***Everyone Only*** - Vossler's Theory on Evolution

[vossler]

"The Bible is continually being conformed by TEs" - to what end? For what purpose?

I certainly don’t think there is some sinister purpose, actually the purpose is nothing more than what most deception appeals to, our human pride.

How different is that set of beliefs from yours, vossler? If we really are conforming the Bible to our own understanding then we are pitifully incompetent at it.

I’ve never accused you of being competent at it.

We haven't managed to get over the divinity of Jesus, the total depravity of man, and all of those other doctrines that are stumbling blocks both to Jews and Greeks. Some militant atheists actually classify us as creationists along with you - we certainly haven't stopped believing that God created the heavens and the earth, even if we quibble over details. Do we really have some kind of agenda that we are pushing onto the Bible? If we do, why do our results look eerily like your own faith?

Your agenda is actually no different than most people who call themselves to be Christian, myself included. On the surface we ascent to the divinity of Christ, depravity of man, etc yet in practice we fall quite short of what we claim to believe. The difference comes down to a fundamental belief that the Bible is the Word of God. Now I imagine that you will even ascent to that, but as they say the proof is in the pudding. Remember even the demons believe, so belief isn’t all that it is cracked up to be.
I’ll give you an example of how we, you and I, are so very different and how our results are not as eerily similar as you would like to believe. I recently participated in a 12 week study that you wouldn’t have been invited to because of your beliefs. You probably would have found the study repugnant yet I found to be the most meaningful and pertinent study I’ve ever attended. Two of those weeks, in a major part, dealt with the lie of evolution.

Firstly, non-believers have been believing that there is no God and no moral accountability long before Darwin, and they will continue to do so even if Darwin is ever deposed. Atheists never needed evolution; and if it has helped them, I daresay it has only because fundamentalism handed it to them on a silver platter.

Without a doubt you are right, non-believers have believed what they do long before Darwin ever came along. The difference is that now their unbelief was legitimized.

Secondly, what "own worldly teachings" do TEs have? I certainly haven't managed to get rid of the divinity of Jesus or my own utter sinfulness by accepting evolution; I must be missing something somewhere!

No other single group of Christians that I know do more to promote non-biblical teachings or distort God’s Word in so many ways. The one thing I typically see that ties these people together is their common belief in evolution. I’ve come across countless TEs who believe that same sex marriage and abortion are biblical. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but I’ve yet to come across a single Creationist who does. Does this mean that all TEs believe the same, obviously not as exhibited here by many of you, but it was the one thing I found that bound them all together.

Thirdly, there is a key difference between Eve believing that the tree was pleasant to the eyes and us accepting that evolution is true. Eve's belief that the tree was pleasant to the eyes was not reflected in reality. The tree wasn't really pleasant; it wasn't really desirable for gaining knowledge. Eve ate and found that those were all lies - precisely because those beliefs had no correspondence whatsoever with reality.

Wow, this is exactly what common descent displays, no correspondence whatsoever with reality. The only way you could believe it is if you were deceived with a great story and there’s only one person capable of pulling that off. He goes by a few names but he's the same guy who was the author of the first lie. The Bible calls him the father of lies.

However, evolution does have correspondence with reality. Why else would it work so well? Where does evolution's predictive power come from? Why does life look like it has evolved? Why is evolution applicable across the entire spectrum of biology? The test of whether a statement is true, after all, is whether it is consistent with reality. Eve's beliefs weren't consistent with reality; evolution is. That makes all the difference.

Whose reality, maybe the TE and the non-believer, certainly not mine. I would expect a deceived person to fully believe it to worked so well. As a matter of fact, I would expect such a person to be so convinced of the deception that he/she would deceive others. Sound familiar?

Evolution’s power comes from an all too familiar source, the father of all lies, Satan. I know of no one personally who believes that life looks like it evolved, if anything I hear the opposite. I’ve yet to come across a single person whom I’ve discussed this with tell me that common descent has in any way, shape or form provided any benefits to anyone. This includes evolutionists like two biology teachers whom I personally know. The only people who make such claims are those I come in touch with here or read about from other sources. So in actuality evolution has no bearing on reality at all, it is just another deception of the evil one to point people away from the one true God and His Word. Reality is God’s doing and He’s already told us what that is and how it came about.

By getting TEs to buy into this false claim Satan hits the jackpot of jackpots, his idea being promoted by God’s own children. How much worse can this be? Satan’s very first words to Eve were “Did God really say?” It was his calling card in the beginning and it still hasn’t changed. Why should he change something that works so well?

 

[vossler]

It sounds like you're more concerned with the effects of evolution rather than whether it is factually or even scientifically true. Do you think this is a fair characterization?

No, I'm concerned about both.

You think evolution is scientific conjecture and speculation? If I can show you that evolution is, in fact, irrefutably good science, would your opinion change on the matter?

Trust me, you're not the first to attempt this. In over 3 years here I've never come across a single factual piece of evidence that solidly supports common descent.

Do you eat pork? Maybe I'm slow on the uptake but we already interpret the Bible as a document written by and for a people 2000 years ago. I don't think this is "dismissing" it...

If the Bible was written for people 2000 years ago that certainly explains how a TE views it. I personally believe it was written for me.

Umm... you call yourself a Christian and, when you are caught making a transgression, you suggest that one be made against you? ...as an act of revenge, maybe? I don't know what you're thinking, here. Do you think he's not a Christian?

I don't know how you came to this conclusion. I stated if someone found me saying or doing something that wasn't scriptural then I wanted him/her to point that out to me. This has nothing to do with whatever you are implying.

 

[vossler]

Vossler, you may be able to persuade me on one thing or another. But if the arguments stem from the position that I (or other TEs) disbelieve Genesis you'll never persuade me on anything because you clearly don't have any sort of grasp on what I think.

Wiltor, at one time I thought I could persuade people here of something. I've long since given up on that. Very few people here are open minded enough to seriously entertain what someone from the other side is saying. It's one of the reasons I try not to post much, it serves no purpose.

This also has nothing to do with what I think you think, it has to do with what you say. I won't begin to claim I know what you are thinking. However, I can claim to know what God said and I can certainly claim that, based on God's Word, TEs are deceived. Obviously if someone is deceived they certainly believe, believing is an essential element of any deception. Eve believed, however it doesn't change the fact that she was still wrong. The problem is you're unaware of the deception because if you were it would no longer be a deception.

 

[Assyrian]

Whose reality, maybe the TE and the non-believer, certainly not mine.

shernren is talking about God's reality, the real world God created.

