at length.

 

[mark kennedy]

Why should it make any difference to you that someone can be a Christain and accept evolutionary thoery at the same time? You don't have to agree with them, but why agonize over it?

I'm a Christian and I believe in evolution as it is defined scientifically, 'the change of alleles in populations over time'. It is the historical content of the Gospel that is at issue here and the typical generalities used in these discussions are far from substantive. I am going to offer expostive posts on specific texts that are historical narratives. Respond as you like but I will be poisting Scripture against what has become arguments of science, 'falsely so called'.

Evolution as natural history is completly incompatable with the Gospel as redemptive history. You can't have it both ways, either God acts in time and space by divine fiat or He does not. If not then the Bible is worse then useless, even as an allegory.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

You are entitled to you opinion. However, I hope you realize that there are those out there who study science and disagree with you on the validity of the theory of evolution. There are also those who study the bible and would disagree with you on the validity of T.E. Then, there are those, like Dr. Kenneth Miller, who study both and would disagree with you.

 

[mark kennedy]

I voted neither. Although most of the OT is myth and parable. The NT IS historical and in part verified by extra-scriptual sources.

Specific texts will be looked at and I welcome you comments on the texts I bring up. To say that most of the OT is myth and parable is completly incompatable with the New Testament wittness regarding the historicity of the Law and the Prophets.

Ehhh doc.... You have three alones do you realise that? Whatever happened to Christ alone? I have the same issue with my denomination.

Of course I realize that and they are all mutually dependant on the Gospel as Divine Revelation. I will elaborate on the Christ alone when we get to the Messianic Prophecy that begins in the early chapters of Genesis.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

You are entitled to you opinion. However, I hope you realize that there are those out there who study science and disagree with you on the validity of the theory of evolution. There are also those who study the bible and would disagree with you on the validity of T.E. Then, there are those, like Dr. Kenneth Miller, who study both and would disagree with you.

I did not learn about the theory of evolution from creationists but from evolutionists and scientists. It is not whether someone who studies the Bible agrees with me or not but whether or not what I say agrees with the Bible.

Im out of time once again.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[shernren]

I will be following this thread with interest. But I am cynical that I will see anything substantially new or useful here. If you think that our comments and criticisms are "no different from those of secular evolutionists", then I suppose I am entitled to expect that what you present here will be on the level of the Paluxy Track, the Ica Stones, and the canopy theory.

But I will be watching and waiting, and hoping to be proved wrong.

 

[chaoschristian]

The central defining tenant of Protestant theology is Scripture alone, faith alone, Christ alone as the fulcrum of our faith. With regards to our view of history God is not a distant disinterested observer. God is Creator. The word of God through whom He made the worlds, co equal, co eternal with the Holy Spirit and the Father, became flesh and dwelt among us.

First and foremost I hope to see you develop a definition of what exactly 'Protestant theology' is and a compelling argument as to why it must necessarily be used by all Christians. And I would hope that you also include compelling reasons why you omitted the revelation of Creation and the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit from your theology as described in the above paragraph. And it would be really super if you provided clear definitions as to what 'Scripture alone' , 'faith alone' , and 'Christ alone' mean and, again, an argument as to why your definitions are the compelling ones.

You used a lot of language just in that one paragraph alone, that without clear and compelling boundaries, is liable to either pull the legs out from underneath your case, or spin you off into endless tangents.

Finally, it will be really interesting to see if this is more of a 'This is what I, Mark Kennedy, believe' kind of thread or a 'This is what I, Mark Kennedy, think you ought to believe' kind of thread.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

'This is what I, Mark Kennedy, think you ought to believe' kind of thread.

Agreed 100%.

And Mark, I never insinuated that you didn't get your evolutionary learinings from anyone besisdes evolutionists. I simply assert that you have your opinion and are entitled to it.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

the FIVE Solas are:
| Sola Scriptura | Soli Deo Gloria | Solo Christo | Sola Gratia | Sola Fide |
from:
http://www.fivesolas.com/5solas.htm
http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/fivesolas.html

 

[Willtor]

Missing Option: My Bible doesn't have a book of "Revelations." It ends with "Revelation."

Missing Option: Cowboy Neal is our common ancestor.

/obscure?

