I don't understand the point of creationism

Speedwell said:

Another winner. The objection I have to YECs is not what they believe, but that they insist that non-YECs are somehow not "real" Christians.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know. Some of them do insist upon that point and play the role of Divi / Der.

I, too, wish they wouldn't.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

There's a lot about Christianity you don't have to understand on day 1 of being saved that you come to understand over time...

Partly concerning creationism, is the question "did God create man", "did God create varying species of animals", or is it all just happenstance. While the Bible doesn't give us all the minutiae of the matter, it does cover the basics on pages 1-2 of your Bible.

If you don't believe that in some form, then it's a bit difficult to believe in later pages, and the whole "who we are before a Just and Holy God" really just falls apart.

Hazelelponi said:

There's a lot about Christianity you don't have to understand on day 1 of being saved that you come to understand over time...

Partly concerning creationism, is the question "did God create man", "did God create varying species of animals", or is it all just happenstance. While the Bible doesn't give us all the minute of the matter, it does cover the basics on pages 1-2 of your Bible.

If you don't believe that in some form, then it's a bit difficult to believe in later pages, and the whole "who we are before a Just and Holy God" really just falls apart.

Click to expand...

Actually, it doesn't, sister Hazelelponi. I'll admit that it can be difficult to believe in later pages of the Bible if we don't take a more literal approach to the biblical text, it isn't impossible to do so. It just requires some additional reading and pondering, along with some praying.

My point is that the central focus of our faith is upon the person, work and nature Jesus, not upon whatever exacting details may have played a part in 'how' God created the universe, our world, all life on our earth and all of Humanity.

The 'bogey-man' issue of our time is the denial of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, not our partial understanding about how God brought us all into existence.

2PhiloVoid said:

Actually, it doesn't, sister Hazelelponi. I'll admit that it can be difficult to believe in later pages of the Bible if we don't take a more literal approach to the biblical text, it isn't impossible to do so. It just requires some additional reading and pondering, along with some praying.

My point is that the central focus of our faith is upon the person, work and nature Jesus, not upon whatever exacting details may have played a part in 'how' God created the universe, our world, all life on our earth and all of Humanity.

The 'bogey-man' issue of our time is the denial of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, not our partial understanding about how God brought us all into existence.

Click to expand...

I'm addressing specifically not believing in intelligent design at all... not the minutiae of creation itself. I'm not a YEC Christian, but I do believe God specifically created mankind, animals, and plantlife.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

It’s all about trusting in God’s word. Blessed is he who believes without seeing. If I were going to be wrong, I’d rather be wrong trusting in God’s word than be wrong not trusting His word.

BNR32FAN said:

It’s all about trusting in God’s word. Blessed is he who believes without seeing. If I were going to be wrong, I’d rather be wrong trusting in God’s word than be wrong not trusting His word.

Click to expand...

All Christians trust God's word as divine revelation. The question is, why do some Christians require Genesis to be literal history?

Hazelelponi said:

I'm addressing specifically not believing in intelligent design at all... not the minutiae of creation itself. I'm not a YEC Christian, but I do believe God specifically created mankind, animals, and plantlife.

Click to expand...

The thing is, Intelligent Design is a specific proposal, not just the general notion that God "designed" creation, and many Christians--including some YECs--reject it.

JackRT said:

I do not read the Genesis myth as a fall from an original state of perfection into sin and death. The first couple were completely innocent and naive creatures. They were certainly capable of making a mistake but, without knowing good from evil, they lacked even the ability to sin. That ability came only with them eating of the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil". To me the story is a "coming of age story". Our mythical first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated. We are not a people fallen from an original state of perfection into sin and death.

Why the expulsion from Eden? In the mythology, I believe it to be symbolic that mankind was no longer a naïve creature living in moral ignorance but had become real men and women living in a real world where there was real good and evil.

