• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Evolution and how God acts

Status
Not open for further replies.

JMC309

Regular Member
Jun 5, 2007
386
20
✟23,128.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
That is not a major criticism indeed it is not even a minor criticism. This is what is termed a non sequitur ("it does not follow") and all it demonstrates is that you need to hit your theology textbooks and do some more study. :)

Adam was created posse non peccare which means "able not to sin". Adam was perfect although he was posse peccare and this in no way denies his perfectness.

Perfection implies immutability, just as God is perfect and immutable. Plus, how can creation be perfect. Only God is perfect, and creation is not God. The word used is 'good,' which means going according to God's plan.

But then you deny the truth that death entered the created order through the sin of Adam!

No I don't! Creation was always imperfect from Adam's potential to sin, and the fact that Adam would sin. Surely 'non posse peccare,' would be closer to perfection than 'posse non peccare?'

Not sure what you have proven :scratch:

That you can have the doctrine of the Fall without YEC. :)

Another point. In God's speech in Job, when Job basically asks about the reason for suffering, God describes, not the Fall, but creation. This links the actual creation with God's answer to Job's pleas. Incidentally, why do you interpret the references in Job to a measuring line and foundations figuratively, while interpreting Genesis literally?

Still subjective, because you are the one deciding what is necessary for God to accomplish His will.

Look at Scripture. See what God is trying to achieve. See what God does. See the links. All Scripture, no subjectivity. :)

Which still could have been done without wiping them out.

Unless of course death had to be their punishment for rebelling against God.

What "precedent"?

See the OP. :thumbsup:


 
Upvote 0

JMC309

Regular Member
Jun 5, 2007
386
20
✟23,128.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I...phrased my position a touch badly.:sorry:

My point is that when you look at the miracles God does, he uses the amount of miraculous power necessary to accomplish his goal and no more. The goal of creation was to create the world in which we live. The simpler process of evolution is more in keeping with this approach than the literalistic interpretation of Genesis 1. While the debate on the validity of theistic evolution continues, the point is that if either is acceptable, theistic evolution is more in keeping with the precedent which God has set by the other miracles described in the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Perfection implies immutability, just as God is perfect and immutable.

God is indeed perfect and not able to sin. Adam on the other had was created perfect but able not to sin. Adam was free to not sin or to sin. That does not negate perfection on the part of Adam and the creation. The creation was "very good".

Ecc 7:29 "Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions."

The word used is 'good,' which means going according to God's plan.

It means without sin and pleasing to God for he is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity. If there was sin in the created order before Adam, which is what you must argue for death to be present, then the holy and righteous God would never have declared it to be "very good".

No I don't!

Of course you do. If death entered the created order through Adam's transgression then there was no death before Adam and hence no evolution.

BTW: Why do you hold to Theistic Evolution?

Isaiah 45:12 "I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded."
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
The goal of creation was to create the world in which we live.

Surely you mean "The goal of evolution" as you do not believe in creation? God's goal in creation was to glorify himself. Now how a created order of death and decay can be honouring and glorifying to God is, well, beyond me.

The simpler process of evolution is more in keeping with this approach than the literalistic interpretation of Genesis 1.

It is far simpler to believe the Scriptures and accept by faith that God spake and by the power of his word the whole created order was made.

John 1:1-3 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

Colossians 1:16, 17 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."

Romans 11:33-36 "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."

Some good essays can be found here and here.

If you find some spare cash lying aroung you may wish to try Herman Bavinck's Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 2: God and Creation for £19.74 :) Of this J. I. Packer said:

Bavinck's Dutch masterwork was the Everest of which the textbooks by Louis Berkhof and Auguste Leoerf were foothills and Berkouwer's studies in dogmatics were outliers. Like Augustine, Calvin, and Edwards, Bavinck was a man of giant mind, vast learning, ageless wisdom and great expository skill, and to have his first volume now in full English, with a promise of the other three to come, is a wonderful enrichment. Solid but lucid, demanding but satisfying, broad and deep and sharp and stabilizing, Bavinck's magisterial Reformed Dogmatics remains after a century the supreme achievement of its kind.