Finally, it will be really interesting to see if this is more of a 'This is what I, Mark Kennedy, believe' kind of thread or a 'This is what I, Mark Kennedy, think you ought to believe' kind of thread.

If it wasn't obvious from the Thread's title.

 

[jereth]

Redemptive history and evolution as natural history are mutually exclusive.

Evolution as natural history is completly incompatable with the Gospel as redemptive history.

Much as I wish to remain gracious and charitable, your continued insistence here (and on multiple threads) has led me to the conclusion, Mark, that you and I do not believe the same Gospel.

The "gospel" that you believe in is clearly not the gospel foretold by the Prophets, spoken by the Lord Jesus, witnessed by the Apostles and believed by the Church.

It doesn't bother me that you think Young Earth Creationism is superior to Theistic Evoltuion theologically and scientifically. We can agree to disagree about that.

But when you continue to insist that Theistic Evolution is "incompatible" or "mutually exclusive" with the Gospel (and, by implication, Theistic Evolutionists are unchristian), you demonstrate that your "gospel" is a false and heretical "gospel", a destructive and divisive "gospel". You have married the pure gospel of Christ to the "gospel" of creationism, and therefore polluted it in just the same way that the Galatians polluted the gospel with their legalism.

Though I accord you with the respect due to you as a professing believer, I denounce your theology, and ask that you please reconsider your beliefs and actions.

Please consider the fact that you are bringing the cause of YECs in general into disrepute, when in fact many (if not most) YECs are capable of believing that their disagreeing TE brothers and sisters are still united with them in the one gospel.

 

[chaoschristian]

Mark:

You posted this:

The Gospel is either the history of the human race or the single common anceostor mythology

here: Look for post 15

The underlined part is my emphasis.

This is perhaps the single most intriguing comment I have ever seen you make, and I am honestly curious and open eared in anticipation of seeing you develop this line of thought and your reasoning behind it.

Perhaps this is the open door for me to come into a better understanding of the way you think, of your pov on scripture, and what you refer to as 'redemptive history.'

So with this post I am encouraging you to expound on how scripture reveals the history of the human race, because I am genuinely interested.

 

[charityagape]

I found your post really interesting too and would like to hear more.

 

[LoG]

But when you continue to insist that Theistic Evolution is "incompatible" or "mutually exclusive" with the Gospel (and, by implication, Theistic Evolutionists are unchristian), you demonstrate that your "gospel" is a false and heretical "gospel", a destructive and divisive "gospel". You have married the pure gospel of Christ to the "gospel" of creationism, and therefore polluted it in just the same way that the Galatians polluted the gospel with their legalism.

Consider please that Christ himself "married" His gospel with Creationism, when He stated quite plainly "But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' Mark 13:19.That simple statement flies in the face of evolution on several fronts. From this one verse it is easy to determine whose interpretation of the gospel is polluted, destructive, divisive and most of all, deceitful.

When one realizes that secular evolutionists utilize the same proofs as TE's to "prove" there is no God, it stretches the imagination as to how TE's somehow see their beliefs as being compatible with the gospels, since a large chunk of the redemptive foundation is missing or considered mythological.

Please consider the fact that you are bringing the cause of YECs in general into disrepute, when in fact many (if not most) YECs are capable of believing that their disagreeing TE brothers and sisters are still united with them in the one gospel.

Evolution and by extension theistic evolution, brings christianity in disrepute, not so much because of a belief in evolution as because of a disbelief in a creation event that Jesus himself affirmed. It makes God, His Son and every prophet that referenced the creation and/or Adam and Eve, a liar or storyteller. It destroys the ability to have total faith that God is not a man that He would lie.

 

[Willtor]

Except that secular evolutionists don't use evolution to prove there is no God. How could they? It's just science.

 

[jereth]

Consider please that Christ himself "married" His gospel with Creationism, when He stated quite plainly "But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.' Mark 13:19.

A) Christ is not talking about the gospel of his redemptive death and resurrection here, he is talking about marriage and divorce
B) Christ marries his teaching to the doctrine of humanity as taught in Genesis, not to literal-six-day-recent creationism which is a faulty post-Reformation interpretation of Genesis.

I urge you to please consider carefully what you are saying here. Be careful when you assert what our Lord Jesus Christ taught, remembering that he will call us all to account for how we have represented his Words.