Christianity... and the fact of evolution

[Anguspure]

That overlooks another aspect of God. He is a God of the smallest details,
not just the big picture.

Matthew 10:29-31
29 Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.
30 But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
31 Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

Psalms 147:4
He telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names.

Luke 12:27-28
27 Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
28 If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more will he clothe you, O ye of little faith?

Not really, the details are in each individual life and God remains close to each individual.
Notice He is concerned with each individual sparrow that falls on the ground.
It is not a devaluation of the suffering but a negation of the idea that accumulative pain and suffering is somehow worse than the suffering in each individual life.

 

[Indent]

Indeed, which is why I ASK rather than state.
The question was not about your faith. The question was why you label yourself as a Christian on a Christian website and post things which are contrary to what Christ taught. That seems rather curious to me. Whether you are the most devout person in the world or a complete non-believer is between you and God. We don't discuss or question each other's personal beliefs. It's against forum rules. Posts or posting behavior is fair game, which is why we address the post and not the poster.

Interestingly, though, Jesus never taught evolution. He taught that the Bible was the inspired word of God. He taught that the Scriptures were suitable for teaching and instruction. He taught us that man lives not by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God. The Bible is a mixture of plainly written historical text, poetry, metaphors, parables and prophesy. His kingdom is not of this world. This world is a temporary home, constructed by God to exist for a time and then be destroyed. It is NOT the focus of our existence.

Nobody is condemning anyone. I'm questioning your motivation, and why you post contrary to the teaching of Christ.

They are historical, not scientific. There was nothing about the creation that follows natural law. God spoke and it happened.

I prefer John 3: 5-8.
None of which answers my question. Why are you proclaiming Christianity and posting the same things as the atheists? There are two sides in a spiritual war for the souls of man. You can't support them both. Either you believe the Bible is the word of God or you do not. Either you follow the teaching of Christ or you do not. Unbelievers call the writings of Moses a myth. Jesus said if you didn't believe Moses you won't believe Him. Personally, I care nothing for the opinions of others. I stand by what the word of God teaches and accept that the miracles of the Lord are greater than the physical laws of the world He created in less than a week.

Oh really?

You asked why she identified with being Christian. You then proceeded to make a number of statements:

1. You do not believe what Christ taught
2. Claimed she "proclaimed Scriptures to be false"
3. You put words in her mouth and created a caricature

You discussed and questioned her beliefs (which is plain for all to see), and while doing some mental acrobatics, tell us it's a question of "behaviour" that is "fair game."

It seems to me you landed face first on the beam. Here is what was said: "I'm not saying your not a Christian, but you're not really a Christian."

When she reacted to an aggressive and accusatory individual, you played dumb.

It's easy to see through you.

While the self-appointed watchdogs for Christian orthodoxy are usually a swell bunch, how about we show people some respect?

The question of whether God created us through evolution or de novo (as described in Genesis) is not "contrary" to what Christ taught. It's a matter of hermeneutics. It's that simple. You don't have the best version/iteration of the faith, and she's entitled to have a different view on Genesis from you.

 

[Indent]

He posted that Genesis was a myth; not that he had trouble believing that the events happened; not that he didn't believe it as written, but that it was in fact a myth. That's a pretty declarative statement and it is 100% in opposition to what Christ taught. Now if you say "I believe that it's a myth," or "I believe it's not historical," then it's a statement of your belief which is far different than stating that Jesus did not tell the truth when He said the Scriptures were accurate as written.

That's because Genesis contains myths.

It's a known fact that the Ancient Near Eastern cultures communicated through myths. Storytelling was a fundamental part of their traditions.

The Israelite were an Ancient Near Eastern culture, like it or not.

"Myths" are a rather sophisticated means of communication. It can be a vehicle for truth, beliefs and values.

It's not "100% in opposition to what Christ taught." That's speculation. That's personal opinion. That's just a theory.

It's not a historical document. This is a story of God's abode—and the Israelites located themselves in that narrative, it sets the stage for their relationship to God. It articulates the purpose and coherence of their lives in that reality.

If God operated within the intellectual and cultural limitations of the time (which is abundantly clear), including through "myths", then the Scriptures are "accurate as written." That does not mean Genesis is a historical document that is driving a conclusion on evolution. It's not.

It's also a fact that evolution happened. That should prompt us to revisit our understanding of the Bible and the church doctrines.

 

[bbbbbbb]

That's because Genesis contains myths.

It's a known fact that the Ancient Near Eastern cultures communicated through myths. Storytelling was a fundamental part of their traditions.

The Israelite were an Ancient Near Eastern culture, like it or not.

"Myths" are a rather sophisticated means of communication. It can be a vehicle for truth, beliefs and values.

It's not "100% in opposition to what Christ taught." That's speculation. That's personal opinion. That's just a theory.

