Creation, science, and the Nicene creed

dad said:

First Council of Nicea (325) First Council of Constantinople (381)
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; by whom all things were made;




To sign up as a Christian on some forums, as I seem to remember I may have done once on this one...people are supposed to agree with this.

Now my question is to Christians and mods who are Christians and mods in training, etc. How can you preach evolution here and claim you are following this little creed?

Click to expand...

This site lets atheists sign up, so it would be rather pointless to allow that if one required absolute adherence to such faith statements.

(also, evolution isn't related to religion. Religion doesn't deal with evolution either. They are separate things. Evolution was completely unknown to the people wrote the bible and the Nicene, as was Relativity and the germ theory of disease and plate tectonics, etc)

Doveaman said:

Theistic Evolution is not scientific because it requires the input of an invisible God who cannot be scientifically verified.

For Theistic Evolution to be scientifically valid you must scientifically demonstrate God's influence on evolution, otherwise there is nothing theistic about evolution from a scientific perspective.

Click to expand...

You seem to be creating your own strawman version of theistic evolution. And even if it is not scientific it is still closer to the truth than a literal reading of the Bible.

Doveaman said:

Theistic Evolution is not scientific because it requires the input of an invisible God who cannot be scientifically verified.

For Theistic Evolution to be scientifically valid you must scientifically demonstrate God's influence on evolution, otherwise there is nothing theistic about evolution from a scientific perspective.

Click to expand...

I actually agree with you on this. I'm just trying to say that there is not necessarily a conflict between believing in god and evolution.

Science is based on methodological naturalism which basically limits it to exploring naturalistic causes which are testable and repeatable. This pretty much rules out supernatural causes from the realm of science as they are inherently not testable, and if we could come up with a way to test them they would cease to be supernatural and become some new aspect of the natural realm that we were previously unaware of. This does not necessarily rule out the existence of god or the supernatural, just that they are unprovable.

I wish more Christians understood this and would just let science be science instead of taking offense whenever its conclusions differ from their beliefs.

In Philosophy on the other hand, the existence and nature of god and spiritual realms are open for discussion

AV1611VET said:

There are two types of science:

Science that opposes the Bible and science that doesn't oppose the Bible.

The science that opposes the Bible can take a hike.

You mentioned the Internet as an example.

Job 38:35 Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?

The science behind the Internet does not oppose the Bible.

Click to expand...

There is only one type of science. If we are including the bible in scientific process we are no longer doing science.

What you should say is there are two types of conclusions from science, ones that agree with your beliefs about the bible and ones that don't.

Most Christ

Everybodyknows said:

I actually agree with you on this. I'm just trying to say that there is not necessarily a conflict between believing in god and evolution.

Science is based on methodological naturalism which basically limits it to exploring naturalistic causes which are testable and repeatable. This pretty much rules out supernatural causes from the realm of science as they are inherently not testable, and if we could come up with a way to test them they would cease to be supernatural and become some new aspect of the natural realm that we were previously unaware of. This does not necessarily rule out the existence of god or the supernatural, just that they are unprovable.

I wish more Christians understood this and would just let science be science instead of taking offense whenever its conclusions differ from their beliefs.

In Philosophy on the other hand, the existence and nature of god and spiritual realms are open for discussion

Click to expand...

Most Christians do understand it.

Doveaman said:

For Theistic Evolution to be scientifically valid you must scientifically demonstrate God's influence on evolution, otherwise there is nothing theistic about evolution from a scientific perspective.

Click to expand...

But you could say that about creation as well.

I think the strongest argument for the influence of God is the emergence of a singularity - the origin of the big bang. It did not appear within a point in space or time, but rather space and time began in the singularity. So to ask what lies beyond or what happened before doesnt apply because space and time did not exist outside of the singularity. And where did the singularity come from.

Zoii said:

But you could say that about creation as well.

I think the strongest argument for the influence of God is the emergence of a singularity - the origin of the big bang. It did not appear within a point in space or time, but rather space and time began in the singularity. So to ask what lies beyond or what happened before doesnt apply because space and time did not exist outside of the singularity. And where did the singularity come from.

Click to expand...

We don't know where it came from. But to declare that a god had to do it without any real evidence is as bad as declaring that a god could not have done it without any evidence. The Big Bang is neither evidence for God or against God. It is merely how the universe as we know it began.

Subduction Zone said:

We don't know where it came from. But to declare that a god had to do it without any real evidence is as bad as declaring that a god could not have done it without any evidence. The Big Bang is neither evidence for God or against God. It is merely how the universe as we know it began.

Click to expand...

Oh I realize that - but to me - of all the things theological or scientific, the origin of a singularity is the most mysterious and unexplained. We all have a choice to theorize the unexplainable - God is my choice

Speedwell said:

Most Christians do understand it.

Click to expand...

In my experience most Christians simply don't care.

Zoii said:

Oh I realize that - but to me - of all the things theological or scientific, the origin of a singularity is the most mysterious and unexplained. We all have a choice to theorize the unexplainable - God is my choice

Click to expand...

In this part of the corum one should not abuse the word "theory". You don't have a theory. Believing something because one wants to believe is irrational. A theory is testable. A theory has been tested and the tests confirmed the theory. How does your belief meet those needs criteria?