What we are is a people that is still evolving and that evolution has profoundly affected not just our bodies but our psyches as well. The world in which we evolved was a difficult and dagerous one and mere survival was of the highest priority. Selfishness became a part of who we are as a survival mechanism. This selfish instinct is no longer as necessary as in our savage past but it is still powerful. If there is an "Original Sin", this is it. Of course it is not a sin really but an innate part of our nature and it can be overcome.

In the words of Bishop John Spong: "Every living thing, plant and animal is programmed to survive. What is true of all these living things is also true of human life. The only difference is that we human beings are self-conscious, while plants and animals are not. If survival is our highest goal, self-centeredness is inevitable and thus this quality becomes a constant part of the human experience. Traditionally, the church has called this "original sin" and has explained it with the myth of the fall. That was simply wrong. Survival is a quality found in life itself. There was no fall. Self-centered, survival driven, self-conscious creatures is simply who we are. There is thus no such thing as "original sin" from which we need to be rescued by a divine invader. So much of traditional Christianityfrom that flows every other evil --- greed, gluttony, lust, anger, sloth and the like. assumes this false premise."

In conclusion, we are born sinless but we are not born perfect. We have the defect of selfishness and from that flows every other evil --- greed, gluttony, lust, anger, sloth and the like.

Click to expand...

I like it you are bringing out one good thing, a central thing.

Still, as you might expect, it isn't the only key thing that happened in the crux of the story of the Garden of Eden. It isn't all of the central essense of the story.

You have pointed out one good thing that happened --

"...first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated."

That gain in intellectual ability is a key good change, a valuable change.

It's good to become able to think, to evaluate... So, we agree entirely on that. .

Let's sift through though so see what other deep thing is there.

What could show up in a new sympathetic reading (open to seeing new aspects)?

First, consider as background, that God is the...source of something so fundamental to our nature/self/soul, an essence of our soul one might try to say -- sometimes people find a wording like this: He is the ground of being.

Like a parent, He is our source, our...original joy and power and hope and springboard.

Far older and deeper of course. Wiser by being. We are like Him, but He is so much older, deeper. Consider how a person like you or me might become in a billion or 14 billion years, if we make many right choices, and find the best possible things. He is at that level, at least, we could say, for example (like the minimum level, X >= Y).

Now...look at just what happened in the story:

1Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”
[this simplistic seeming mistaking of what God had said seems a diversion, but that's not the real purpose of it. The real purpose is already accomplished (!) -- the real purpose of the question is its premise: that (of course) God is being (just like us, naturally) selfish and unfair(!) -- you always knew it! don't be naive! -- because He can....
This premise is the real message of the question.]

2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
[yes, it's just like you should have known, God is merely a (immature bully) -- why wouldn't He be just like us at our worst moment? -- and is keeping good things from us just out of selfishness, for his gain at our expense]

6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths."

Genesis 3 ESV

If you notice the relational side here, the natural and inevitable gain in intellectual power that is happening is....almost like a diversion, because another profound thing happens.

They get moved from a state of trust in their Parent to a state of seeing their Parent as even less than themselves, a wrongful being that is petty and spiteful, and withholding good things from them.

This can play out in our ordinary lives at times.

Imagine 100 young children wanting to drive a car -- didn't every 3 year old want to?

I did. I recall that urge and desire. I'd go out and climb in the car and pretend to drive it.

Now, even though I needed to be about 5 times as old to be ready, I wanted to already.

When a parent says "No, give back the key." -- It's a moment when we are crestfallen, often.

There are many possible responses in those 100 toddlers, to the demand from the parent to give them back the key.

Some could throw a tantrum, some just feel a sense of rebellion....or some might instead trust and give the key back.

But, imagine if later, another day, the toddler gets the keys again....

Now what happens?

Do they distrust the parent and go start the car and shift it into drive just like they've seen done?

Well, it's at some essential level about trust.