By getting TEs to buy into this false claim Satan hits the jackpot of jackpots, his idea being promoted by God’s own children. How much worse can this be? Satan’s very first words to Eve were “Did God really say?” It was his calling card in the beginning and it still hasn’t changed. Why should he change something that works so well?

Wow, Creationists keep digging this pit and falling into it. They attack a figurative interpretation of Genesis with Satan asked “Did God really say?” Except that is a figurative interpretation. Genesis does not say it was Satan, it says it was a snake.

Does God's word really say it was a snake? Yes.

Is it speaking literally? No.

Rev 20:2 And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years.

 

[Markus6]

The difference comes down to a fundamental belief that the Bible is the Word of God. Now I imagine that you will even ascent to that, but as they say the proof is in the pudding. Remember even the demons believe, so belief isn’t all that it is cracked up to be.

I do not call the bible the Word of God. That doesn't affect how we view the text in any way it's just a label, and one I think is misapplied. The bible is clear that Jesus is the Word of God and that it contains words of Paul, David et al.

If the Bible was written for people 2000 years ago that certainly explains how a TE views it. I personally believe it was written for me.

What do you think of the beginning of Ephesians where Paul makes it clear that the letter was written for "the saints in Ephesus" and not Vossler?

 

[Melethiel]

*takes a deep breath*
*deletes previously written post*
I see no point in continuing in dialogue with our YEC brothers if they are going to come at us with the fundamental assumption that we are worse than unbelievers. I don't know about the others here, but for someone to tell me that I am as good as an unbeliever (without even knowing me) over a minor point of doctrine is one of the deepest insults one can make. It's late now, but tomorrow I think I'll go some horribly unbelieving things like...um...dig my headscarf out of my suitcase and go visit the monastery?

 

[USincognito]

In over 3 years here I've never come across a single factual piece of evidence that solidly supports common descent.

You have. You've just chosen to reject or not believe it.

 

[shernren]

... but tomorrow I think I'll go some horribly unbelieving things like...um...dig my headscarf out of my suitcase and go visit the monastery?

What? You don't already wear your headscarf every time you go to church? Why, you faithless bum.

No other single group of Christians that I know do more to promote non-biblical teachings or distort God’s Word in so many ways. The one thing I typically see that ties these people together is their common belief in evolution. I’ve come across countless TEs who believe that same sex marriage and abortion are biblical. I’m not saying they don’t exist, but I’ve yet to come across a single Creationist who does. Does this mean that all TEs believe the same, obviously not as exhibited here by many of you, but it was the one thing I found that bound them all together.

So "the one thing I found that bound them all together" - promoting unbiblical beliefs - is something many of us here don't exhibit? Your logic is impeccable. I wonder what you would say if I thought all Americans constantly drink, swear, smoke, sleep around, and think Hungary is a state of the digestive system and not a state on the continent of Europe. Of course, none of the Americans I spend a lot of time with actually do, but I'm entitled to my vacuous overgeneralizations, am I not?

I would question if the "TEs" you know have actually systematically considered their belief systems, instead of being just evolutionists who wandered into church. Is it then evolution's fault if their faith is unconsidered and uninformed?

Wow, this is exactly what common descent displays, no correspondence whatsoever with reality. The only way you could believe it is if you were deceived with a great story and there’s only one person capable of pulling that off. He goes by a few names but he's the same guy who was the author of the first lie. The Bible calls him the father of lies.

Whose reality, maybe the TE and the non-believer, certainly not mine. I would expect a deceived person to fully believe it to worked so well. As a matter of fact, I would expect such a person to be so convinced of the deception that he/she would deceive others. Sound familiar?

Evolution’s power comes from an all too familiar source, the father of all lies, Satan. I know of no one personally who believes that life looks like it evolved, if anything I hear the opposite. I’ve yet to come across a single person whom I’ve discussed this with tell me that common descent has in any way, shape or form provided any benefits to anyone. This includes evolutionists like two biology teachers whom I personally know. The only people who make such claims are those I come in touch with here or read about from other sources. So in actuality evolution has no bearing on reality at all, it is just another deception of the evil one to point people away from the one true God and His Word. Reality is God’s doing and He’s already told us what that is and how it came about.

By getting TEs to buy into this false claim Satan hits the jackpot of jackpots, his idea being promoted by God’s own children. How much worse can this be? Satan’s very first words to Eve were “Did God really say?” It was his calling card in the beginning and it still hasn’t changed. Why should he change something that works so well?

What grounds do you have to say that common descent displays no correspondence whatsoever with reality? Every time a piece of scientific evidence for evolution is discussed you admit that you have insufficient scientific expertise to discuss it, and you've said before that you're quite uninterested in acquiring that needed scientific expertise. It is precisely because evolution explains so much of the scientific evidence that we conclude that evolution is concordant with physical reality.

Again, I could say all Americans are drunken harlots besides the ones I know well. How many of the people you know, who aren't here, have actually given serious thought to what evolution is and what part it plays in the operation of nature? How many evolutionary biologists do you know? I could survey all of my friends (except those who take thermal physics) and ask them what the Sackur-Tetrode equation is, and none of them would have a clue. But it gives the entropy of an ideal gas, which means that plenty of everyday physical behavior - from pumping a bicycle tyre to blowing to cool down hot porridge to a pneumatic jackhammer to a leaf falling to the ground - depends either on the Sackur-Tetrode equation or some modification of it. Physical principles don't have to be well-known to be fundamentally important; neither do biological principles like common descent.

It's interesting that so far you have been making generalizations about samples of people you know in every day life, and then finding that we at Origins Theology break the mold. Shouldn't this be an indication that something's wrong? Your evolutionist biology teachers don't find common descent important, and they probably couldn't articulate why it's biblically acceptable to accept evolution either; we find common descent vital as demonstrated in the twin-nested hierarchy, and we have defended our position to the extent that many of us know exactly how orthodox we are and a few of us have even subscribed to the Chicago Statement of inerrancy. If evolution is truly the lie of the devil, why is it that those who study it more are better equipped with a Christian understanding of it, instead of less? Surely if evolution is a lie, the more we were convinced that it is true, the less we would be convinced of the truth of Christian faith. Instead, you yourself see that people who are shallow, knee-jerk believers in evolution either also being shallowly militant atheists, or shallowly compromising Christians, while people like us who understand the process and proof* of evolution in-depth also have in-depth defenses of it as an acceptable Christian position.