It's not a historical document. This is a story of God's abode—and the Israelites located themselves in that narrative, it sets the stage for their relationship to God. It articulates the purpose and coherence of their lives in that reality.

If God operated within the intellectual and cultural limitations of the time (which is abundantly clear), including through "myths", then the Scriptures are "accurate as written." That does not mean Genesis is a historical document that is driving a conclusion on evolution. It's not.

It's also a fact that evolution happened. That should prompt us to revisit our understanding of the Bible and the church doctrines.

It is also a "fact" according to most reputable Islamic sources that the Holocaust did not happen. At least with the Holocaust we have solid evidence to the contrary of the Islamic "fact". Just because you believe something to be absolutely true may not make it actually true.

 

[dms1972]

I basically agree with you on this DMS. However, the main issue that I've been trying to address in this thread is that Fundamentalist Christians 'tend' to discount me as a Christian because of my general adherence to Theological Evolution. I'm not concerned much with convincing others of my perspective, other than that I think they should give me the hand of fellowship because I too have faith in Christ. It's seems my more ecumenical approach is to be swatted away like so much chaff.

2PhiloVoid

I don't regard myself a 'fundamentalist', or a 'liberal' either but no doubt I can find points I agree with them on, as well as other points were I would disagree. All we can do, is avoid the extremes. I prefer the term 'christian foundations' to 'fundamentals' as there are several meanings of fundamentalism. But for the most part I regard myself as a Truth seeker. I read a fair bit in writers such as Josef Pieper, CS Lewis, Francis Schaeffer, William Barrett, Victor Frankl, Christopher Lasch, Karl Stern, Frank Lake, as well as older writers such as Calvin and Matthew Henry for exposition of Scripture and Theology.

I have no idea what that makes me, nor do I care to 'define myself' very much intellectually.

 

[KWCrazy]

You asked why she identified with being Christian.

More to the point, the question was why a person identifies as a Christian on a Christian website and then posts things contrary to to what Christ taught. I have a good reason for asking this, because it's common practice for people to come to this forum pretending to be, for example, Biblical scholars, and then using that influence to post things contrary to the Scriptures. When questioned, they know nothing about the Scriptures. Later, many of them change their faith to atheist and claim that the intolerance of Christians taught them there was no God. They have a different agenda than discussing topics with others. They come here specifically from other websites with the express intent of separating Christians from their faith.

When someone posts as a Christian and posts that the writing of Moses is a myth, there are only two reasons; they have been deceived by those who teach against God's word, or they are one of those who teach against God's word. I believe that it is important to all believers to re-enforce to other believers that the word of God is true and the lies of man are not.

2. Claimed she "proclaimed Scriptures to be false"

Her words: "Factual, no. It is a MYTH...an attempt by ancient man to explain how he got there..."
That is NOT an affirmation of the veracity of the Scriptures. That is a refusal to accept the Scriptures as the inspired word of God, which is what Jesus taught.

You discussed and questioned her beliefs (which is plain for all to see),

I never questioned her beliefs, only her posts and why she posted them.
If this forum wasn't replete with those trying to undermine the faith of believers by posting anti-Christian doctrine as an educated believer there wouldn't be reasons to challenge those posts. However, there are people investigating faith who might be turned away by repeated statements that what they are being told by some is the word of God is being called a myth and untrue by others who claim to have a more enlightened view of the Scriptures.

While the self-appointed watchdogs for Christian orthodoxy are usually a swell bunch, how about we show people some respect?

If Obama comes out campaigning for Trump would you question why?
We have enough atheists telling us our Gospel is untrue. We really don't need it from Christians.
When Christians testify against what Christ taught, should we not question why?
The poster in question didn't say we were misinterpreting Genesis, she said it was all a myth. Christ referenced Genesis as fact. Was He, then, speaking false? How to you stand with God while teaching the lies of the ungodly? More importantly, how will your words affect those who look to other Christians for support?

The question of whether God created us through evolution or de novo (as described in Genesis) is not "contrary" to what Christ taught.

I consider your statement to be false and challenge you to produce Scripture to support it.

 

[dms1972]

Factual, no. It is a MYTH...an attempt by ancient man to explain how he got there, why he worships the god he worships and explain the hard questions of life that they were aware of, death, illness, failed crops. Every single ancient culture has one...who's to say the Genesis account is any more correct than any other one?

Edit

Genesis is factual in the sense of something done. Yes 'myth' can be understood as an attempt by ancient man to explain the origins of the world. In that sense Genesis is a not a myth. In my view the early chapters in Genesis are an account of a true creation but told in mythopoeic language, it describes events which have a locus in space and time, events that were part of a open system capable of re-ordering by God and in a more limited degree by humans made in God's Image. The Bible provides a unified field of knowledge, though sometimes events are described in the language of epic poetry as with the first chapters of Genesis it seems to me.