Does the parent have the wisdom to know whether we are ready to drive in full sized 2 ton hunk of metal that can go from zero to 30mph in seconds, and that can maim or kill....

?

Is the parent wise enough to know, or is the parent just a spiteful bully we don't trust?

Halbhh said:

I like it you are bringing out one good thing, a central thing.

Still, as you might expect, it isn't the only key thing that happened in the crux of the story of the Garden of Eden. It isn't all of the central essense of the story.

You have pointed out one good thing that happened --

"...first couple graduated from animal status into to fully self aware human beings capable of making moral judgements. This is not an Original Sin story but rather an Original Blessing story that should be celebrated."

That gain in intellectual ability is a key good change, a valuable change.

It's good to become able to think, to evaluate... So, we agree entirely on that. .

Let's sift through though so see what other deep thing is there.

What could show up in a new sympathetic reading (open to seeing new aspects)?

First, consider as background, that God is the...source of something so fundamental to our nature/self/soul, an essence of our soul one might try to say -- sometimes people find a wording like this: He is the ground of being.

Like a parent, He is our source, our...original joy and power and hope and springboard.

Far older and deeper of course. Wiser by being. We are like Him, but He is so much older, deeper. Consider how a person like you or me might become in a billion or 14 billion years, if we make many right choices, and find the best possible things. He is at that level, at least, we could say, for example (like the minimum level, X >= Y).

Now...look at just what happened in the story:

1Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made.

He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”
[this simplistic seeming mistaking of what God had said seems a diversion, but that's not the real purpose of it. The real purpose is already accomplished (!) -- the real purpose of the question is its premise: that (of course) God is being (just like us, naturally) selfish and unfair(!) -- you always knew it! don't be naive! -- because He can....
This premise is the real message of the question.]

2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
[yes, it's just like you should have known, God is merely a (immature bully) -- why wouldn't He be just like us at our worst moment? -- and is keeping good things from us just out of selfishness, for his gain at our expense]

6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths."

Genesis 3 ESV

If you notice the relational side here, the natural and inevitable gain in intellectual power that is happening is....almost like a diversion, because another profound thing happens.

They get moved from a state of trust in their Parent to a state of seeing their Parent as even less than themselves, a wrongful being that is petty and spiteful, and withholding good things from them.

This can play out in our ordinary lives at times. Imagine 100 young children wanting to drive a car -- didn't everyone when they were 3?

I did.

Now, even though I needed to be about 5 times as old to be ready, I wanted to already.

When a parent says no, give back that key...

There are many possible responses in those 100 toddlers, to the demand from the parent to give them back the key.

Some could throw a tantrum, some just feel a sense of rebellion....or some might instead trust and give the key back.

But, imagine if later, another day, the toddler gets the keys again....

Now what happens?

Do they distrust the parent and go start the car and shift it into drive just like they've seen done?

Well, it's at some essential level about trust.

Does the parent have the wisdom to know whether we are ready to drive in full sized 2 ton hunk of metal that can go from zero to 30mph in seconds, and that can maim or kill....

?

Is the parent wise enough to know, or is the parent just a spiteful bully we don't trust?

Click to expand...

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my understanding of Genesis. It is of course an interpretation just as your understanding is as well. We must of course remember as well that the Genesis text is itself an interpretation.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

Creationism comes from a commitment to read all of the stories in the Bible as literally true history.

Its more an attitude toward the Bible than toward God or Jesus.

JackRT said:

Thank you for taking the time to respond to my understanding of Genesis. It is of course an interpretation just as your understanding is as well. We must of course remember as well that the Genesis text is itself an interpretation.

Click to expand...

Well, my interpretation has changed over time because of the effect of reading fully through the books again and being more aware of the themes that run throughout them all, from listening better with an effort to really hear. That quiet listening like you'd do for a really good poem or writing, when it's that good.

Halbhh said:

Well, my interpretation has changed over time because of the effect of reading fully through the books again and being more aware of the themes that run throughout them all, from listening better with an effort to really hear. That quiet listening like you'd do for a really good poem or writing, when it's that good.