Surely the deeper one believes a lie, the less one believes the truth. (That is after all what lies are supposed to do, right? A lie that doesn't keep me from the truth is useless to the devil's cause.) On the other hand, if evolution is true, and Christianity is true, that can only be because they are accurate descriptions of the same reality on different levels - and if they are both accurate descriptions of the same reality, it is only expected that the deeper one probes both those descriptions, the more one finds them reconcilable, since they both describe fundamentally one and the same reality.

You referred earlier in your post to human pride but really, I only see people who come before the evidence with an open mind and find that the only biological theory that does it justice is evolution. This is physical evidence that God Himself created and biological order that God Himself instituted. There can be nothing humbler than admitting that the data must shape our theories, instead of our theories imposing on the data and shaping it.

 

[Willtor]

Wiltor, at one time I thought I could persuade people here of something. I've long since given up on that. Very few people here are open minded enough to seriously entertain what someone from the other side is saying. It's one of the reasons I try not to post much, it serves no purpose.

This also has nothing to do with what I think you think, it has to do with what you say. I won't begin to claim I know what you are thinking. However, I can claim to know what God said and I can certainly claim that, based on God's Word, TEs are deceived. Obviously if someone is deceived they certainly believe, believing is an essential element of any deception. Eve believed, however it doesn't change the fact that she was still wrong. The problem is you're unaware of the deception because if you were it would no longer be a deception.

My last post was all about how it _does_ have something to do with what I think. My argument is that it is _you_ who don't understand what God said - and the implication that I want to argue with you about it. But I never challenge the sincerity you have in interpreting Scripture; that you would rather believe the lies of Satan than the truth of God because it makes you more comfortable (or for whatever reason). How is it, then, that you push such accusations on me?

 

[vossler]

So "the one thing I found that bound them all together" - promoting unbiblical beliefs - is something many of us here don't exhibit? Your logic is impeccable. I wonder what you would say if I thought all Americans constantly drink, swear, smoke, sleep around, and think Hungary is a state of the digestive system and not a state on the continent of Europe. Of course, none of the Americans I spend a lot of time with actually do, but I'm entitled to my vacuous overgeneralizations, am I not?

I may very well be wrong, truly what do I know. Not a whole heck of a lot, I'm just juxtaposing my observations or theory onto another theory. Some would argue (like you) that my observations are nothing but conjecture and speculation. It would be difficult for me to disagree. I readily admit I don’t know and that I’m guessing. If I'm wrong then I apologize if I've offended, it was never my intent, however it doesn't change the evidence I've seen. Yes it may be an overgeneralization, that's why I presented it as a theory in an area where those who are like minded can give their opinions.

I would question if the "TEs" you know have actually systematically considered their belief systems, instead of being just evolutionists who wandered into church. Is it then evolution's fault if their faith is unconsidered and uninformed?

I can't say whether they have or have not. If there is one thing that I do need to make clear here is that no group, however unified they may be, can take responsibility for the individual. Each of us has to answer to God individually. My point with evolution simply is that this theory makes it more difficult for the individual to respond appropriately.

What grounds do you have to say that common descent displays no correspondence whatsoever with reality? Every time a piece of scientific evidence for evolution is discussed you admit that you have insufficient scientific expertise to discuss it, and you've said before that you're quite uninterested in acquiring that needed scientific expertise. It is precisely because evolution explains so much of the scientific evidence that we conclude that evolution is concordant with physical reality.

This is where I have some of my biggest problems with evolution. If one isn't a specialist in the field of science, which probably comes down to less than 1% of the population at large, then it allows the evolutionist to promote their form of superior intellect onto the rest of society. The common people haven’t a clue whether what they are saying is true or not, it sure sounds factual yet they are not capable of fully understanding. The question is, is it important for us to understand? What does God say? Well, the Bible repeatedly tells us to focus on the spiritual and not the flesh or world.
Matthew 11:25 states:

At that time Jesus declared, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children.
​

If the truth of Scripture is hidden from the wise, the 1%, then it’s no surprise that God hides nothing in His Word from His children. Doesn't it concern you that so few of God's Children seem to fully understand the worldly idea of common descent?

Romans 8:5-8 states:

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
​

It is through the Spirit that God speaks Truth, not the flesh or world as the Bible repeatedly tell us: 1 Corinthians 2:12-14

Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
​

It is God’s Word that holds wisdom and power, not the wise and the wisdom of the world. 1 Corinthian 1:18-21:

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.
​

1 Corinthians 3:18-21 states:

Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their craftiness," and again, "The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile." So let no one boast in men.
​

Proverbs 9:10 states: The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom…

Psalm 119:103-105 says:

How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way. Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
​

So please don’t be offended if I’m calling you out on these things. Jesus did the same to Peter. Jesus loved Peter as I do you. If I didn't truly care about you I wouldn't be spending my time writing this and praying for you. Matthew 16:23

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man."
​

It's interesting that so far you have been making generalizations about samples of people you know in every day life, and then finding that we at Origins Theology break the mold. Shouldn't this be an indication that something's wrong?

I wouldn't say you break the mold, not by a longshot. What I would say is that you still cut from the same cloth, you’re just not as extreme as many others. You’ve had a few more rough edges hewn off, but the stock is still the same.

If evolution is truly the lie of the devil, why is it that those who study it more are better equipped with a Christian understanding of it, instead of less? Surely if evolution is a lie, the more we were convinced that it is true, the less we would be convinced of the truth of Christian faith.

You truly underestimate the power of Satan to use whatever he can to thwart God’s people.

Instead, you yourself see that people who are shallow, knee-jerk believers in evolution either also being shallowly militant atheists, or shallowly compromising Christians, while people like us who understand the process and proof* of evolution in-depth also have in-depth defenses of it as an acceptable Christian position.

I don’t see you as shallow, you’re actually quite deep. You’re certainly not a knee-jerk person, nor militant. No if you were then Satan couldn’t really use you like he does. There is but one position that is true, not many.

Surely the deeper one believes a lie, the less one believes the truth. (That is after all what lies are supposed to do, right? A lie that doesn't keep me from the truth is useless to the devil's cause.)

You are very right.

On the other hand, if evolution is true, and Christianity is true, that can only be because they are accurate descriptions of the same reality on different levels - and if they are both accurate descriptions of the same reality, it is only expected that the deeper one probes both those descriptions, the more one finds them reconcilable, since they both describe fundamentally one and the same reality.

This sure sounds worldly to me, I don't sense the Spirit coming through that at all.

You referred earlier in your post to human pride but really, I only see people who come before the evidence with an open mind and find that the only biological theory that does it justice is evolution. This is physical evidence that God Himself created and biological order that God Himself instituted. There can be nothing humbler than admitting that the data must shape our theories, instead of our theories imposing on the data and shaping it.

