Creationist Philosophy

[er72]

If evolution is true, then why is Christianity? I'd love to know.

 

[Fencerguy]

Hey you! Just found this thread!

Caution: Droning post ahead.

It seems that as more is discovered about how life works (particularly when it directly involves evolution) the more depressing the thinking behind Creationism becomes. Does Christianity really support the following:


1. All living beings, even the Earth itself, is slowly atrophying. This is either because Adam brought sin into the world or because God created everything in its perfect, complete form which is gradually 'winding down'. Evolution cannot happen because nothing is getting better.
This is basically a very pessimistic idea as it suggests that God has abondoned us; indeed many evolutionists accuse creationists of being 'deists'. I would even say that according to this argument Jesus did not come down here teach us how to make the world a better place (what's the point? Everything's just getting worse) but is simply offered as a sort of 'get out of jail free' card. Believe in him and when you die you'll leave this miserable world forever.

The state of the world is quite depressing. I would say God did not originally create the world in the way that we see it now; with all of the atrophy and death and stuff....But the culmination of God's creation (Man) who God gave the opportunity to obey Him or not, chose not to obey Him. What we see in the world today are all of the consequences of Man's first act of disobedience toward God.....And it's true, the teachings of Jesus could be seen as a 'get out of jail free' card; He stated on a couple of occasions that His kingdom was not of this world, but of the next. We can try to keep the world from getting worse more quickly, but things will unfortunately get worse...

Evolution teaches us 'survival of the fittest', where you survive by killing the weak and favouring the strong. Death and disease is everywhere. Our genes break down with age. How could a loving God make such a cruel world? This probably relates to the first argument: God made the world perfect, we cheesed him off, he's now abandoned us to our fate. He offers Jesus to those who can't stand this planet and want to get off. I also suspect this line of reasoning it what turns many Christians into atheists.

I don't think it necessarily follows that God abandoned us after we cheesed Him off.....But everything that we have to deal with (survival of the fittest, killing, breaking down) are the consequences that we incurred by disobeying Him (Where God said, "You will surely die" and "cursed is the ground because of you")
The important part here is to remember that the first Man had the option of not disobeying God. For God to have a truly meaningful relationship with Man, there had to exist free will, Man had to want to be with God....and so it follows that there had to be the opportunity for Man to choose something other than God, or else Man is nothing more than a puppet....So we are living with the consequences of every act of disobedience and every choice of something other than God that the human race has ever made.

In order to prove Creationism true, God must have created the everything in such a specific way that any slight variation would cause it to go wrong. Whether or not they intend it this idea suggests variety is a bad thing. Things have to be done this way or else. It also suggests that living things are not independant of God, that they can't possibly do anything without him. Our relationship to Him is a clingy, parasitic one.

Well, consider here that the God that created the world and all that (the Christian God) states also in the Bible that He is a jealous God, and He does not want glory to go anywhere but towards Himself...This concept admittedly seems arrogant to us; but I think it is supposed to, The only person who really should get such worship and glory is the One Being who was powerful enough to put this universe into place......
I think also that living things are independent of God to an extent; God originated living things, but gave them the ability to change and become diverse and of greater variety....He did not create them to be static and unchanging......Rather than having a parasitic relationship with God; humans (specifically) are designed to not really feel complete without God....Part of being created in His image is that desire to commune with Him and have a relationship with Him, and so it follows that if we don't, then we won't ever really feel complete...

Even worse, if all things are guided by God does this mean he made people deformed / disabled / retarded on purpose? This doesn't seem to be the case, as Jesus healed people on many occasions.

right, this would be another example of the consequences of sin in the world. Our genes are deteriorating and our bodies are becoming less and less fit; and some people are born with deformities or other disabilities. But this does not mean that that is how God created them, it is simply how the fallen cursed world we live in affected their bodies and minds....

This doom-and-gloom philosophy isn't central to Creationism, but seems to have been inferred by various individual creationists until it became the norm. If we were to travel back a few centures, when creationism was a genuinely valid theory, I doubt many of it's supporters would have agreed with them.

