Creationist Philosophy

[Fencerguy]

Verse 47 and 48 tell us two different things, Verse 48 says that Adam was the same as us, it is verse 47 that tells us Paul is talking about the creation of Adam 1Cor 15:47 NIV The first man was of the dust of the earth. And as we have seen, two verse before that Paul is quoting from the creation of Adam in Gen 2:7.

Thought question: Could the "dust of the earth" refer to the molecular composition of Adam? That he was formed directly from the molecules that compose a living organism.....and Jesus was divinely conceived....thus, "of heaven"?

 

[Assyrian]

Thought question: Could the "dust of the earth" refer to the molecular composition of Adam?

I doubt Paul was thinking in terms of molecules, but certainly natural material, the stuff the world is made of. But molecules are our way of thinking of the same material, so yes.

That he was formed directly from the molecules that compose a living organism.....

As I already mentioned Glenn Morton takes that view that Adam was created from a dead (returned to dust) hominid with a fatal genetic disease. I don't think the description says either organic or inorganic material so much as saying we are made from natural material and the God is the potter who formed us.

and Jesus was divinely conceived....thus, "of heaven"?

I don't think Paul was talking about Jesus conception so much as (1) his preexistence and (2) the nature of his resurrection body.

 

[Greg1234]

Thought question: Could the "dust of the earth" refer to the molecular composition of Adam? That he was formed directly from the molecules that compose a living organism.....and Jesus was divinely conceived....thus, "of heaven"?

In that ballpark. Paul says that to every seed is given its own body. That's also why all flesh is not the same and why microbe to man phenomena is both demonstratably and theologically unsupported. The body that is sown for Adam comes from Gen 2:7 and it is quickened with the soul thus becoming a living soul (living not dead). Paul also compares that with Jesus as the life giving spirit. But first came the soul, not spirit. It is through the the soul that earthly generation can be undertaken. Alternatively, the spirit gives life and heavenly generation.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

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.

A common misconception of perfection in light of God. See, perfection of a being in which is alive is to also give it free will. Otherwise, is it life? Maybe in the biological approach, but surely not in essence of God.
Therefore, perfection is in the eye of the beholder. One has to make a distinction between a perfect circle and a perfect creation.

We are complete in the sense of life. We are the paragon of all things alive other then God. Our free will caused imperfection in what could have been.
For us to become perfect, we must undo what has been done. This is practically an impossible task and that is why Jesus died for our sins.
It is not God abandoning us, or being cruel. He is having us choose for ourselves, just like at the beginning. Nothing has changed but reassurance and mercy.

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.

Evolution is simply an alternative, anti-Genesis approach to explaining life. It may as well be atheistic, as that is what lies at the bottom of it, but Christian Deists will never accept that- hence the Christian before the Deist.

Mankind as well as animals were never subject to Earth's conditions. Initially, we were directly in God's grace and there simply was no room for evolution. It was when we fell and were booted from Eden that we were at the mercy of Earthly conditions, subject to change and 'survival of the fittest'. Along with what I stated above, sin is a plague that does not choose who it inflicts. It simply inflicts, whether you are the Adversary or an apostle. It is our mission by God to master the knowledge of good and evil.

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 is simply not true. God created everything as we see it. He is the master artisan, and origin of everything. It is pro-evolution that suggests such a specific creation.
Sin is what causes deformities. If, from the beginning, man did not sin, there would be none of that. This is why the Old Covenant was harsh. Casting the ill out of society saved more lives and stopped more suffering from coming about, and it was sin that cause illness to begin with. Where people go wrong is thinking that being liberal and being righteous must co-exist.
That to, is our curse that sin inflicts, having to be hardened and yet loving all the same.
This is why Jesus is necessary. We are simply inflicted.

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.

Not with how you portray it. People back then were practically Bible-slingers, not conforming to what scientific theory idealizes or your gloomy bias of the matter all the same.

 

[Fencerguy]

In that ballpark. Paul says that to every seed is given its own body. That's also why all flesh is not the same and why microbe to man phenomena is both demonstratably and theologically unsupported.

Oooo kudos, you put this very well......

How do we subsequently explain the extreme genetic similarity between ourselves and other great apes?

The body that is sown for Adam comes from Gen 2:7 and it is quickened with the soul thus becoming a living soul (living not dead). Paul also compares that with Jesus as the life giving spirit. But first came the soul, not spirit. It is through the the soul that earthly generation can be undertaken. Alternatively, the spirit gives life and heavenly generation.

