Friendly Question(s) to TEs

[Mallon]

I hope I wasn't trying to imply that truth comes from majority opinion. I was simply stating since the majority see evolution equated with atheism it would be in the best interests of those Christians who believe in evolution, whenever possible, to distinguish or separate the two.

I agree. And in fact, it seems to me the only people trying to distinguish science from religion are TEs themselves! (... along with athiests and agnostics, occasionally). After all, the only people trying to force God into the science classroom are creationists. Glad you see the light.

So, correct me if I'm wrong, but according to you there isn't a need for a supernatural event in order to explain life as we know it?

There may not be. We'll only be able to know for sure on the day we create life from non-life. And if we do, it won't matter to me since I believe God is capable of working through natural means.

I'm sorry but to me the horse's mouth is God Himself, not a scientist or anyone else.

What has God told you about evolution? What has He told you about computers? What has He told you about mitosis?

I'm also surprised to hear you say that Christians are just as likely to sin as anyone else. No wonder the world doesn't see any difference between us and them.

I didn't say we weren't saved; I said we're prone to sin, even from birth. There are countless Bible passages that will attest to this fact.

There is no way you could ever convince me that I'm on the same level as a non-believer.

No wonder the world feels Christians are self-righteous.

 

[gluadys]

I personally think that a good argument can be made against atheistic evolution by using a sort of John Polkinghorne view of teleology but generally when I've started a thread like that it get's ignored anyway...

Polkinghorne is cool though: http://www.aril.org/polkinghorne.htm

Glad to see more people are becoming familiar with Polkinghorne. I discovered his work about two years ago and I highly recommend it.

 

[vossler]

If not for YECist making it an issue, no it would not be.

They make it an issue, you don't think it is one, fine, now how are you going to show God and His glory through your belief in evolution? That should be the issue.

Is the Earth being round an issue? Flat-Earthers make it one. Is a Sol-centric solar system an issue? Geocentricism makes it one. Is gravity an issue? Some on this board have made it one.

How about making Jesus the issue instead.

If they spout lies in the name of their beliefs, then they need to be corrected, not just for evangelism, but for truths sake.

As I've already repeatedly stated, correction isn't the problem, belittling and/or condemning dialog is.

Because I have no idea how God does work through evolution, just as I have no idea how God works through electricity. How would you show how God works through your cars engine?

But you do acknowledge that He works through evolution, right? One would think, that should be a foundation from which to establish a dialog a common bond if you will already exists.

Just because we can figure out how something works does not automatically give us insight on how God is using it.

I agree, but at least we've determined God is using it. That's obviously an important point.

Then your example is not good for what you are asking. The example you gave is an argument for a tinkering, back yard mechanic, kind of view of God. It is more of the YEC/ID view of God then mine or any other TE that I have talked to.

I know that in other threads you have had the basic ideas of TE explained to you by TEs here. Why do you ignore what these people have told you and try to make it out that we believe something else?

I'm not sure where you're going here, I'm pretty confident of what it is you believe. I may not fully understand it, but I know what it is you believe.

Are there many? Could you point out some that enjoy belittling YEC’s rather than those who are just trying to correct them?

I could give you a list if you'd like. I won't post them here but I will pm you.

You honestly do not see where the Bible encourages us to be honest and strive to deal with the world in an honest way?

I cannot help you if you feel that being dishonest is good in Gods eyes.

You were stating it was your job or witness was to prove that "Christians are not all ignorant," how does that relate to your statement above? You certainly twisted what I was saying to imply I feel being dishonest is good.

 

[gluadys]

One thing that has always befuddled me is why TEs apparently don't witness to or correct the average evolutionists on the Crevo board very much. I understand the arguments that your scientific positions are similar and therefore you pit yourselves against the YECer who is apparently ignorant of such matters; but given that the scientific evidence truly is unimportant when compared to their salvation; why not witness from an evolutionary viewpoint?

I have corrected people on the crevo board and been corrected by them. I have corrected both YECs and atheists who try to claim that evolution=atheism. To their credit, most atheists also correct fellow atheists on this point.

Clearly this cannot be considered soley an evolutionary process yet I don't recall ever hearing a TE use such an argument to witness to a non-believer.

That’s not clear at all. Why couldn’t it be solely an evolutionary process?