Who knows? But I think that there needs to be at least some element of doom and gloom when analyzing the state of the world now and the state of the world at creation.....Because if there wasn't, why should we long for anything better? Why would we want what God/Jesus offers us? We should be distressed by the state of the world, because that encourages us to long for the next world, and to encourage others to do the same.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

And it's true, the teachings of Jesus could be seen as a 'get out of jail free' card; He stated on a couple of occasions that His kingdom was not of this world, but of the next. We can try to keep the world from getting worse more quickly, but things will unfortunately get worse...

Yes but as I said Jesus didn't come down here just to offer people hope, he gave us practical advice on how to make the world a better place. If the world is not capable of becoming better then why did he bother?

I think also that living things are independent of God to an extent; God originated living things, but gave them the ability to change and become diverse and of greater variety....He did not create them to be static and unchanging......Rather than having a parasitic relationship with God; humans (specifically) are designed to not really feel complete without God....Part of being created in His image is that desire to commune with Him and have a relationship with Him, and so it follows that if we don't, then we won't ever really feel complete...

Again yes - I think that gap is important. We treat as black-and-white: either absolutly everything we do is dependant on him or we don't need it at all. As you said in order to be complete human beings we need our own free will.

Our genes are deteriorating and our bodies are becoming less and less fit; and some people are born with deformities or other disabilities. But this does not mean that that is how God created them, it is simply how the fallen cursed world we live in affected their bodies and minds....

This relies on an assumption that unfortunately many religions have: medical conditions are the result of immorality. If someone has a physical problem it's because of some sin they or their ancestors committed. I think Hindus have this belief - misfortune is a result of bad karma which acts as punishment for bad deeds committed in a past life. This is not a Christian belief:

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.​

- John 9:1-3 (KJV)​

I'm not completely sure what Jesus meant when he said "The works of God should be made manifest in him." I doubt he meant God made him blind on purpose, considering he heals him at once.

 

[Fencerguy]

Yes but as I said Jesus didn't come down here just to offer people hope, he gave us practical advice on how to make the world a better place. If the world is not capable of becoming better then why did he bother?

Its true that Jesus did give practical advice; for how would any two christians get along without someone teaching them a way to accomplish it? Christians all clearly see things very differently lol. And I also think that Jesus' practical advice is meant to give Christians a way to engage nonbelievers.....I mean, how effective is that "fire and brimstone/gloom and doom" style of evangelism anyway......Though I think the goal of Jesus' practical advice was to teach us how to live together the best, speak to nonbelievers in a way that will genuinely encourage them to believe, and also to prepare us for what the next world will be like........

Again yes - I think that gap is important. We treat as black-and-white: either absolutly everything we do is dependant on him or we don't need it at all. As you said in order to be complete human beings we need our own free will.

And to be complete human beings we also need God, so the relationship becomes symbiotic rather than parasitic

This relies on an assumption that unfortunately many religions have: medical conditions are the result of immorality.

I wouldn't say that they are the result of immorality directly, in a karmic sense.....But I would say that they are the consequence of humanity's general tendency towards disobedience against God......

If someone has a physical problem it's because of some sin they or their ancestors committed. I think Hindus have this belief - misfortune is a result of bad karma which acts as punishment for bad deeds committed in a past life. This is not a Christian belief:

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.​

- John 9:1-3 (KJV)​

I'm not completely sure what Jesus meant when he said "The works of God should be made manifest in him." I doubt he meant God made him blind on purpose, considering he heals him at once.

Right; God would not have handicapped that person just so Jesus could come along and say "look at what I can do because I'm so full of love for people" But rather the works of God that Jesus refers to here are kind of like I said above. The man was born blind because his body did not properly develop; because that body was affected by the curse put on the world by man's sin in general....The works of God that are spoken of here are that Jesus was able to show that He was the promised Messiah, that He would be the one to restore Man's relationship with God, and that faith in Him was the mechanism by which this resotration would be achieved, the healing of the blind man was a physical metaphor for the promises that Jesus made

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I wouldn't say that they are the result of immorality directly, in a karmic sense.....But I would say that they are the consequence of humanity's general tendency towards disobedience against God......