 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
1) How can a 'clear teaching,' arouse so much debate in the church?

Until the 1800s there was no debate over this. Creation was only questioned when, due to enlightenment thinking, God was rejected and people sought a new way of explaining how we came to be and developed elaborate theories. Some Christians then sought to make the inerrant word of God fit in with the errant theories of men. Take heed of St. Paul's charge to Timothy:

1Timothy 6:20, 21 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen."

2) As I hope to have shown, either interpretation is doctrinally plausible.

Not at all. The issue is this, one either accepts the account of the inerrant inspired word of Almighty God as set forth in the Scriptures or one believes "science" and makes the inerrant inspired word of Almighty God fit in with that.

3) The evidence for evolution is overwhelming.

You have got to be kidding right? There is no evidence whatsoever for evolution.

Why couldn’t God have used evolutionary processes to create?
Impact: Evolution: The Secret Behind The Propaganda
Back to Genesis: Things You May Not Know About Evolution
Impact: Evolution Is Religion--Not Science

4) Suppose someone was blind and was taught the Bible. Could they ask you the same question for not taking literally the references to God's hand, arm, finger, eyes etc. as being visible in the world?.

I am not sure of your argument here.
 
Upvote 0

theFijian

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 30, 2003
8,898
476
West of Scotland
Visit site
✟86,155.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
AV1611 said:
It is far simpler to believe the Scriptures and accept by faith that God spake and by the power of his word the whole created order was made.

John 1:1-3 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."

Colossians 1:16, 17 "For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist."

Romans 11:33-36 "O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? Or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen."
Those are wonderful verses indeed, mind you they don't tell us how God created. Oh well....
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Those are wonderful verses indeed, mind you they don't tell us how God created. Oh well....

They are but the ground work whereby we learn that God CREATED. As for how:

Hebrews 11:1, 3 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

Gill:

Heb 11:3 - Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God,.... The celestial world, with its inhabitants, the angels; the starry and ethereal worlds, with all that is in them, the sun, moon, stars, and fowls of the air; the terrestrial world, with all upon it, men, beasts, &c. and the watery world, the sea, and all that is therein: perhaps some respect may be had to the distinction of worlds among the Jews; See Gill on Heb_1:2, though the apostle can scarce be thought to have any regard to their extravagant notions of vast numbers of worlds being created: they often speak of three hundred and ten worlds, in all which, they say, there are heavens, earth, stars, planets, &c. (f); and sometimes of eighteen thousand (g); but these notions are rightly charged by Philo (h) with ignorance and folly. However, as many worlds as there are, they are made "by the Word of God"; by Christ, the essential Word of God, to whom the creation of all things is ascribed in Joh_1:1. And this agrees with the sentiments of the Jews, who ascribe the creation of all things to the Word of God, as do the Targumists (i), and Philo the Jew (k). And these are "framed" by the Word, in a very beautiful and convenient order; the heavens before the earth; things less perfect, before those that were more so in the visible world, or terraqueous globe; and things for men, before men, for whom they were; and it is by divine revelation and faith that men form right notions of the creation, and of the author of it, and particularly of the origin of it, as follows:

so that things which are seen: as the heaven, earth, and sea, and in which the invisible things of God, the perfections of his nature, are discerned:

were not made of things which do appear; they were not made from pre-existent matter, but out of nothing, out of which the rude and undigested chaos was formed; and from that invisible mass, covered with darkness, were all visible things brought into a beautiful order; and all from secret and hidden ideas in the divine minds; and this also is the faith of the Jews, that the creation of all things is
מאין, "out of nothing" (l). There seems to be an allusion to the word ברא, used for creation, which signifies to make appear a thing unseen; and is rendered in the Septuagint version by δεικνυμι, Num_16:30 and καταδεικνυμι, Isa_40:26 to show, or make appear; and thus God created, or made to appear, the heavens and earth, which before were not in being, and unseen, Gen_1:1 and created to make, as in Gen_2:3 that is, made them to appear, that he might put them into the form and order they now are.