It would appear, to me, that TEs have and take more pleasure correcting and/or belittling a fellow believer as opposed to witnessing to a person they already have something great in common with.

If I thought a person had never given much thought to their atheism, I might ask them privately to re-consider. But in my experience, many atheists come from a believing family and have given due consideration to the claims of the gospel. In any case, I would not witness on the public board under any circumstances. Witnessing is too personal for that.

 

[gluadys]

Why is it a TEs primary job to defend evolution by correcting a YEC as opposed to promoting Christianity? Please don't give me the answer that defending evolution is promoting Christianity.

St. Augustine considered it a worthwhile service to the faith to protect it from the uninformed errors of faithful fools, such as the one Mallon mentioned.

What this is telling me is that you believe all of nature can be explained via science.

Not yet. But I think it is likely eventually.

I understand that the issue being debated is evolution and not God, but since this is a Christian forum, I don't think bringing God into the equation is in some way inappropriate. I'm sure Jesus would approve.

Well there are appropriate and inappropriate ways to do so. As shernren says, we want to avoid using the Bible hammer we so often see. So what is a gentle, kindly, appropriate way to speak of God in this context? Personally, I think it is enough that Christian TEs identify themselves as such.

That is a significant thing in itself. It shows both believers and unbelievers that evolution is not an issue for most Christians. It shows both believers on the edge of de-conversion and unbelievers on the edge of conversion that there is a way to be true to God and true to science at the same time.

 

[Lilandra]

One thing that has always befuddled me is why TEs apparently don't witness to or correct the average evolutionists on the Crevo board very much. I understand the arguments that your scientific positions are similar and therefore you pit yourselves against the YECer who is apparently ignorant of such matters; but given that the scientific evidence truly is unimportant when compared to their salvation; why not witness from an evolutionary viewpoint?

I am grateful to TEs like Gluadys and Vance for their witnessing.
I was raised Southern Baptist. I believed at one time Adam and Eve were real people and every word was literal. I never believed the Earth was 10,000 years old.

Anyhow I came to CF convinced that organisms were created fully formed at about the family level in taxonomy.

When I was shown that the borders were not as fixed as I thought I was forced to change my mind. I didn't even know that TEs existed. If it weren't for the TEs on this board demonstrating a way to reconcile faith and science I would have been left with very little choice but to deconvert.

Vance even PMed me to make sure I was okay.

It would appear, to me, that TEs have and take more pleasure correcting and/or belittling a fellow believer as opposed to witnessing to a person they already have something great in common with.

Perhaps you should notice the other TEs, who post here every day who do not toot their own horns, but are not like that.

 

[shernren]

I’m really not sure what point it is you’re trying to make here.

You still seemed to be operating from within a God-of-the-gaps framework. I was trying to correct that. Apologies if I was mistaken.

I didn’t say anything about fighting evolution to the death. My point was if you believe that God used evolution then you should be showing people how He did in whatever way that TEs believe He did in order to distinguish or magnify God within the process. Instead most TEs spend far too much time either showing the scientific basis for evolution or worse belittling and/or condemning YECs.

But context determines response. If I meet an atheist saying that evolution disproves God, by all means, I would try argue him out of it, but more importantly to show by my life that there is truth to spiritual reality. On the other hand, what happens more often on C/E is that a creationist shows up and says something scientifically wrong, and atheists start laughing and saying Christians are stupid. Contextually, showing that Christianity and evolution are compatible would be a suitable response in defense of the faith, wouldn't it? Of course it should not be done in a manner which belittles other believers - but this can be extremely difficult given the wacky ideas some people hold to.

 

[random_guy]

One thing that has always befuddled me is why TEs apparently don't witness to or correct the average evolutionists on the Crevo board very much. I understand the arguments that your scientific positions are similar and therefore you pit yourselves against the YECer who is apparently ignorant of such matters; but given that the scientific evidence truly is unimportant when compared to their salvation; why not witness from an evolutionary viewpoint?

First, both TEists and evolutionists do correct people that state evolution proves/disproves God. Next, the reason why we don't witness from evolutionary viewpoint is because it will cause more division than unity. Science is built such that relgious views of the person do not matter. If we attribute every single area that we don't understand to God, such as dark matter, origins of life, etc... what happens when we end up figuring it out? It can cause disillusionment, or worse. For example, a lot of YECists say that if they ever found evolution to be correct, they'd stop believing in God. When we pit religion and science against each other, religion will end up losing.

Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. There are countless examples of things that happen in nature that cannot be explained via evolution alone. Case in point, today on my way to work I heard of a fungus that attaches itself to a beetle and commandiers it to climb a tree where the fungus releases itself to fall on other beetles. Clearly this cannot be considered soley an evolutionary process yet I don't recall ever hearing a TE use such an argument to witness to a non-believer. Why?

From what I remember, it's actually an ant that is infected. Also, why can it not be considered done by an evolutionary process? There are some species of parasites that must infect 3 or 4 different species animals in order to complete its life cycle. There are other species of parasites that hijack the nervous systems of their host and make them drown themselves. If we attribute explain everything as "Goddidit", it diminishes scientists' views of Christianity. It makes us look like we're holding back science., and in a way, YECism and Creationism does.

It would appear, to me, that TEs have and take more pleasure correcting and/or belittling a fellow believer as opposed to witnessing to a person they already have something great in common with.

Please prove me and my belief wrong!

Easy. I get no pleasure in correcting or belittling other people, whether they are Christian or not. I spend time in CvE for one reason, to teach others. Where I get pleasure is when people reply to my post accepting whatever science knowledge I can impart in them. Remember that a lot of members in CvE are hostile to Christianity because of the YECists and Creationists. A lot of them dislike how ID, Creationism, and antiscience in general is being pushed into schools and into society. I think the best way to reach them is to show them science literate Christians do exist, and that one does not need to reject science in order to be a Christian. In the end, I believe that my behavior will speak louder than any attempt to actively force religion into science.

 

[vossler]

I am grateful to TEs like Gluadys and Vance for their witnessing.

Perhaps you should notice the other TEs, who post here every day who do not toot their own horns, but are not like that.

I agree gluadys and Vance along with some other TEs are effective witnesses for Christ. I have noticed them and pointed them out in other posts. However, that still doesn't change the points I made in the OP.

 

[vossler]

On the other hand, what happens more often on C/E is that a creationist shows up and says something scientifically wrong, and atheists start laughing and saying Christians are stupid.

That's exactly true, still TEs don't need to chime in and laugh with the atheist, that's the point.

Contextually, showing that Christianity and evolution are compatible would be a suitable response in defense of the faith, wouldn't it?

That's exactly what I expect TEs to do, yet many times don't.

Of course it should not be done in a manner which belittles other believers - but this can be extremely difficult given the wacky ideas some people hold to.

Who said being a Christian was going to be easy, sometimes you'll have to deal with ignorant Christians like me.

 

[vossler]

First, both TEists and evolutionists do correct people that state evolution proves/disproves God. Next, the reason why we don't witness from evolutionary viewpoint is because it will cause more division than unity.

Division between who?

Science is built such that religious views of the person do not matter. If we attribute every single area that we don't understand to God, such as dark matter, origins of life, etc... what happens when we end up figuring it out? It can cause disillusionment, or worse. For example, a lot of YECists say that if they ever found evolution to be correct, they'd stop believing in God. When we pit religion and science against each other, religion will end up losing.

First of all let me say if evolution were ever shown to be correct it would shake me deeply, but I would never lose my faith in Jesus and anyone who's faith is built upon scientific thinking has no faith and isn't a child of God to begin with. So if we 'figure it out' and it causes disillusionment then I would have to say that persons faith was extremely weak and in the wrong thing.

If we attribute explain everything as "Goddidit", it diminishes scientists' views of Christianity. It makes us look like we're holding back science., and in a way, YECism and Creationism does.

Well everything can be attributed to "Goddidit", the only question is how, and that in no way diminishes Christianity.

Easy. I get no pleasure in correcting or belittling other people, whether they are Christian or not. I spend time in CvE for one reason, to teach others. Where I get pleasure is when people reply to my post accepting whatever science knowledge I can impart in them. Remember that a lot of members in CvE are hostile to Christianity because of the YECists and Creationists. A lot of them dislike how ID, Creationism, and antiscience in general is being pushed into schools and into society. I think the best way to reach them is to show them science literate Christians do exist, and that one does not need to reject science in order to be a Christian. In the end, I believe that my behavior will speak louder than any attempt to actively force religion into science.