Again, no. No matter how loose the correlation, medical conditions are not the result of immorality. As I said this is not a Christian belief. I think Creationism has become so desperate to try and disprove evolution it will use anti-Christian sentiments in order to do it.

When Adam sinned be brought evil into the world. If you look at Genesis you'll see that disease isn't included in the list of punishments mankind got as a result. Disease and disorders have been around since the begining of life on Earth, and since they are not inherently evil themselves they have nothing to do with the Fall. In fact many things creationists believe about the garden of Eden - that there was no death, that animals didn't eat each other, that nothing ever became sick or injured - aren't mentioned in the Bible at all.

The idea that medical problems are the result of immorality doesn't make sense anyway: if all humans inherited Adam's sin then why are some people so much worse that others? And why do animals become sick? They had nothing to do with the Fall.

 

[Fencerguy]

Again, no. No matter how loose the correlation, medical conditions are not the result of immorality. As I said this is not a Christian belief. I think Creationism has become so desperate to try and disprove evolution it will use anti-Christian sentiments in order to do it.

I wouldnt say that its creationists trying to defeat evolution; I just don't see where disease and suffering were present before Original Sin without going outside of a theological source. So if we consider this as a theological argument, we don't have any reason to think that diseases and stuff aren't an indirect result of the Fall....

When Adam sinned be brought evil into the world. If you look at Genesis you'll see that disease isn't included in the list of punishments mankind got as a result.

Thats ture, disease isn't mentioned specifically, but just because it isn't there explicitly doesn't automatically exclude it from the punishments that man incurred. If we are free to interpret the first chapter of Genesis on a non-literal basis, then we should likewise be free to interpret the third chapter figuratively...The greater message of God's judgement of Man's sin is that Man had introduced pain and suffering into the world; so disease can naturally be considered part of that pain and suffering....

Disease and disorders have been around since the begining of life on Earth, and since they are not inherently evil themselves they have nothing to do with the Fall.

But since many diseases and disorders involve pain and suffering (for man), it is also reasonable to assume that they did not afflict humanity until after the Fall....

In fact many things creationists believe about the garden of Eden - that there was no death, that animals didn't eat each other, that nothing ever became sick or injured - aren't mentioned in the Bible at all.

I think this is a good point, but I think it is based mostly on one's interpretation of Scripture....regarding your points strictly as a theological argument......There is no reason to believe that things such as death and disease and disorders did not affect other animals...Though I will need to hear much more discussion about that, cause I would tend to assume that God was speaking about death universally, not just to humanity.....but who really knows?

The idea that medical problems are the result of immorality doesn't make sense anyway: if all humans inherited Adam's sin then why are some people so much worse that others?

Because not only did we inherit Adam's sin, we were also created in the image of God, so we do have some good intentions in our hearts, we aren't all bad....But some people follow the sinful desires of their heart more passionately than others do.....Its almost as if the human heart has two sides....one that tends towards good and another that tends towards evil. The part that tends towards good is where we are created in Gods image......the part that tends towards evil is the human part of us that is sourced in survival instincts and looking out for number 1....Some people just choose to follow the selfish "look out for number 1" part more than others do......

And why do animals become sick? They had nothing to do with the Fall.

That is not entirely true.....Genesis says that The Serpent was the one who tempted Eve, and God specifically curse The Serpent to crawl on its belly.....and God said to Adam "cursed is the ground because of you" its reasonable to assume that God was talking about the entire world when He said that, and not just the literal ground.....

 

[Assyrian]

and God said to Adam "cursed is the ground because of you" its reasonable to assume that God was talking about the entire world when He said that, and not just the literal ground.....

Until you read the details of the curse
Gen 3:17 cursed is the ground because of you...
but it continues:
... in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; and you shall eat the plants of the field. The curse was that the ground Adam tilled would produce thorns and thistles.

If you look in the Hebrew, the ground adamah refers to a specific region, It is where God created Adam from the dust before he brought him to the garden East of Eden.

Gen 2:7 then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground (adamah) and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. 8 And the LORD God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and there he put the man whom he had formed.

After the fall God sent Adam back to the place God had created him, back to the adamah that had now been cursed.

Gen 3:19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground (adamah), for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

Gen 3:23 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground (adamah) from which he was taken.