You've twisted this whole position to such a point that you see this as you do, humanly instead of spiritually. You've dismissed and/or twisted what God has said and allowed your human pride to stand in the way of His Truth. Human understanding has become the first priority, rather than spiritual understanding. That is where pride is exhibited and where it is I’m coming from.

 

[vossler]

My last post was all about how it _does_ have something to do with what I think. My argument is that it is _you_ who don't understand what God said - and the implication that I want to argue with you about it. But I never challenge the sincerity you have in interpreting Scripture; that you would rather believe the lies of Satan than the truth of God because it makes you more comfortable (or for whatever reason). How is it, then, that you push such accusations on me?

I may not fully understand what God said, I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all the answers. If you feel I'm missing something, please feel free to point that out. However, I would ask that whenever you do that you would use the Bible itself as your primary tool for correction.

As far as the sincerity portion of your comment. I won't begin to question your sincerity, I've assumed from the beginning that you and most people here are sincere. If not, you probably wouldn't be here, right? I can only say, it doesn't matter how sincere one may be, if you are sincerely wrong, you are still wrong. So I don't believe you or anyone else here willfully believes the lies of Satan, again you are just deceived.

 

[shernren]

I may very well be wrong, truly what do I know. Not a whole heck of a lot, I'm just juxtaposing my observations or theory onto another theory. Some would argue (like you) that my observations are nothing but conjecture and speculation. It would be difficult for me to disagree. I readily admit I don’t know and that I’m guessing. If I'm wrong then I apologize if I've offended, it was never my intent, however it doesn't change the evidence I've seen. Yes it may be an overgeneralization, that's why I presented it as a theory in an area where those who are like minded can give their opinions.

I'm glad to see you acknowledge the possibility that you're wrong.

I can't say whether they have or have not. If there is one thing that I do need to make clear here is that no group, however unified they may be, can take responsibility for the individual. Each of us has to answer to God individually. My point with evolution simply is that this theory makes it more difficult for the individual to respond appropriately.

Does it? Let's go over the data again. The people you know who haven't thought much about evolution find it incompatible either with reality or with Christianity. The people you know who have thought much about evolution find it compatible with both. It's a familiar pattern.

Take, for example, the Trinity. Many Muslim friends would consider me and my faith wrong on this point. God clearly can't be both one and three at the same time, and since my God is not unitary, I must be a polytheistic idolater. So, then, many people I know who haven't thought much about the Trinity find it incompatible either with reality or with Christianity (as the constant trickle of Unitarian theologians throughout the Church's history shows us); however, the Christians I know who have thought much about the Trinity find it compatible with both. Does that mean the Trinity is a stumbling block? In a sense it is; many people have been turned away from the faith by its seeming illogicity. But that makes it no less true.

This is where I have some of my biggest problems with evolution. If one isn't a specialist in the field of science, which probably comes down to less than 1% of the population at large, then it allows the evolutionist to promote their form of superior intellect onto the rest of society. The common people haven’t a clue whether what they are saying is true or not, it sure sounds factual yet they are not capable of fully understanding.

Is difficulty really the issue here? I'm not a biology major, and yet I know evolutionary biology well enough to tell you about the several lines of evidence that simultaneously support it. gluadys does literature, and as far as I know she doesn't have any science background at all, and yet she's fairly competent with evolutionary biology. A friend of mine, who's an analyst in an important company here (and who, as far as I know, only has a high-school background in science), collects fossils and knows quite a bit about paleontology. No, I don't think evolution is that hard to grasp, although it can certainly be difficult to fully explore. I think the issue is another one altogether:

What grounds do you have to say that common descent displays no correspondence whatsoever with reality? Every time a piece of scientific evidence for evolution is discussed you admit that you have insufficient scientific expertise to discuss it, and you've said before that you're quite uninterested in acquiring that needed scientific expertise. It is precisely because evolution explains so much of the scientific evidence that we conclude that evolution is concordant with physical reality.​

(emphasis added) If professionals like Mallon and sfs really thought that us unwashed amateurs couldn't possibly understand evolutionary biology, what would they still be doing hanging around here?

The question is, is it important for us to understand? What does God say? Well, the Bible repeatedly tells us to focus on the spiritual and not the flesh or world.

Whoa. The flesh, the world, and the physical reality of creation are three completely different things. It looks like you've searched through your Bible for anything which somehow sounds a little disapproving of something which to you sounds a little like science ... proceeding to mangle the sense of every New Testament passage you've quoted here.

Matthew 11:25 states:

At that time Jesus declared, "I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children.
​

If the truth of Scripture is hidden from the wise, the 1%, then it’s no surprise that God hides nothing in His Word from His children. Doesn't it concern you that so few of God's Children seem to fully understand the worldly idea of common descent?

It took the church three centuries to fully formulate the doctrine of the Trinity; even today I probably know more Christians who have an accurate picture of evolution than I do Christians who could set out a full Scriptural defense of the necessity of the Trinity as a Christian doctrine. Is evolution obscure because it isn't true? Or because, to be blunt, Christians are lazy?

In any case, the passage you cite doesn't support the conclusions you have. Examine it in context:

Then Jesus began to denounce the cities in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent. "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you. And you, Capernaum, will you be lifted up to the skies? No, you will go down to the depths. If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Sodom, it would have remained to this day. But I tell you that it will be more bearable for Sodom on the day of judgment than for you."
At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.
(Matthew 11:20-27 NIV)
​

What were "these things"? They are either the miracles performed in the unrepentant towns of Judea - in which case your interpretation of "these things" as scientific theories or doctrinal ideas is clearly erroneous - or the revelation of God through Jesus as His Son - in which case your application of this verse to evolution and its relative obscurity is still wrong. God did not reveal in full, for example, His Trinitarian nature to Jesus' disciples; nor indeed do we find "revealed" anywhere in Scripture the list of books that should be included in its canon. (Was the "contents" page of your Bible received by plenary verbal inspiration?) That doesn't make them wrong.

The parallel passage in Luke places this saying of Jesus after the return of the seventy (or seventy-two) from their mission throughout Judea:

At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for this was your good pleasure. "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows who the Son is except the Father, and no one knows who the Father is except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him." Then he turned to his disciples and said privately, "Blessed are the eyes that see what you see. For I tell you that many prophets and kings wanted to see what you see but did not see it, and to hear what you hear but did not hear it."
(Luke 10:21-24 NIV)
​

There is no hint of moral failure on the part of the wise and learned from whom these things were hidden. Indeed, they were "prophets and kings" who "wanted to see what you see ... and to hear what you hear" - which they could only have done by godly faith! These things were "hidden" from them not because of doubt or wickedness, but simply their misfortune of living and dying BC instead of AD. In fact, as far as I am aware, "worldly wisdom" is a distinctly Pauline idea, and nowhere in the Gospels do we need to consider "wise" people to be anything other than wise in the godly sense. Those who are not godly-wise are, in the vocabulary of the Gospels, simply fools.