That sounds great and is, for the most part, exactly what I would hope that you do, but you've got to admit not everyone (TEs) does as you do.

 

[shernren]

That's exactly what I expect TEs to do, yet many times don't.

But when a Christian defends evolution and says that fellow Christians who dispute evolution are wrong, doesn't that implicitly show that Christianity is compatible with evolution for at least some?

That's exactly true, still TEs don't need to chime in and laugh with the atheist, that's the point.

I've certainly made a harsh parody or two, but I don't think I've ever chimed in and laughed with them. So I'm assuming this whole issue of belittling Christians is done with.

 

[vossler]

But when a Christian defends evolution and says that fellow Christians who dispute evolution are wrong, doesn't that implicitly show that Christianity is compatible with evolution for at least some?

Sure it does, but at least when it happens we're doing it in love and not to make light of the other.

I've certainly made a harsh parody or two, but I don't think I've ever chimed in and laughed with them. So I'm assuming this whole issue of belittling Christians is done with.

I don't believe you act this way, at least not that I'm aware of, but I'm speaking primarily of other TEs, at least with regard to this issue.

 

[Lilandra]

I agree gluadys and Vance along with some other TEs are effective witnesses for Christ. I have noticed them and pointed them out in other posts. However, that still doesn't change the points I made in the OP.

I can only control my own behavior. If I were to say to you why are other YECs abrasive to TEs, what could you do about that?

The only thing you can do is be courteous yourself to prevent the abrasive YEC stereotype from forming.

I am a human being I get irritated and frustrated. I endeavor to be courteous but I am not always successful.

All I can do is set a good exanple of a TE by my actions. I cannot control what other people say and do.

 

[vossler]

I can only control my own behavior. If I were to say to you why are other YECs abrasive to TEs, what could you do about that?

Without a doubt there are YECs who are abrasive and unfortunately some might even call me that. Yet I can't think of ever wanting to imply and/or state a TE was some idiot or other negative name to a non-believer.

I am a human being I get irritated and frustrated. I endeavor to be courteous but I am not always successful.

All I can do is set a good example of a TE by my actions. I cannot control what other people say and do.

Of course this is all true and something we all should heed. Yet as a member of a group, whatever group that may be, one, whether positive or negative, takes on or is assigned the characteristics of that group. What we must all decide is whether those characteristics line up with my beliefs and values.

 

[Lilandra]

Without a doubt there are YECs who are abrasive and unfortunately some might even call me that. Yet I can't think of ever wanting to imply and/or state a TE was some idiot or other negative name to a non-believer.

Maybe you don't do this. But, there some YECs that are more than happy to call others sinners, who are going to hell.

What hurts more "You're dumb!" or "You are going to hell!"

Of course this is all true and something we all should heed. Yet as a member of a group, whatever group that may be, one, whether positive or negative, takes on or is assigned the characteristics of that group. What we must all decide is whether those characteristics line up with my beliefs and values.

I think the good that TEs do outweighs the bad. I would be more than happy to be associated with any of them.

 

[steen]

Well, I have read the tread. Interesting, yet odd arguments from YEC. I shall seek to address some of them

One thing that has always befuddled me is why TEs apparently don't witness to or correct the average evolutionists on the Crevo board very much.

Ah, odd and biased, unsubstantiated claim right there. "average evolutionist? What is that? I am an evolutionist, as best I understand the term (as one who accept scientific findings). I am not a Theistic Evolutionist. I go for the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution. And I am also a Christian.

What is an "average" evolutionist?

Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about. There are countless examples of things that happen in nature that cannot be explained via evolution alone.

certainly. Much of what happens in nature has absolutely nothing to do with Biology, and therefore has nothing to do with Evolution either. Plate tectonics has nothing to do with Evolution. Evolution also does not explain the formation of coal or the effects of gravity. So what? On the other hand, when you get to issues of Biology, then there really isn't much that Evolution doesn't explain.


Now, you have had a slew of posts since, more or less in the same venue. If there is anything I need to cover because I didn't make myself clear to you, please let me know.