The adamah in Genesis 2 does not mean ground in general or the whole planet, but refers to the specific region where Adam was created and he was exiled back to after Eden.

 

[Notedstrangeperson]

I just don't see where disease and suffering were present before Original Sin without going outside of a theological source. So if we consider this as a theological argument, we don't have any reason to think that diseases and stuff aren't an indirect result of the Fall....

As we can see in Genesis plants and animals existed long before mankind came along, and both plants and animals suffer from many diseases and disorders. Dinosaurs bones show signs of tumours. Both of us also acknowledge the fact that animals cannot be evil, therefore when Adam brought sin (evil) into the world the animals were not affected.

Even if we believe the there was a literal snake who was literally cursed, that's only one particular species. Why would any other organism by cursed? What about dogs, cats or monkeys?

But since many diseases and disorders involve pain and suffering (for man), it is also reasonable to assume that they did not afflict humanity until after the Fall....

The fact that something is painful does not automatically make it bad. There is a condition known as 'congenital insensitivity to pain' which, as the name suggests, is a genetic condition which leaves it's victim completely unable to feel pain. It sounds like a medical condition anyone would want (it would save me a fortune in asprin) but it's a disaster. The victims injure themselves terribly because they don't know when their bodies are being damaged.

Without pain and suffering we wouldn't known when to stop. It's unpleasent for a reason, but not because it has anything to do with sin.

Thats ture, disease isn't mentioned specifically, but just because it isn't there explicitly doesn't automatically exclude it from the punishments that man incurred.

I would say that it is, for two reasons - first because, as I have been arguing, medical conditions are not a direct result of immorality.
Second, because if diseased were a result of immorality it would be a very important thing to leave out. If for example someone told you breaking the speed limit would result in a £50 fine, and after breaking the speed limit you recieved a £500 fine instead, wouldn't you be furious? You'd think they'd mention something that severe.

But some people follow the sinful desires of their heart more passionately than others do.....Its almost as if the human heart has two sides....one that tends towards good and another that tends towards evil.

No doubt some people are far more evil than others but their sinfulness does not relate to their genes. If it did we would expect incredibly evil people to have more serious genetic disorders than the common man. We would also expect the families of people with autism, Down's syndrome, hydrocephalus, fragile X syndrome, inherited blindess etc. to be more immoral than average, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

There are some cases where evil people had undesireable genes but it seems that it was the gene which turned them bad, rather than the other way around.

 

[shernren]

Hey Fencerguy, here's a question that, funnily enough, relates to your nick.

In the account of the Garden of Eden, it says that: The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. (Gen 2:15, ESV) That word keep there is interesting, from what I know / look up in Strong's it means to put a fence or hedge around something to protect it.

You might have more experience in matters of fencing than I, perhaps, Fencerguy, so I gotta ask: How do you work a perfect garden? And why would you fence it off from a perfect world?

 

[theFijian]

If evolution is true, then why is Christianity? I'd love to know.

False dichotomy. Do not pass Go, do not collect £200.

 

[juvenissun]

Hey Fencerguy, here's a question that, funnily enough, relates to your nick.

In the account of the Garden of Eden, it says that: The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to work it and keep it. (Gen 2:15, ESV) That word keep there is interesting, from what I know / look up in Strong's it means to put a fence or hedge around something to protect it.

You might have more experience in matters of fencing than I, perhaps, Fencerguy, so I gotta ask: How do you work a perfect garden? And why would you fence it off from a perfect world?

Do you mean to fence the Garden from an imperfect world? Why should the world outside the Garden be perfect?

 

[theFijian]

Do you mean to fence the Garden from an imperfect world? Why should the world outside the Garden be perfect?

You tell us, you're the one who says it must be interpreted literally

 

[juvenissun]

You tell us, you're the one who says it must be interpreted literally

In fact, Shernren reminded me one question I forgot for a while: What is the job of Adam in the Garden? Noticed that the Garden is actually an extreme large area for one or two persons.

Yeah, I am very literal. That is why I can have this question.

 

[juvenissun]

Caution: Droning post ahead.