Subduction Zone said:

In this part of the corum one should not abuse the word "theory". You don't have a theory. Believing something because one wants to believe is irrational. A theory is testable. A theory has been tested and the tests confirmed the theory. How does your belief meet those needs criteria?

Click to expand...

A theory doesn't started as having been tested. Its starts as a hypothesis. So like I said - That God has an intelligent design in time and space starting with the emergence of a singularity. Thats my hypothesis on which im going to test my theory when there is capacity to test it - right now I cant so it will remain an untested theory and Im Ok with that - for now. I say for now because I really wanna know the answer to our universe - the annoying thing is I may never know.

Subduction Zone said:

You seem to be creating your own strawman version of theistic evolution. And even if it is not scientific it is still closer to the truth than a literal reading of the Bible.

Click to expand...

Is Theistic Evolution a scientific theory in your opinion?

Zoii said:

A theory doesn't started as having been tested. Its starts as a hypothesis. So like I said - That God has an intelligent design in time and space starting with the emergence of a singularity. Thats my hypothesis on which im going to test my theory when there is capacity to test it - right now I cant so it will remain an untested theory and Im Ok with that - for now.

Click to expand...

Lol

Zoii said:

I think the strongest argument for the influence of God is the emergence of a singularity - the origin of the big bang.

Click to expand...

Could you please tell me how you get from the emergence of a singularity to a God? why a God and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

GazzaStott said:

Could you please tell me how you get from the emergence of a singularity to a God? why a God and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

Click to expand...

Could you please tell me how you get from expanding universe to dark-energy? why dark-energy and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

dad said:

First Council of Nicea (325) First Council of Constantinople (381)
We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds (æons), Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father;
By whom all things were made [both in heaven and on earth]; by whom all things were made;




To sign up as a Christian on some forums, as I seem to remember I may have done once on this one...people are supposed to agree with this.

Now my question is to Christians and mods who are Christians and mods in training, etc. How can you preach evolution here and claim you are following this little creed?

Click to expand...

The same way I can claim that I was created both by my parents and by God.

Could you please tell me how you get from the emergence of a singularity to a God? why a God and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

Doveaman said:

Could you please tell me how you get from expanding universe to dark-energy? why dark-energy and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

Click to expand...

I ask a question and you answer with a question? what is wrong with you?
You don't need to answer because everyone knows what is wrong with you,
as do you.

dad said:

Now my question is to Christians and mods who are Christians and mods in training, etc. How can you preach evolution here and claim you are following this little creed?

Click to expand...

It's not a "little creed", it's THE Creed of Christ's holy Church.

And the Creed says absolutely nothing about evolution for or against. We believe that God is the Maker of all things, seen and unseen, and therefore this universe and all that it is in it, and all the natural processes which work within it, are His divine handiwork--that includes evolution.

-CryptoLutheran.

Doveaman said:

Could you please tell me how you get from expanding universe to dark-energy? why dark-energy and not a magic Unicorn? because neither one of them explain anything at all, you still don't know how it happened all they do is stop you looking for the real answer by making you believe you already have the answer.

Click to expand...

Why doesn't dark energy explain anything? An expanding universe requires something to make it expand otherwise it would collapse under its own gravity. We know through observation there is some kind of force (energy) accelerating things apart. It's not well understood what it is and why it's there but we know its there. This is nothing like just pulling a unicorn out of your hat.

Dark energy actually does explain something and gives us some possibilities to investigate which are measurable and testable.

I recommend doing some reading about this topic.

Kenny'sID said:

I have to be misunderstanding that, yet you wrote it so clearly.

Click to expand...

Creationism, as it exists today, is largely a product of mid-20th century Fundamentalism. Most Fundamentalists in the early 20th century, while not evolutionists, didn't subscribe to what we know as Young Earth Creationism, such Fundamentalists such as William Jennings Bryan, the prosecuting attorney at the famous Scope's "Monkey" Trial and avid "anti-Darwinist" was one such Old Earth Creationist.

For the most part most Christians following Darwin's findings and his theory of natural selection really weren't bothered. Darwin, by the way, didn't come up with the theory of evolution, Darwin's contribution was the theory of natural selection; evolution was already fairly established and accepted in Darwin's time, but the mechanism for how evolution worked was still largely missing from the puzzle. That's where Darwin comes in with his theory of natural selection, natural selection was the key to understanding evolution. Opposition to evolution largely came later, while there was opposition to Darwin in his lifetime, the massive anti-evolutionist movement didn't really reach any steam until the birth of modern Creationism in the mid-20th century (specifically the 1960's); where evolution became one of a number of social ills targeted by the emerging Religious Right.

The conflict between religion and science, which seems so prevalent and dominant in our current narrative of Western culture is almost entirely an artificial construct of the modern age, perpetuated by a rather (comparatively) fringe minority of Christians who are very vocal and those who have come to think that all Christians (and religious people in general) have a problem with science. It's a false narrative that serves no purpose except to, ultimately, make religion (and Christianity in general) seem like the dying beliefs of a backward people. The problem is that some of the most important contributing minds to the relevant fields to evolution have been practicing Christians from a diverse array of denominational backgrounds and traditions: Evangelicals, Mainline Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox alike.

-CryptoLutheran