 

[steen]

Well, I had decided I was done, but I have to address this

First of all let me say if evolution were ever shown to be correct it would shake me deeply,

It has been.

but I would never lose my faith in Jesus

Of course it shouldn't. One doesn't exclude the other. Science is about the "what" and the "how." God is concerned with the "why." the two complement each other. Those who claim that science diminishes God are simply starkly ignorant of the science, attacking it without cause.

and anyone who's faith is built upon scientific thinking has no faith

Agreed. The creationists who are so desperate that they need Scientific Evidence to 'prove" God are those whose Faith is so weak that they need tangible signs of God. This is exactly like the Israelites needing a Golden calf to worship. Creationism is the modern times' Golden calf.

and isn't a child of God to begin with.

I must disagree. We are ALL God's children.

So if we 'figure it out' and it causes disillusionment then I would have to say that persons faith was extremely weak and in the wrong thing.

Agreed. So what is your fear of Science? What is your need to have Science be about God? If we need to develop a new antibiotic due to bacterial resistance, do you want to use scientific knowledge of evolution to determine what kind of antibiotic would work? Or will you randomly throw substances together, letting God guide you to make the best antibiotic? What is the need to have God be the center of Science? Why the need for physical evidence of God?

Well everything can be attributed to "Goddidit", the only question is how, and that in no way diminishes Christianity.

Ah, God created the new, resistant bacteria. God made this new antibiotic I mixed together. Well, I for one prefer to stake my life on the brain God gave me to obtain knowledge that has proven itself to work.

 

[gluadys]

I am not a Theistic Evolutionist. I go for the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution. And I am also a Christian.

Interesting. What do you understand "Theistic Evolutionist" to mean?

Because the way you describe yourself --a Christian who goes for the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution--is what I understand to be the meaning of "Theistic Evolutionist" (with the proviso that non-Christian theists may also be TEs).

When I call myself a Theistic Evolutionist, that is what I mean by it--that I am a Christian who fully accepts the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution--no ifs, ands or buts of any sort.

But you differentiate. How do you see yourself as different from Theistic Evolutionists? Or them from you?

No debate intended. Just curious.

 

[steen]

Interesting. What do you understand "Theistic Evolutionist" to mean?

Because the way you describe yourself --a Christian who goes for the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution--is what I understand to be the meaning of "Theistic Evolutionist" (with the proviso that non-Christian theists may also be TEs).

Sure, I understand your confusion. I accept scientific evidence. I don't see a need for God to somehow have created life. I do make a distinction between Evolution and origin of life or origin of the universe, which might be where the confusion arise. I see evolution as ONLY dealing with the changes in a population from generation to generation. How the original life got there, or how the planet or universe came to be is utterly immaterial to Evolution.

I am also a Christian. I have a solid and unshaken Faith in God and see absolutely no conflict between God and science in any way.

Hope that clarifies it for you?

When I call myself a Theistic Evolutionist, that is what I mean by it--that I am a Christian who fully accepts the actual Scientific Theory of Evolution--no ifs, ands or buts of any sort.

But you differentiate. How do you see yourself as different from Theistic Evolutionists? Or them from you?

Theistic Evolutionists seem to me to have a belief that God HAS to be involved in the beginning of life somewhere along the way. Which is a God-of-the-gaps idea. If Science actually provide solid evidence for Abiogenesis, then I still have no crisis of faith. I don't know what TE (in my impression of what it is) will do then? I don't see God as having anything to do with the "what" or the "how" of the world. God is about the "why." The Bible is not a science or history textbook. Science and history is not textbooks about God. the two spheres complement each other, they don't compete. Anybody seeking to use one to explain the other will invariably end up with untenable assertions.

And it is a bit of a bother here in the forum that these things are not better contemplated. F.ex. under your profile, one of the things you can fill out is your view of origins. There is an option for TE. there is an option for "atheistic Evolution. There is no option for Scientific Evolution." You have to write that in yourself. It indicates a fundamental ignorance of science in the Christian fellowships, and that concerns me immensely (Sorry, I am a nitpicking stickler when it comes to scientific terminology. Comes from years of having to listen to "only a theory" nonsense )

I hope you understand what I mean here?

No debate intended. Just curious.

Sure. I have seen enough of your posts to know that your integrity is solid. No argument or offense taken.