Click to expand...

We seem to be walking parallel paths --- we catch glimpses of each other through the undergrowth.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

When I first heard about it (and I was probably a teenager), I probably just thought it as the position of the uneducated and intellectually backward. Later I learned how widespread it was. Not long after I left the church. Given what I have learned since, I suspect it is a defensive rejection of the modern world. I've frankly never seen what it had to do with belief in Christ

Dr David L Cooper.
When The Plain Sense of Scripture Makes Common Sense, Seek no Other Sense; Therefore, Take Every Word at its Primary, Ordinary, Usual, Literal Meaning Unless the Facts of the Immediate Context, Studied in
the Light of Related Passages and Axiomatic and Fundamental Truths Indicate Clearly Otherwise.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

1.The Bible says God created the World, so creation/creationism is, therefore, a Biblical doctrine. From the beginning, we see that Adam was a follow-formed man with the capacity of thought and reason to choose for himself and communicate. Therefore from the beginning, he had the ability to do right or wrong. If he didn't and were just some evolving animal no different from a monkey, he wouldn't have the ability to sin. Notice in Edean God only instructed Adam the only creature made in his image the only creature with a free will and conscience, the only creature with the ability to reason and speak. He didn't give instructions to the lions or the monkeys because he made those creatures with animalistic urges that they are ruled by; therefore, the laws that govern them are their own animal desires, but it is not so with human spiritual laws govern us because we are spiritual creatures.

2. Understanding our creation allows us to understand why we need salvation. All creatures are made according to their own kind, and man is made in the image of God. Creation is important because we are made in God's image; we are eligible for and need salvation animals are not made in his image, so nothing is expected from them; they don't need salvation/redemption. Man was made to be a higher creature and has used his capacity as a higher creature to sin. Therefore, it is man that needs redemption.
Because we are made in God's image, we are given the capacity to be self-determined creatures; we have the capacity to chose for ourselves; we aren't guided by animalistic instinct as evolution insists. With evolution, we can say, " I did this thing because it was the way I evolved," with God, we can't say such a thing because, being spiritual creatures, we aren't to be ruled by our flesh. We have a conscience, we may have the urge to cheat on our wives, but we have the responsibility before God not to. You see the importance of the doctrine of creation; it says that we aren't to act like animals because God creates us to be higher than animals. A lion may kill another lion, but humans aren't to murder each other. The creation doctrine shows that man is a higher creature, so more is expected of him. We wouldn't need salvation if we were made to be animals that live by Instinct because God would know that we were incapable of being anything other than animalistic after all, he would have been the one who made us that way, but he didn't; he made us self-aware of right and wrong good and evil, and he intends for us to chose good. Before we receive salvation, we must first acknowledge our sin, and to do so; we must acknowledge that God made us for the purpose of fellowshipping with him and have now fallen short of that purpose. We wouldn't be fallen creatures if we weren't created to be higher than we are ( which is completely different than evolution, which states we are constantly moving to a higher state ). Hence, you see, without the doctrine of creation, there is no doctrine of salvation because we wouldn't be accountable for our actions before God, just like animals aren't accountable. Nore would God need to save us if we hadn't fallen from our original condition.

Aloysius gbahn said:

... which is completely different than evolution, which states we are constantly moving to a higher state...

Click to expand...

No, it states no such thing.

It states that populations change over generations because offspring vary and some reproduce more successfully than others.

Aloysius gbahn said:

1.The Bible says God created the World, so creation/creationism is, therefore, a Biblical doctrine. From the beginning, we see that Adam was a follow-formed man with the capacity of thought and reason to choose for himself and communicate. Therefore from the beginning, he had the ability to do right or wrong. If he didn't and were just some evolving animal no different from a monkey, he wouldn't have the ability to sin. Notice in Edean God only instructed Adam the only creature made in his image the only creature with a free will and conscience, the only creature with the ability to reason and speak. He didn't give instructions to the lions or the monkeys because he made those creatures with animalistic urges that they are ruled by; therefore, the laws that govern them are their own animal desires, but it is not so with human spiritual laws govern us because we are spiritual creatures.