(f) Misn. Oketzim, c. 3. sect. 12. Targum Jon. in Exod. xxviii. 30. Kettoreth Hassamim in Targum Jon. in Gen. fol. 4. 4. Lex. Cabel. p. 60, 61. (g) T. Bab. Avoda Zara, fol. 3. 2. Yalkut, par. 2. fol. 50. 4. (h) De Opificio, p. 39. (i) Targum Oak. in Deut. xxxiii. 27. & Ben Uzziel in Isa. xlviii. 13. (k) De Opificio, p. 4. & Leg. Alleg. l. 1. p. 44. (l) Tzeror Hammor, fol. 1. 1. Kettoreth Hassamim in Targ. Jon in Gen. fol. 5. 1, 2.
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private

1Timothy 6:20, 21 "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen."

Basil (Bishop of Caesarea Mazaca, Cappadocia, from AD 370–379.) stated in Homily IX:1 "I know the laws of allegory, though less by myself than from the works of others. There are those truly, who do not admit the common sense of the Scriptures, for whom water is not water, but some other nature, who see in a plant, in a fish, what their fancy wishes, who change the nature of reptiles and of wild beasts to suit their allegories, like the interpreters of dreams who explain visions in sleep to make them serve their own ends. For me grass is grass; plant, fish, wild beast, domestic animal, I take all in the literal sense. “For I am not ashamed of the Gospel” [Rom. 1:16]." He went on to say "It is this which those seem to me not to have understood, who, giving themselves up to the distorted meaning of allegory, have undertaken to give a majesty of their own invention to Scripture. It is to believe themselves wiser than the Holy Spirit, and to bring forth their own ideas under a pretext of exegesis. Let us hear Scripture as it has been written."
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
So you have no counter for the evidence, I take it.

I need to read through it in greater depth but the fact is that the evidence I have read in tha past is mere hypothesis stated as fact furthermore if this evidence contradicts Scripture then your so-called evidence is false. That is to say, my counter is Scripture not "science" however there are many "scientific" replies to evolutionary theory.

What I would be more interested in are the assumptions (untestable axioms or presuppositions) which underlined the conclusions. :)

Have you read Gordon Clark on Science and Truth?
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Creation was always imperfect from Adam's potential to sin, and the fact that Adam would sin. Surely 'non posse peccare,' would be closer to perfection than 'posse non peccare?'

I was thinking earlier about the temptation of Christ. Could Christ have sinned in those temptations? If so then you would be concluding Christ was posse non peccare and hence imperfect which would contradict Scripture. Just a thought :)
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Ah, got it. It can't be right because scripture is always right because scripture says it's always right. Masterful logic, that.

One thing that I have noticed regarding this debate is that ones view of Scripture will, by and large, determine where you sit.

Those who uphold the Reformation doctrines of the Scripture being God's inerrant, inspired revelation to mankind and accept the principle that Scripture is its own interpreter will lie on the Creationist side of the argument. Soli Deo Gloria!!

You on the other hand even reject your own Church's teaching that Tradition interprets Scripture and take as your principle that of science interprets Scripture instead of Scripture interpreting science.
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
I know that. I don't think anybody here is disputing that God CREATED.

What then does God reveal to us as to how he created the heavens and the earth and all that therein is? Simple - He spake and it was created by the power of his word!

Some excellent books can be ordered cheaply on this from here. :)
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Question: "What is theistic evolution?"

Answer: Theistic Evolution is one of three major origin-of-life worldviews, the other two being Atheistic Evolution (also commonly known as Darwinian Evolution) and Special Creation.