It differs from a myth I believe in this way as explained by Wolfhart Pannenberg:

"By being incorporated into the chronology of the priestly document, the character of the creation narrative as the account of a primal age lost the possibility of being repeated in the cult; it became an event which was definitively in the past, and in precisely this way provided the basis of the later history of the world. It thus lost the essential feature of myth, the ability, as the events of the primal age, at the same time to be present in any age through the events of the cult."

 

[dms1972]

It's also a fact that evolution happened. That should prompt us to revisit our understanding of the Bible and the church doctrines.

Not at all, the ponderings of men and their imaginations are to be verified in the light of Scripture, and in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit.

The materialistic version of evolution theory is attempting to fill the gaps in those peoples knowledge, gaps that have come about because of not beginning from Scripture. They rejected revelatory facts, that could have provided starting points for explanatory theories, in favor of an insupportable philosophical standpoint 'materialism'. How can those gaps be described as facts? They cannot, and materialistic evolution cannot make facts of theories.

When we refuse to acknowledge and retain God in our knowledge, ie. in our theories we become fools, this is what the Apostle Paul says in Romans 1.

 

[dms1972]

You do not get to define what a Christian is. You do not get to define MY faith for me. I get to do that.

I'll not say you are not a christian; but you seem very muddled in your comments about God not being a Person, and what 'person' means. God is Personal and He is Spirit. He is worshiped (when we find a moment from arguing) not because He is Spirit, but because He is Wise and Good. Personal does not mean having a body, or a corporeal being, it means a relational being, as within the Holy Trinity. The Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds.

Jesus Christ defines christianity, christian etc. and that is in the Bible. Christians are supposed to contend for the Faith. It is not my faith or your faith or something we get to make up for ourselves.

"Who has bewitched you?" Galations chapter 3.

 

[dms1972]

Actually creating a whole universe might be a whole lot less mysterious than we think. If the thinking of string theorists relating to matter being a vibration and the observations of quantum relating to observer determination have got anything to do with it then a mind with sufficient power could in fact "speak" a universe into existence.
And God said...

When some people take unverified speculative ponderings of scientists and use them to argue with non-believers for the existence of God, it would be amusing if it were not so futile. Futile because while it is true that God is there, no amount of debate by itself will convince a skeptic or atheist, or someone who likes to 'court controversy'. The only time I quote an atheist is when an they are honest enough to admit the problems with materialism. Highly speculative science, will convince no one. If someone became a christian because of 'superstring theory' they'd cease to be one as soon as 'superstring theory' was discarded by scientists. Or else wait and hold off becoming a christian until it was verified. What saves is the Word spoken in the power of the Holy Spirit

"For the message of the Cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: 'I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.' Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?" 1 Corinthians 1:18 and following...

 

[dms1972]

.

 

[Archivist]

He posted that Genesis was a myth; not that he had trouble believing that the events happened; not that he didn't believe it as written, but that it was in fact a myth. That's a pretty declarative statement and it is 100% in opposition to what Christ taught. Now if you say "I believe that it's a myth," or "I believe it's not historical," then it's a statement of your belief which is far different than stating that Jesus did not tell the truth when He said the Scriptures were accurate as written.

But I didn't say anything about Genesis being a myth. I asked about my view of it being an allegory.

 

[KWCrazy]

But I didn't say anything about Genesis being a myth. I asked about my view of it being an allegory.

I meany She, not HE. I missed an S. Red Pony Driver said Genesis was a myth.
You said you view it as an allegory and I 100% disagree.
There is, however, a difference between seeing "I see it as an allegory," or "I believe it to be a myth" and coming out with a declarative statement, "Genesis is a myth;" as if you had special knowledge of the fact and are not expressing your opinion.
It's the difference between saying, "Your post doesn't make sense to me," and "You're an idiot."
As a Christian, you can freely doubt anything you read in the Bible and question some of the events, but saying "The six day creation is a lie, Moses made it all up" is considered false teaching. Many things in the Bible are difficult to understand, but I'm not going to say to other Christians, "Your Bible is false. This never happened."

From previous experience, I question the intent of Christians who attack the Scriptures and make definitive claims based on what they do or do not believe. The number of pretenders I have personally exposed is beyond coincidence. Non-believers use forums like this to attack our faith from the inside.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Allegories didn't actually happen.

If you take the definition of allegory to the extreme I guess you could say that. What if Genesis was just God simplifying how He created the world to an ancient people who would have absolutely no concept of science as we understand.

Lets take hurricanes as a simple example.
How do hurrcianes come to be?

Simple answer: God created them.