I like the way you have said these things....have you been talking to Hupomone10 by any chance? lol
He often differenitates between Spirit, Soul and Body with regards to the Human entity....

 

[Fencerguy]

Evolution is simply an alternative, anti-Genesis approach to explaining life. It may as well be atheistic, as that is what lies at the bottom of it, but Christian Deists will never accept that- hence the Christian before the Deist.

Be careful with how you describe evolution as anti-Genesis. Microevolution is a perfectly legitimate scientific fact, and one that faces no contradiction in Genesis......Macroevolution--where molecules become man--does not have the scientific (or theologic) support that microevolution has...

Mankind as well as animals were never subject to Earth's conditions. Initially, we were directly in God's grace and there simply was no room for evolution.

not necessarily true....See previous posts in this thread...Genesis does not say that organisms did not evolve at all.....or that death was completely nonexistant before Man's sin.....whether death still affected animals is not stated....

It was when we fell and were booted from Eden that we were at the mercy of Earthly conditions, subject to change and 'survival of the fittest'.

Relative to Humans, yes...but Genesis does not say that other organisms were not in this system all along....

This is simply not true. God created everything as we see it.

Unless you know book, chapter, and verse where the Bible says this, I cannot accept it as true.....There is too much data that suggest that Microevolution occurs.....And Genesis is mute on the topic....

Sin is what causes deformities. If, from the beginning, man did not sin, there would be none of that.

Is this a Christian philosophy, or a Hindu philosophy?

Not with how you portray it. People back then were practically Bible-slingers, not conforming to what scientific theory idealizes or your gloomy bias of the matter all the same.

However, one's understanding of Creation must adapt as one's scientific knowledge increases.....or else you are doing yourself a disservice by clinging to a less than educated understanding of the world...

 

[theFijian]

A common misconception of perfection in light of God. See, perfection of a being in which is alive is to also give it free will.

Don't confuse free will with free agency.

Otherwise, is it life? Maybe in the biological approach, but surely not in essence of God.

What is 'in essence of God' supposed to mean?

Therefore, perfection is in the eye of the beholder. One has to make a distinction between a perfect circle and a perfect creation.

'Therefore'? Since you haven't demonstrated anything it's a bit difficult to draw any logical conclusions. 'Perfect circle' and 'perfect creation', what is this supposed to mean? Sounds like pseudo-intellectual gibberish.

We are complete in the sense of life. We are the paragon of all things alive other then God. Our free will caused imperfection in what could have been.
For us to become perfect, we must undo what has been done. This is practically an impossible task and that is why Jesus died for our sins.
It is not God abandoning us, or being cruel. He is having us choose for ourselves, just like at the beginning. Nothing has changed but reassurance and mercy.

'Nothing has changed but reassurance and mercy'? Really? Was there not always mercy with God? Was there not always reassurance? What does this pseudo-spiritual claptrap have to do with anything?

Evolution is simply an alternative, anti-Genesis approach to explaining life. It may as well be atheistic, as that is what lies at the bottom of it, but Christian Deists will never accept that- hence the Christian before the Deist.

Rather, it's Creationists who have demonstrated (and admitted to) their acceptance of a deistic God in demanding that Science include what is outwith its scope of knowledge.

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Be careful with how you describe evolution as anti-Genesis. Microevolution is a perfectly legitimate scientific fact, and one that faces no contradiction in Genesis......Macroevolution--where molecules become man--does not have the scientific (or theologic) support that microevolution has...

I don't really understand this. Just what are you trying to caution here? It's simply anti-Genesis. You can mark something as a possible 'half-truth' and conclude anything. It's simply anti-Genesis.

not necessarily true....See previous posts in this thread...Genesis does not say that organisms did not evolve at all.....or that death was completely nonexistant before Man's sin.....whether death still affected animals is not stated....

Well given the perfect state of Eden and how everything within it was perfect, it leaves good indication that things were not mutating or changing. They were in their perfect states.

Unless you know book, chapter, and verse where the Bible says this, I cannot accept it as true.....There is too much data that suggest that Microevolution occurs.....And Genesis is mute on the topic....

Micro-evolution is a moot point. It was never something God ever intended us to take note of. The way I see it, micro-organisms are just as the ozone layer and sunshine- supportive objects for all life.