It seems that as more is discovered about how life works (particularly when it directly involves evolution) the more depressing the thinking behind Creationism becomes. Does Christianity really support the following:


1. All living beings, even the Earth itself, is slowly atrophying. This is either because Adam brought sin into the world or because God created everything in its perfect, complete form which is gradually 'winding down'. Evolution cannot happen because nothing is getting better.
This is basically a very pessimistic idea as it suggests that God has abondoned us; indeed many evolutionists accuse creationists of being 'deists'. I would even say that according to this argument Jesus did not come down here teach us how to make the world a better place (what's the point? Everything's just getting worse) but is simply offered as a sort of 'get out of jail free' card. Believe in him and when you die you'll leave this miserable world forever.

2. Evolution teaches us 'survival of the fittest', where you survive by killing the weak and favouring the strong. Death and disease is everywhere. Our genes break down with age. How could a loving God make such a cruel world? This probably relates to the first argument: God made the world perfect, we cheesed him off, he's now abandoned us to our fate. He offers Jesus to those who can't stand this planet and want to get off. I also suspect this line of reasoning it what turns many Christians into atheists.

3. In order to prove Creationism true, God must have created the everything in such a specific way that any slight variation would cause it to go wrong. Whether or not they intend it this idea suggests variety is a bad thing. Things have to be done this way or else. It also suggests that living things are not independant of God, that they can't possibly do anything without him. Our relationship to Him is a clingy, parasitic one.
Even worse, if all things are guided by God does this mean he made people deformed / disabled / retarded on purpose? This doesn't seem to be the case, as Jesus healed people on many occasions.


This doom-and-gloom philosophy isn't central to Creationism, but seems to have been inferred by various individual creationists until it became the norm. If we were to travel back a few centures, when creationism was a genuinely valid theory, I doubt many of it's supporters would have agreed with them.

God does not make anything perfect on the earth, not even Adam (he did not have enough knowledge). The idea of perfect must be associated with a defined domain. Outside of the domain, the same nature becomes imperfect.

To creationist, the earth is a place for the preparation of the better future. To recognize and to understand the current imperfect situation is a course to teach us how to prepare for the perfect future situation.

 

[theFijian]

In fact, Shernren reminded me one question I forgot for a while: What is the job of Adam in the Garden? Noticed that the Garden is actually an extreme large area for one or two persons.

Yeah, I am very literal. That is why I can have this question.

And because you are 'literal', you have no answer.

 

[juvenissun]

And because you are 'literal', you have no answer.

I do have many versions of "literal" answers. Only not sure which one is better.

 

[Keachian]

One of the problems that I find with Creationism is it puts the meaning behind who we are, who God is, what his creation is, to ourselves being happy. This is a blatant heresy, God didn't make us that we might be happy, he made us that he might be happy, so saying that God must have made the universe in six days to make us is only an argument for the reason behind God being the happiness of man.

 

[juvenissun]

One of the problems that I find with Creationism is it puts the meaning behind who we are, who God is, what his creation is, to ourselves being happy. This is a blatant heresy, God didn't make us that we might be happy, he made us that he might be happy, so saying that God must have made the universe in six days to make us is only an argument for the reason behind God being the happiness of man.

So you are not happy with your explanation? If so, won't you want to change it so you would become happier about it?

 

[Keachian]

So you are not happy with your explanation? If so, won't you want to change it so you would become happier about it?

I am perfectly happy with "my"* explanation as I have not shoe horned God into making this universe for my own benefit. God is above all, he is the only eternal, YHWH before I was and will continue after me. YHWH before the universe and YHWH after. YHWH is the Alpha and Omega.

*I do not believe it is an explanation I have come up with but one that is apparent from, the nature of God, the text of scripture and the study of the universe

 

[juvenissun]

I am perfectly happy with "my"* explanation as I have not shoe horned God into making this universe for my own benefit. God is above all, he is the only eternal, YHWH before I was and will continue after me. YHWH before the universe and YHWH after. YHWH is the Alpha and Omega.

*I do not believe it is an explanation I have come up with but one that is apparent from, the nature of God, the text of scripture and the study of the universe

You are happy with yours and I am happy with mine. Why is my (a creationist) happiness worse then yours?