Romans 8:5-8 states:

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
​

And what precisely is this flesh? Again, context is everything.

For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.

(Romans 8:3-7 ESV)
​

What, precisely, is this "flesh"? It is not our material bodies as opposed to our spiritual essences, nor is it physical creation as opposed to the spiritual heavens; it is simply that in us which weakens the law by virtue of its sinfulness - namely, our fallenness and our entire human condition to the extent that it is affected by our fallenness. We in our fallenness cannot access God's truth and salvation on our own. To abstract from that to saying that we cannot do science or do it well is simply silly. Indeed, it is precisely because science is an endeavour that we as fallen humans can still complete successfully in our fallenness that we know that science cannot prove God's existence.

It is through the Spirit that God speaks Truth, not the flesh or world as the Bible repeatedly tell us: 1 Corinthians 2:12-14

Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.
The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
​

It is God’s Word that holds wisdom and power, not the wise and the wisdom of the world. 1 Corinthian 1:18-21:

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the discernment of the discerning I will thwart." Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.
​

1 Corinthians 3:18-21 states:

Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, "He catches the wise in their craftiness," and again, "The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile." So let no one boast in men.
​

Again, what is Paul referring to? He speaks of how the world cannot apprehend the message that he is preaching because they are wise in their own eyes. But what is this message that he is preaching?

And I, when I came to you, brothers, did not come proclaiming to you the testimony of God with lofty speech or wisdom. For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

(1 Corinthians 2:1-2 ESV; emphases added)
​

Paul resolved to know nothing but the Cross's message; by implication, he is also talking about nothing but the Cross's message as God's truth, and therefore his pronouncements that worldly wisdom cannot understand God's truth cannot apply to anything other than the Christian message of judgment and salvation in the Cross. This passage thus tells us nothing about whether human reason can systematically analyze the biological features of life and biodiversity and conclude rightly that it was all formed via evolutionary processes - indeed, again one is forced to conclude that scientific knowledge of any kind will never bring anyone to God, which in no way detracts from it being true about creation on its own.

Proverbs 9:10 states: The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom…

Psalm 119:103-105 says:

How sweet are your words to my taste, sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through your precepts I get understanding; therefore I hate every false way. Your word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path.
​

And Biblical wisdom equates to neither intelligence nor science.

So please don’t be offended if I’m calling you out on these things. Jesus did the same to Peter. Jesus loved Peter as I do you. If I didn't truly care about you I wouldn't be spending my time writing this and praying for you. Matthew 16:23

But he turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man."
​

"Calling me out" on what, exactly? I've spent half an hour writing how you misused Scripture.

continued ...

 

[Melethiel]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to shernren again.

 

[shernren]

And don't get me wrong either, I can see your concern for me full well. I can see, for example, that more likely than not you typed up that post on Word 2007 - something I wouldn't do unless I wanted to go through drafts and revisions, re-crafting words to choose those with maximum effect.

Thanks. I appreciate that. And I can assure you that I've given full thought to what the Bible says, and to how I can allow Scripture to guide my beliefs and shape my understanding of science and its intersection with faith. I just hope you have. Mistaking "worldly wisdom" for the empiricism of science is a basic error ...

You truly underestimate the power of Satan to use whatever he can to thwart God’s people.

I don’t see you as shallow, you’re actually quite deep. You’re certainly not a knee-jerk person, nor militant. No if you were then Satan couldn’t really use you like he does. There is but one position that is true, not many.

So now Satan uses me. For what, exactly? Of all the people whom I have had some pastoral capacity over, and all my other Christian friends, I have never convinced a single person to embrace evolution. I kid you not. I've had friends who've had their faith damaged by creationism; I've been able to counsel them, and all without needing to convince them that evolution is true.

It's certainly not casting out demons but I think it's good to bear in mind what Jesus had to say when people accused Him of being used by Satan:

But some of them said, "By Beelzebub, the prince of demons, he is driving out demons." Others tested him by asking for a sign from heaven. Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand? I say this because you claim that I drive out demons by Beelzebub. Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your followers drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you.
(Luke 11:15-20 NIV)
​

Our allegiances can be known by our fruits. And if Christians who accept evolution based on the empirical evidence are being used as tools by Satan in his plan of deception, what does that tell us about other sciences? Creationists display remarkable amnesia. When Newtonian physics first became widely accepted in Britain, for example, it was used to promote Deistic notions of a watchmaker god who wound up the world and then left it to run on our own. We didn't need the Bible for revelation; we could detect the signature of the watchmaker in the designs of the watch, and have a refined, scientific version of a god who conveniently wasn't around any more, ignoring the crass splutterings in the Bible of a God who offended all current (and past and future) cultural sensitivities.

So Satan used Newtonian physics as a tool. Does that mean Newtonian physics is false? Certainly not. Does that mean Newtonian physics is bad? Not even that. Does that mean some physicists were bad? That's a better answer. And if you want to say evolution will be bad for me in the long term, well, I have enough stories of Christians who were first brought to the faith by creationism and then fell away when they realized that very crutch was full of lies. Fruit tell on trees, sooner or later: and you have absolutely no right to tell me my roots are poisoned until you can show me rotten fruit.

On the other hand, if evolution is true, and Christianity is true, that can only be because they are accurate descriptions of the same reality on different levels - and if they are both accurate descriptions of the same reality, it is only expected that the deeper one probes both those descriptions, the more one finds them reconcilable, since they both describe fundamentally one and the same reality.

This sure sounds worldly to me, I don't sense the Spirit coming through that at all.

Is it down to sense, now? I have not sensed your presence in the Force recently. You probably should check your midi-chlorian count.

When it comes down to hard Scriptural evidence, you don't have a single verse to give me. On the other hand:

The moon marks off the seasons,
and the sun knows when to go down.
You bring darkness, it becomes night,
and all the beasts of the forest prowl.
The lions roar for their prey
and seek their food from God.
(Psalms 104:19-21 NIV)

"The moon marks off the seasons and the sun knows when to go down" - in other words, the period of daylight and night that we experience is governed by natural processes. That a Hindu or Muslim or agnostic or atheist could agree with. And yet "You bring darkness, it becomes night" - the period of daylight and night are controlled by God, the God of Israel.