<staff edit>

However, one's understanding of Creation must adapt as one's scientific knowledge increases.....or else you are doing yourself a disservice by clinging to a less than educated understanding of the world...

If man followed God 1000's of years ago, the plague would have never happened, nor Aids, Flus, high blood pressure, diabetes, and wars.
So scientific knowledge is a moot point as well. We need it because of sin, as we gained it because of sin.

Don't confuse free will with free agency

This is yet another moot point as well. I didn't confuse anything.

<staff edit>

Rather, it's Creationists who have demonstrated (and admitted to) their acceptance of a deistic God in demanding that Science include what is outwith its scope of knowledge.

I'm really glad you said thta, just so I can point out that Theistic Evolutionists are Deists, not YEC's. <staff edit>

 

[KerrMetric]

Micro-evolution is a moot point. It was never something God ever intended us to take note of. The way I see it, micro-organisms are just as the ozone layer and sunshine- supportive objects for all life.

Look what he thinks the concept of micro-evolution is? LOL

 

[Sum1sGruj]

Look what he thinks the concept of micro-evolution is? LOL

I haven't concluded much of anything with evolution period, only that nothing had room to evolve until after everything turned dark because Eden was perfect along with everything in it, including micro-organisms.
Recombination, mutations, ect,, nothing in evolution is truly random, just as cause and effect is not random. In a perfect world, these things simply do not exist.
Microorganisms, along with plants, have no brains or even instinct. They are practically there in spite of themselves thriving on stimulus, and God is not vain. This reinforces why micro-organisms are simply here to support life, just as the ozone layer and sunshine as I stated.

 

[KerrMetric]

I haven't concluded much of anything with evolution period, only that nothing had room to evolve until after everything turned dark because Eden was perfect along with everything in it, including micro-organisms.
Recombination, mutations, ect,, nothing in evolution is truly random, just as cause and effect is not random. In a perfect world, these things simply do not exist.
Microorganisms, along with plants, have no brains or even instinct. They are practically there in spite of themselves thriving on stimulus, and God is not vain. This reinforces why micro-organisms are simply here to support life, just as the ozone layer and sunshine as I stated.

Use Google !!!

 

[Sum1sGruj]

<staff edit>


Deism~ The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.
Evolution and cosmological cause and effect from the Big Bang from a maker. Christian Deists have just edited it as having God be the initial cause. You cannot believe evolution and not everything else which follows behind it.

It is a direct merging of Spinoza's metaphorical god and the Abrahamic God.
Except that there is nothing Abrahamic about it. It is just modern Deism connecting with religion.
Simply put, if God does something outside of natural cause and effect, it is a miracle. So a Deist's idea of miracles is contradictory to it's own standing.

 

[Keachian]

Deism~ The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.
Evolution and cosmological cause and effect from the Big Bang from a maker. Christian Deists have just edited it as having God be the initial cause. You cannot believe evolution and not everything else which follows behind it.

Thing is as far as I can tell there aren't really any TE accepting Christians who believe in a deistic God, rather one that continually supports and controls nature. A deistic God goes against Christianity I agree and I'm sure most TEs on here also agree, which is why we don't believe in a deistic God. We believe in a God who doesn't lie, who is truly sustainer and great in power.

 

[theFijian]

<staff edit>

Deism~ The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.
Evolution and cosmological cause and effect from the Big Bang from a maker. Christian Deists have just edited it as having God be the initial cause. You cannot believe evolution and not everything else which follows behind it.

Well a clearer demonstration that you simply do not understand your TE brethren you could not have provided. You actually think TEs believe God exerts no influence over his Creation?? truely clueless

Col 1:16, 17 - For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities&#8212;all things were created through him and for him. [sup]17[/sup] And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

I affirm and wholeheartedly believe the teaching of these verses from Colossians, so where does that leave your TE-is-deism claptrap?

It is a direct merging of Spinoza's metaphorical god and the Abrahamic God.
Except that there is nothing Abrahamic about it. It is just modern Deism connecting with religion.
Simply put, if God does something outside of natural cause and effect, it is a miracle. So a Deist's idea of miracles is contradictory to it's own standing.

Simply put, you have no idea what you are talking about

 

[Sum1sGruj]

I have a theology that knocks TE right of it's high charity. The only thing I do not have is a massive number of people who will back me up on it.
Which is all fine, because it only reinforces why TE is so popular in the first place- it's an easy way to avoid critical thinking for the less faithful and promotes God even it is falsely so.