Atheistic Evolution says that there is no God and that life can and did emerge naturally from preexisting non-living building blocks under the influence of natural laws (like gravity, etc). Special Creation says that God created life directly, either from scratch or from preexisting materials. (There are a variety of Special Creation hypotheses reflecting a variety of Theistic traditions. For the purpose of this article we will focus on the Biblical Christian perspective.) Theistic Evolution says one of two things:

That, while there is a God, He wasn’t directly involved in the origin of life. He may have created the building blocks, He may have created the natural laws, He may even have created these things with the eventual emergence of life in mind, but at some point early on He stepped back and let His creation take over. He let it do what it does, whatever that is, and life eventually emerged from non-living material. This view is similar to Atheistic Evolution in that it presumes a naturalistic origin of life.

Or, that God did not perform just one or two miracles to bring about the origin of life as we know it. His miracles were multitudinous. He led life step by step down a path which it took it from primeval simplicity to contemporary complexity, similar to Darwin’s Evolutionary Tree of Life (fish begot amphibians who begot reptiles who begot birds and mammals, etc). Where life was not able to evolve naturally (how does a reptile's limb evolve into a bird's wing naturally?), God stepped in. This view is similar to Special Creation in that it presumes that God acted supernaturally in some way to bring about life as we know it.

There are numerous differences between the Biblical Special Creation perspective and the Theistic Evolution perspective. Perhaps the most significant difference concerns their respective views on death. Theistic Evolutionists tend to believe that the Earth is billions of years old and that the geologic column containing the fossil record represents long epochs of time. Since man does not appear until late in the fossil record, Theistic Evolutionists believe that many creatures lived, died and became extinct long before man’s belated arrival. This means that death existed before man Adam’s sin.

Biblical Creationists (as Biblical Special Creationists are often called) tend to believe that the earth is relatively young and that the fossil record was laid down during and after Noah’s Flood. The stratification of the layers is thought to have occurred due to hydrologic sorting and liquefaction, both of which are observed phenomena. This puts the fossil record and the death and carnage which it describes hundreds of years after Adam’s sin.

Another significant difference between the two positions is how they read Genesis. Theistic Evolutionists tend to subscribe to either the Day-Age theory or the Framework Theory, both of which are allegorical interpretations of the Genesis One Creation Week. Biblical Creationists tend to subscribe to a literal 24-hour reading of Genesis One. (See “Does Genesis chapter 1 literally mean 24-hour days?”)

Both of the two Theistic Evolutionist views are flawed from a Christian prospective in that they don’t line up with the Genesis creation account. Consider:

Theistic Evolutionists imagine a Darwinian scenario in which stars evolved, then our solar system, then earth, then plants and animals, and eventually man. The two Theistic Evolutionist viewpoints disagree as to the role which God played in the unfolding of events, but they generally agree on the Darwinian timeline. This timeline is in conflict with the Genesis creation account. For example, Genesis One says that the earth was created on Day One and that the sun, moon and stars weren’t created until Day Four. Some Progressive Creationists argue that the wording of Genesis suggests that the sun, moon and stars were actually created on Day One but that they couldn’t be seen through earth’s atmosphere until Day Four. Hence their placement on Day Four. This is a bit of a stretch as the Genesis account is pretty clear that the earth didn’t have an atmosphere until Day Two. If the sun, moon and stars were created on Day One, they should have been visible on Day One.

Another example of discordance is, the Genesis account clearly says that birds were created with sea creatures on Day Five while land animals were not created until Day Six. This is in direct opposition to the Darwinian view which says that birds evolved from land animals. The Biblical account says that birds preceded land animals. The Theistic Evolutionist view says exactly the opposite.

See also: http://www.gotquestions.org/questions_Creation.html
 
Upvote 0

Iosias

Senior Contributor
Jul 18, 2004
8,171
227
✟9,648.00
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.