Again, "The lions roar for their prey and seek their food from God" - in other words, the lions are responsible, by the natural process of predation, for their own sustenance. Again, that anyone can agree with. And yet they "seek their food from God" - that is to say that their sustenance is divinely decreed.

This is not something new. The psalmist had already defused the bombshell of scientific atheism, thousands of years before Darwin was even born. Compare his wise and reserved statements with what little the ID movement has to offer us:

"I think at a fundamental level, in terms of what drives me in this is that I think God's glory is being robbed by these naturalistic approaches to biological evolution, creation, the origin of the world, the origin of biological complexity and diversity. When you are attributing the wonders of nature to these mindless material mechanisms, God's glory is getting robbed. [...] And so there is a cultural war here. Ultimately I want to see God get the credit for what he's done - and he's not getting it."
(William Dembski "The design revolution?" TalkReason.org 2004)

On some level I agree that evolution is being abused to support atheism - but that doesn't make it wrong.

Psalm 19 makes the same point, only in greater depth: that the same God who created the heavens (and doesn't mind them being described in patently geocentric language, by the by) was the same God who gave the Law. By revelation we can know that physical reality was originated by, and at every moment is providentially contingent upon, the love and will of the same Creator God who in salvation acted through the history of first Israel and then the rest of the world. This is neither the British deistic natural theology that said that from science you could know all about God, neither is this the modern militant atheism that says that from science you can know all about God's inexistence - this is a Scriptural viewpoint which theologians long before Darwin learned and will defend long after he ceases to be an issue.

If it's down to Scripture versus your "sense of the Spirit", who ought to win?

You referred earlier in your post to human pride but really, I only see people who come before the evidence with an open mind and find that the only biological theory that does it justice is evolution. This is physical evidence that God Himself created and biological order that God Himself instituted. There can be nothing humbler than admitting that the data must shape our theories, instead of our theories imposing on the data and shaping it.

You've twisted this whole position to such a point that you see this as you do, humanly instead of spiritually. You've dismissed and/or twisted what God has said and allowed your human pride to stand in the way of His Truth. Human understanding has become the first priority, rather than spiritual understanding. That is where pride is exhibited and where it is I’m coming from.

You may say that I see things "humanly instead of spiritually"; I see little of substance in that statement other than a pious way of saying how disappointed you are in my beliefs and a wonderfully Christianized setup for the next move in which you will dismiss my adamance as spiritual darkness, tell me that you cannot fight me with "human weapons" since I am controlled by "powers and principalities" (Eph 6:12, to save you the search), and dust the dust off your sandals because only the light of the Holy Spirit can penetrate through my mind after you've done everything you can.

And yet, to look again at a passage you quoted earlier:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
(1 Corinthians 1:18-19 NIV; emphasis added)

Accusations of worldliness come cheap, but the Scriptures are priceless beyond doubt. I long for nothing less than to have God build in me a theology of creation that ignores nothing He has given: the witness of His Word and the witness of the world.

Within the Scriptures I find that time and time again God's action in the world is not limited to words but to deeds, and not simply to undetectable deeds but to deeds that left behind objectively observable physical evidence, so that even doubters could not deny when miracles had occurred.

Within the world I find not just order bland and isolated, but complexly ordered chaos given the capability to direct the formation of more complexly ordered chaos in its wake. The turbulence of the first three seconds made the universe just lumpy enough; the lumpiness of the universe made the first galaxies churn and the first stars rupture; the elements that formed in the violence of that rupturing clumped into dusty clouds surrounding stars; as the dust settled on a new planet chemicals jumped and danced and organized into cycles that produced each other; and life formed, and evolved to the point that God could produce a creature to relate to. The miracle is not just that this happened, but that this world in which it happened should be so finely attuned to the human mind, and the human mind to it, that we can condense the wild physical realities of creation into equations which we can hold in the palm of our hands. By revelation I know this happened precisely and only because God willed it to be so.

The physical evidence is all there. There is nothing that has been created, or that can continue to exist in creation, without God: not one twig grew on the twin nested hierarchy, that formidable piece of evolutionary evidence, without God. The worldview is thoroughly theistic, thoroughly Christian, thoroughly Scriptural, thoroughly coherent with the physical reality of creation.

Doubtless I have been deceived so much that I think my delusions are actually Scriptural!

 

[Willtor]

I may not fully understand what God said, I'll be the first to admit that I don't have all the answers. If you feel I'm missing something, please feel free to point that out. However, I would ask that whenever you do that you would use the Bible itself as your primary tool for correction.

That's no problem. Biblical exegesis is my primary concern, too. I know a lot more about that than I do about evolution, anyway. And although many YECs tend to want to discuss physical evidence, I know that you typically don't so it's no trouble for me to avoid the matter altogether.

As far as the sincerity portion of your comment. I won't begin to question your sincerity, I've assumed from the beginning that you and most people here are sincere. If not, you probably wouldn't be here, right? I can only say, it doesn't matter how sincere one may be, if you are sincerely wrong, you are still wrong. So I don't believe you or anyone else here willfully believes the lies of Satan, again you are just deceived.

The "deceived by Satan" position is infrequently used by Scriptural authors and is typically reserved for fundamentally fellowship-jeopardizing sins. It's a bad habit to jump to that conclusion, even though it's a popular one. It might be appropriate to think that we have been deceived by other men (possible, though unlikely - given that some here are in this particular field of study) or that we have reasoned improperly and come to faulty conclusions (more likely). But at any rate, and for whatever reason we are wrong, why not point out the error rather than asserting a particular malady? If you want to discuss hermeneutics, why not start a thread on it? If there aren't enough interpretation threads, that's the fault of both TEs and YECs, not just TEs. If you want to debate somebody on hermeneutics, challenge someone. I'm sure most of us would be happy to do so.

At any rate, this thread exists, presumably, because we don't appreciate the analysis of our spiritual lives. The proverbial shoe doesn't fit so we don't like to be made to wear it.

 

[vossler]

I'm glad to see you acknowledge the possibility that you're wrong.

Of course, if I didn't then I'd have a much bigger problem on my hands.

Does it? Let's go over the data again. The people you know who haven't thought much about evolution find it incompatible either with reality or with Christianity. The people you know who have thought much about evolution find it compatible with both. It's a familiar pattern.