2. Understanding our creation allows us to understand why we need salvation. All creatures are made according to their own kind, and man is made in the image of God. Creation is important because we are made in God's image; we are eligible for and need salvation animals are not made in his image, so nothing is expected from them; they don't need salvation/redemption. Man was made to be a higher creature and has used his capacity as a higher creature to sin. Therefore, it is man that needs redemption.
Because we are made in God's image, we are given the capacity to be self-determined creatures; we have the capacity to chose for ourselves; we aren't guided by animalistic instinct as evolution insists. With evolution, we can say, " I did this thing because it was the way I evolved," with God, we can't say such a thing because, being spiritual creatures, we aren't to be ruled by our flesh. We have a conscience, we may have the urge to cheat on our wives, but we have the responsibility before God not to. You see the importance of the doctrine of creation; it says that we aren't to act like animals because God creates us to be higher than animals. A lion may kill another lion, but humans aren't to murder each other. The creation doctrine shows that man is a higher creature, so more is expected of him. We wouldn't need salvation if we were made to be animals that live by Instinct because God would know that we were incapable of being anything other than animalistic after all, he would have been the one who made us that way, but he didn't; he made us self-aware of right and wrong good and evil, and he intends for us to chose good. Before we receive salvation, we must first acknowledge our sin, and to do so; we must acknowledge that God made us for the purpose of fellowshipping with him and have now fallen short of that purpose. We wouldn't be fallen creatures if we weren't created to be higher than we are ( which is completely different than evolution, which states we are constantly moving to a higher state ). Hence, you see, without the doctrine of creation, there is no doctrine of salvation because we wouldn't be accountable for our actions before God, just like animals aren't accountable. Nore would God need to save us if we hadn't fallen from our original condition.

Click to expand...

Well, that certainly is a logic fail. If we are no different than animals and have to act like animals if God made us from an animal,

then according to your creation story we are no different then dust and have to act like dust because God made us from dust.

pitabread said:

Based on a couple decades of conversing with creationists and more broadly Christians in general, I've come away with two basic conclusions re: creationism:

1) It's not required for salvation by Jesus Christ.

2) It's not derived on the basis of God's Creation.​

I don't otherwise see the point of adopting creationist beliefs.

Click to expand...

I think it is a very broad term. I don't think it's required for salvation other than the nuance that I call God our creator, and believe he is. But I don't know HOW he created us. He didn't expose ancient man to "beyond 21st century" science and physics. The way the writers of the early old testament books describe the earth in general strongly suggests their world view was that it was flat, and a "solid" heaven above it was supported by pillars. And that's fine - it's not a science book. Also, I remember a few decades ago that many Christians bristled at "creationism" because it was not necessarily Christian. But I suppose that depends on what "Creationism" means to the person using the word.

Direct Driver said:

I think it is a very broad term. I don't think it's required for salvation other than the nuance that I call God our creator, and believe he is. But I don't know HOW he created us. He didn't expose ancient man to "beyond 21st century" science and physics. The way the writers of the early old testament books describe the earth in general strongly suggests their world view was that it was flat, and a "solid" heaven above it was supported by pillars. And that's fine - it's not a science book. Also, I remember a few decades ago that many Christians bristled at "creationism" because it was not necessarily Christian. But I suppose that depends on what "Creationism" means to the person using the word.

Click to expand...

That's what we're trying to find out. What's the point of taking Genesis literally?

If God can not (in the Bible) accurately communicate how His creation and living humans came to be.

Then why should God be trusted on any area the Bible. Genesis begins with, can a person believe God and His communication with His creation.

If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.