My theology stands very well, it even explains the condition of the Earth without contradiction, which is something no TE can say. I would state it on this thread, but you and a couple other are so stubborn and one-sided that would be quite vain. I can systematically take down TE, because I know it more then TE's do themselves. I see the wishful thinking in it and it's contradictions. Always have.
You want to speak on how people such as me brim with audacity when it is this new age un-Biblical standing with such audacity. Trying to poison minds with some shallow interpretation of the Bible because one cannot fathom between logic and heresy and their interpretation of the Bible is lazy and unfounded.
Do not sit here and boast your idea of a falsity and then try to reverse it onto others. This thread is a troll thread along with many others that TE's have put up, so you are a liar and a hypocrite.
I will not waste my time dealing with you. Good day

 

[Fencerguy]

Look what he thinks the concept of micro-evolution is? LOL

Its quite.....unnerving

<staff edit>

 

[FaithPrevails]

MOD HAT ON

This thread has been through a clean up. If one or more of your posts has been edited or removed, it was a victim of the clean up. PM me with questions.

Folks - enough with the flaming! Address the post, not the poster. Insults are not a sign of intellect.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[lucaspa]

2. Evolution teaches us 'survival of the fittest', where you survive by killing the weak and favouring the strong.

If no one has pointed this out before, survival of the fittest is not killing the weak. The "struggle for existence" is a metaphorical struggle, and Darwin emphasized the "metaphorical". For instance, a plant in the desert is competing for scarce water, but it not killing the weak. It's just that any plant that can get by on less water is going to do better.

For every instance where individuals of a species show cutthroat competition between individuals, there is an instance where cooperation is favored.

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.

That's an interesting take on creationism. What's more, as things get away from "perfect", some slight variations will move back toward perfect, wont' they? Yet the creationist argument of decay won't allow that.

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.

Standard Christian doctrine has the universe and everything in it, including living things, dependent on the will of God. Like it or not, the relation isn't "parasitic", but rather "dependent". After all, a parasitic relationship takes things away from the host. We don't take anything away from God.

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.

That's a good point. Creationists in the 17th century did not misuse the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics like modern day creationists do.

 

[lucaspa]

I have a theology that knocks TE right of it's high charity. The only thing I do not have is a massive number of people who will back me up on it.
Which is all fine, because it only reinforces why TE is so popular in the first place- it's an easy way to avoid critical thinking for the less faithful and promotes God even it is falsely so.

Did it ever occur to you that the theology does not "stands very well"? Your refusal to share it shows that you don't want to subject it to critical thinking.

I can systematically take down TE, because I know it more then TE's do themselves.

Then do so.

You want to speak on how people such as me brim with audacity when it is this new age un-Biblical standing with such audacity. Trying to poison minds with some shallow interpretation of the Bible because one cannot fathom between logic and heresy and their interpretation of the Bible is lazy and unfounded.

And here we have it again: it's about the Bible. TE's emphasis is on God. Yours is the Bible. And we have the refusal that God has 2 books.

This thread is a troll thread along with many others that TE's have put up, so you are a liar and a hypocrite.

That is against CF rules. Address the ideas, not the person.

 

[lucaspa]

<Deism~ The belief, based solely on reason, in a God who created the universe and then abandoned it, assuming no control over life, exerting no influence on natural phenomena, and giving no supernatural revelation.
Evolution and cosmological cause and effect from the Big Bang from a maker. Christian Deists have just edited it as having God be the initial cause. You cannot believe evolution and not everything else which follows behind it.

But evolution does not have a God that started the universe and abandoned it! That is apparently what you are not grasping. Both progmark and theFijian have pointed that out to you. Now I will also. Evolution has God involved in the universe by sustaining it. God does exert an influence on natural phenomona -- by making them work!

Underlying these claims is the unspoken belief that God can only work by miracles. That is the heart of deism. So, ironically, in the process of proclaiming that evolution is deism, what is being demonstrated is the deism of creationism.

Simply put, if God does something outside of natural cause and effect, it is a miracle.

True, but natural cause and effect is still God "doing something". Do you understand that? Both natural cause and effect and miracle are God "doing something". That is, according to TE. According to creationism, only miracle is God "doing something". See the connection to deism?