Take, for example, the Trinity. Many Muslim friends would consider me and my faith wrong on this point. God clearly can't be both one and three at the same time, and since my God is not unitary, I must be a polytheistic idolater. So, then, many people I know who haven't thought much about the Trinity find it incompatible either with reality or with Christianity (as the constant trickle of Unitarian theologians throughout the Church's history shows us); however, the Christians I know who have thought much about the Trinity find it compatible with both. Does that mean the Trinity is a stumbling block? In a sense it is; many people have been turned away from the faith by its seeming illogicity. But that makes it no less true.

You obviously see this different than I. Like I've said before I'm not here to change your mind, that thought has long since been given up on.

Is difficulty really the issue here? I'm not a biology major, and yet I know evolutionary biology well enough to tell you about the several lines of evidence that simultaneously support it. gluadys does literature, and as far as I know she doesn't have any science background at all, and yet she's fairly competent with evolutionary biology. A friend of mine, who's an analyst in an important company here (and who, as far as I know, only has a high-school background in science), collects fossils and knows quite a bit about paleontology. No, I don't think evolution is that hard to grasp, although it can certainly be difficult to fully explore. I think the issue is another one altogether:

What grounds do you have to say that common descent displays no correspondence whatsoever with reality? Every time a piece of scientific evidence for evolution is discussed you admit that you have insufficient scientific expertise to discuss it, and you've said before that you're quite uninterested in acquiring that needed scientific expertise. It is precisely because evolution explains so much of the scientific evidence that we conclude that evolution is concordant with physical reality.
​

(emphasis added) If professionals like Mallon and sfs really thought that us unwashed amateurs couldn't possibly understand evolutionary biology, what would they still be doing hanging around here?

Your point is well taken, but I still would submit less than 1% of people truly understand evolution. You may disagree, but I think that's not too far from the truth. So, you have this extremely low percentage of people who understand it, yet a fairly high percentage of people who believe it. I think that's worth noting, especially since it is contrary to the Word of God.
[shernren]Whoa. The flesh, the world, and the physical reality of creation are three completely different things. It looks like you've searched through your Bible for anything which somehow sounds a little disapproving of something which to you sounds a little like science ... proceeding to mangle the sense of every New Testament passage you've quoted here.[/quote]Look, there were countless biblical passages I could have used to make the same point. If you feel I've mangled these biblical passages you are obviously free to counter my biblical argument with your own.

Is evolution obscure because it isn't true? Or because, to be blunt, Christians are lazy?

I don't believe anything God wants us to know is obscure, but I do believe people who call themselves Christians to be lazy.

What were "these things"? They are either the miracles performed in the unrepentant towns of Judea - in which case your interpretation of "these things" as scientific theories or doctrinal ideas is clearly erroneous - or the revelation of God through Jesus as His Son - in which case your application of this verse to evolution and its relative obscurity is still wrong. God did not reveal in full, for example, His Trinitarian nature to Jesus' disciples; nor indeed do we find "revealed" anywhere in Scripture the list of books that should be included in its canon. (Was the "contents" page of your Bible received by plenary verbal inspiration?) That doesn't make them wrong.

"These things" can also just be the Truth of Scripture in general. Just because God didn't reveal in full, as you say, His Trinitarian nature doesn't mean that there isn't sufficient evidence to see it. Now for me that revelation wasn't difficult at all to see.

There is no hint of moral failure on the part of the wise and learned from whom these things were hidden. Indeed, they were "prophets and kings" who "wanted to see what you see ... and to hear what you hear" - which they could only have done by godly faith! These things were "hidden" from them not because of doubt or wickedness, but simply their misfortune of living and dying BC instead of AD. In fact, as far as I am aware, "worldly wisdom" is a distinctly Pauline idea, and nowhere in the Gospels do we need to consider "wise" people to be anything other than wise in the godly sense. Those who are not godly-wise are, in the vocabulary of the Gospels, simply fools.

I don't believe that doubt or wickedness is the primary reason either. Things were hidden because they didn't have enough faith. As for wise people being a Pauline idea, well I don't subscribe to that train of thought. All of Paul's ideas were God inspired.

To abstract from that to saying that we cannot do science or do it well is simply silly. Indeed, it is precisely because science is an endeavour that we as fallen humans can still complete successfully in our fallenness that we know that science cannot prove God's existence.

I've never said nor implied that we cannot do science. I've said, and will continually say, that real science is good. As a matter of fact it holds so many truths of God that I find myself being able, through science, to praise Him even more.

Paul resolved to know nothing but the Cross's message; by implication, he is also talking about nothing but the Cross's message as God's truth, and therefore his pronouncements that worldly wisdom cannot understand God's truth cannot apply to anything other than the Christian message of judgment and salvation in the Cross. This passage thus tells us nothing about whether human reason can systematically analyze the biological features of life and biodiversity and conclude rightly that it was all formed via evolutionary processes - indeed, again one is forced to conclude that scientific knowledge of any kind will never bring anyone to God, which in no way detracts from it being true about creation on its own.

I can certainly agree that scientific knowledge will never bring anyone to Christ. However, it certainly can keep them away.

So now Satan uses me. For what, exactly? Of all the people whom I have had some pastoral capacity over, and all my other Christian friends, I have never convinced a single person to embrace evolution. I kid you not. I've had friends who've had their faith damaged by creationism; I've been able to counsel them, and all without needing to convince them that evolution is true.

Well that's encouraging to know, at least this isn't something you talk about outside of CF.

Our allegiances can be known by our fruits. And if Christians who accept evolution based on the empirical evidence are being used as tools by Satan in his plan of deception, what does that tell us about other sciences? Creationists display remarkable amnesia. When Newtonian physics first became widely accepted in Britain, for example, it was used to promote Deistic notions of a watchmaker god who wound up the world and then left it to run on our own. We didn't need the Bible for revelation; we could detect the signature of the watchmaker in the designs of the watch, and have a refined, scientific version of a god who conveniently wasn't around any more, ignoring the crass splutterings in the Bible of a God who offended all current (and past and future) cultural sensitivities.

Of course there are and always will be those who misuse God's Word. As you began, we will be known by our fruits, it is what we as Christians should use to judge one another by. It is exactly those fruits that led me to post what I did. It doesn't take much effort to see which Christians support things like abortion, same sex marriage, the Bible not being consider the Word of God, etc.

And if you want to say evolution will be bad for me in the long term, well, I have enough stories of Christians who were first brought to the faith by creationism and then fell away when they realized that very crutch was full of lies. Fruit tell on trees, sooner or later: and you have absolutely no right to tell me my roots are poisoned until you can show me rotten fruit.