Complex Answer:
The formation of hurricanes occurs due to the influx of new high-pressure of air that feeds from the ocean’s warm air and availability of water. As the air decreases in temperature, it forms clouds. Once the rotation reaches at least 74 miles per hour, scientists deem the storm system a hurricane. These storms are only hurricanes in the Atlantic Ocean and Eastern Pacific Ocean. In every other area on Earth, hurricanes are tropical cyclones.

https://www.reference.com/science/hurricane-form-b072e2f8369d1abd


Both answers are true.
Both do not de-power God or take away from His glory.

God gave a simple answer to a simple people.

 

[RedPonyDriver]

As a Christian, you can freely doubt anything you read in the Bible and question some of the events, but saying "The six day creation is a lie, Moses made it all up" is considered false teaching.

You DO realize that there are many Christians who do not hold to biblical "inerrancy" and don't use the bible as a science book, right?

 

[RedPonyDriver]

I'll not say you are not a christian; but you seem very muddled in your comments about God not being a Person, and what 'person' means. God is Personal and He is Spirit. He is worshiped (when we find a moment from arguing) not because He is Spirit, but because He is Wise and Good. Personal does not mean having a body, or a corporeal being, it means a relational being, as within the Holy Trinity. The Father loves the Son, and the Son loves the Father, the Holy Spirit proceeds.

Jesus Christ defines christianity, christian etc. and that is in the Bible. Christians are supposed to contend for the Faith. It is not my faith or your faith or something we get to make up for ourselves.

"Who has bewitched you?" Galations chapter 3.

And? By the words spoken here, many Christians are not "contending for the faith", they are causing strife and yes, even hatred. They are rude, they are nasty, they are arrogant. None of those qualities reflect Christ. If "Christian" literally means "follower of Christ" there are many here who need to back up and start thinking about the logs in their own eyes.

 

[KWCrazy]

You DO realize that there are many Christians who do not hold to biblical "inerrancy" and don't use the bible as a science book, right?

The Bible is NOT a science book. Science deals with natural law, the Bible with supernatural law. If you believe that science trumps the word of God then you believe in NONE of the 333 miracles listed in the Bible, including the resurrection of Christ which science tells us cannot happen. So then, what is your barometer for truth if not the word of God? By what standard do you discern which event to be a miracle and which to have not happened?

 

[RedPonyDriver]

The Bible is NOT a science book. Science deals with natural law, the Bible with supernatural law. If you believe that science trumps the word of God then you believe in NONE of the 333 miracles listed in the Bible, including the resurrection of Christ which science tells us cannot happen. So then, what is your barometer for truth if not the word of God? By what standard do you discern which event to be a miracle and which to have not happened?

And who are you to tell me what to believe? I don't have to defend my beliefs to you or anyone else. My avatar says "Christian" and that's all you need to know. It is against TOS to question. Have a great day...

 

[JacksBratt]

If you take the definition of allegory to the extreme I guess you could say that. What if Genesis was just God simplifying how He created the world to an ancient people who would have absolutely no concept of science as we understand.

I just have to step in here. Been following and reading for a couple of days.

I think I should say, here, that we should not get fooled into believing that Moses, the author of Genesis was in any way less intelligent than we.

Moses was raised by the Egyptian royalty. He was educated as an Egyptian royal and ran the country for the Pharaoh. He was no slouch when it came to intelligence.

Moses also witnessed the accomplishments of the Egyptian engineers, a burning talking bush that did not get consumed by the fire, an ocean of water opening up to produce dry land, water from a rock, food from the sky, his creator writing the ten commandments in rock with His finger, twice, and the list goes on. Moses would have had no trouble understanding the TOE had it been presented to him.

To say God made up an allegory in order to tell us about the creation as a way of not confusing us, is rather silly.
He told us and Moses wrote it, as it was written, because that's how it happened.

I believe the opposite to be true here. People of Moses time understood it all very well. It is pompously, arrogantly self proclaimed "educational giants" of today that cannot wrap their head around it. It is the people of today that are unable to comprehend. Not the people of Moses day.

The truth is so simple. God spoke, it happened. It is man that says "God spoke and it took a billion years". This is necessary due to their lack of faith, combined with their self proclaimed wisdom and modern "knowledge". It won't let them believe.

The people of Moses day could have easily understood the concept of the TOE. Do we not teach it to children?

Moses did not write of the TOE because it is not the way it happened. It is not truth. It is Satan's lie and it is deceiving the elect.

 

[toLiJC]

If evolution is one of the strongest explanatory theories in any academic field, I mean, the evidence is simply overwhelming, how do Christians reconcile this?

What about the Biblical scholars that generally dismiss Genesis as a "historical" representation... but rather "myth" (however you want to define that)?

I understand I'm courting "controversy" here, but I'd genuinely like to hear this, supposedly, untouchable theological answer.

why must God delay the process of overall salvation when He is the system Administrator of life for the whole boundless universe?!, the evolution would be a (too) big delay in this regard, and, of course, there are a lot more explanations about why there is no long evolution within the single eternity

Blessings