I'll be the first to say that creationism has problems, specifically in the sciences. Creationists in many ways are similar to evolutionists by relying so much on conjecture and speculation to support their theories. As far as the rotten fruit, my previous quote touched on that already. Are those necessarily your roots, probably not, but you're association with them implies a certain level of acceptance.

Is it down to sense, now? I have not sensed your presence in the Force recently. You probably should check your midi-chlorian count.

I'm sure there's a scientist who'd love to check my midichlorian count, maybe he'd find I'm actually of some other descent.

When it comes down to hard Scriptural evidence, you don't have a single verse to give me.

Scripture typically doesn't provide hard evidence, it's not meant to.

If it's down to Scripture versus your "sense of the Spirit", who ought to win?

Trust me, I'm not here to win anything, actually I've lost far more than I ever could hope to gain.

You may say that I see things "humanly instead of spiritually"; I see little of substance in that statement other than a pious way of saying how disappointed you are in my beliefs and a wonderfully Christianized setup for the next move in which you will dismiss my adamance as spiritual darkness, tell me that you cannot fight me with "human weapons" since I am controlled by "powers and principalities" (Eph 6:12, to save you the search), and dust the dust off your sandals because only the light of the Holy Spirit can penetrate through my mind after you've done everything you can.

You were certainly right about one thing, 'only the light of the Holy Spirit can penetrate through your mind' on this issue. My goal certainly wasn't to do so, as a matter of fact my goal wasn't even to have this conversation.

I long for nothing less than to have God build in me a theology of creation that ignores nothing He has given: the witness of His Word and the witness of the world.

That certainly is my prayer.

Within the Scriptures I find that time and time again God's action in the world is not limited to words but to deeds, and not simply to undetectable deeds but to deeds that left behind objectively observable physical evidence, so that even doubters could not deny when miracles had occurred.

You certainly see a lot more in the Scriptures than I do.

Within the world I find not just order bland and isolated, but complexly ordered chaos given the capability to direct the formation of more complexly ordered chaos in its wake. The turbulence of the first three seconds made the universe just lumpy enough; the lumpiness of the universe made the first galaxies churn and the first stars rupture; the elements that formed in the violence of that rupturing clumped into dusty clouds surrounding stars; as the dust settled on a new planet chemicals jumped and danced and organized into cycles that produced each other; and life formed, and evolved to the point that God could produce a creature to relate to. The miracle is not just that this happened, but that this world in which it happened should be so finely attuned to the human mind, and the human mind to it, that we can condense the wild physical realities of creation into equations which we can hold in the palm of our hands. By revelation I know this happened precisely and only because God willed it to be so.

This clearly demonstrates the enormous difference between us.

The physical evidence is all there. There is nothing that has been created, or that can continue to exist in creation, without God: not one twig grew on the twin nested hierarchy, that formidable piece of evolutionary evidence, without God. The worldview is thoroughly theistic, thoroughly Christian, thoroughly Scriptural, thoroughly coherent with the physical reality of creation.

As you wish to believe, yet a view that is ever changing and in flux. God's Word however never changes or is in flux.

Doubtless I have been deceived so much that I think my delusions are actually Scriptural!

Doubtless!

 

[vossler]

That's no problem. Biblical exegesis is my primary concern, too. I know a lot more about that than I do about evolution, anyway. And although many YECs tend to want to discuss physical evidence, I know that you typically don't so it's no trouble for me to avoid the matter altogether.

I appreciate that!

The "deceived by Satan" position is infrequently used by Scriptural authors and is typically reserved for fundamentally fellowship-jeopardizing sins. It's a bad habit to jump to that conclusion, even though it's a popular one. It might be appropriate to think that we have been deceived by other men (possible, though unlikely - given that some here are in this particular field of study) or that we have reasoned improperly and come to faulty conclusions (more likely). But at any rate, and for whatever reason we are wrong, why not point out the error rather than asserting a particular malady? If you want to discuss hermeneutics, why not start a thread on it? If there aren't enough interpretation threads, that's the fault of both TEs and YECs, not just TEs. If you want to debate somebody on hermeneutics, challenge someone. I'm sure most of us would be happy to do so.

At one time I looked forward to debating TEs, but I truly have no such desire anymore. Hermeneutical studies are things I enjoy immensely, yet they are so incredibly rare here that I can't remember the last one I saw. The ones I do remember didn't produce anything productive either.

At any rate, this thread exists, presumably, because we don't appreciate the analysis of our spiritual lives. The proverbial shoe doesn't fit so we don't like to be made to wear it.

I understand, but to tell you the truth I don't understand why TEs always get in such an uproar about things we say in the Creationist forum. I could care less what TEs say in their forum, it's only on rare occasion that I even look to see what might be going on in there and then only for informational purposes.

 

[Melethiel]

I understand, but to tell you the truth I don't understand why TEs always get in such an uproar about things we say in the Creationist forum. I could care less what TEs say in their forum, it's only on rare occasion that I even look to see what might be going on in there and then only for informational purposes.

Maybe you like being talked about behind your back and having the entire reason for your existence (ie., one's faith in Christ) being called into question and dragged through the mud, but most of us here don't. You see, despite your conjectures to the opposite, a lot of us take our faith in Christ (not in science) seriously.

 

[Mallon]

At one time I looked forward to debating TEs, but I truly have no such desire anymore. Hermeneutical studies are things I enjoy immensely, yet they are so incredibly rare here that I can't remember the last one I saw.

So why not start your own thread?

I understand, but to tell you the truth I don't understand why TEs always get in such an uproar about things we say in the Creationist forum.

It's because of all the blatant misrepresentation that goes on in there. Looking at just the last few threads in that forum, we've had people:
1) Accuse evolutionary creationists of scientism (that was you).
2) Accuse evolutionists of creating frauds because "they are NOT confident in their own beliefs and theories" (conveniently ignoring (a) the fact that it was evolutionists who exposed these frauds and (b) those other frauds espoused by neocreationists).
3) Question the sincerity of the faith of anyone who thinks God didn't use a magic wand to bring life into existence.

If the neocreationists want a private forum of their own, then fine. But don't abuse that privacy by talking smack behind peoples' backs where they're not allowed to stand up for themselves and respond in kind.

 

[Markus6]

If the neocreationists want a private forum of their own, then fine. But don't abuse that privacy by talking smack behind peoples' backs where they're not allowed to stand up for themselves and respond in kind.

Meh, they can do that all they like - it just doesn't seem to make much sense to be suprised when we want to address the misconceptions. Especially as Vossler invited us to start a thread here if we wanted to discuss it.