Friendly Question(s) to TEs

[Marshall Janzen]

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 consider myself to be a TE, and I'm agnostic regarding abiogenesis. Whatever science reveals in this regard, I'll still believe that God created life, along with everything else, because I don't limit God's creative work to what defies natural explanation.

I don't see God as having anything to do with the "what" or the "how" of the world. God is about the "why."

God doesn't have anything to do with the "what" or the "how", or God hasn't revealed much about the "what" and the "how" of creation in Scripture? I believe God is quite involved in those things because God is the author and sustainer of all creation, and he will accomplish his purposes for what he has made.

 

[Pats]

From my little humble observations, Vossler, I'd just like to remind that arguements for IDism equal "we were designed by ___ (fill in the blank)."

It is an arguement for agnosticism, at best, wich is a step to the side of atheism. At worst, it's an arguement that we were designed by space aliens.

I agree that when I see the wonders of creation I see God's fingerprints. But, that is hardly an arguement on wich to base Christianity.

Even when I was completely YEC, I understood that the TEs stood as a whitness to show non believing evolutionists that one does not have to give up on science to be a Christian.

 

[gluadys]

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?

It clarifies your thinking. But I see most TEs distinguishing between evolution and origin of life just as you do.

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.

Neither would I. Although I wouldn't describe abiogenesis or any natural scientific process as excluding God. Just excluding a direct miraculous intervention.

But I would see this as a point where TEs might disagree with each other. Some may accept the possibility of abiogenesis and others reject it. I accept it and I know several others who also accept it.

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.

Agreed.

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?

Agreed. It gives the impression that there are two different theories of evolution. I have had to clarify several times that there is only one scientific theory of evolution which theists and atheists agree on, despite their theological disagreement.

 

[steen]

I consider myself to be a TE, and I'm agnostic regarding abiogenesis.

Indeed. We don't know yet. Science is hinting, but there is no solid Scientific Theory yet.

Whatever science reveals in this regard, I'll still believe that God created life, along with everything else, because I don't limit God's creative work to what defies natural explanation.

SUre, it is because of God. But I don't see God as going in and "Now I will cause life to be created." Ocham's razor.

God doesn't have anything to do with the "what" or the "how", or God hasn't revealed much about the "what" and the "how" of creation in Scripture?

What I see is God establishing a reason for relevance.

I believe God is quite involved in those things because God is the author and sustainer of all creation, and he will accomplish his purposes for what he has made.

And that is why I am not TE.

 

[vossler]

What is an "average" evolutionist?

A non-believer.

Why not challenge YEC bearing False Witness? Do you think that outright lying or making the same false, already proven-false claims in the face of solid evidence to the contrary, and then even doing so in God's name is something to support/ Doesn't that more or less cover what Blasphemy is? Should I support blasphemy because it is uttered by Christians? I don't understand your reasoning. It almost sounds like you are saying that YEC should be let get away with bearing False Witness solely because they are Christians? What kind of witnessing is that?

This thread was about belittling and/or condemning a brother in front of a non-believer.

On the other hand, when you get to issues of Biology, then there really isn't much that Evolution doesn't explain.

So you believe.

Why not? here you are making an absolutist claim with no background knowledge and no actual information other than "I want this to not be because of Evolution," and then presenting your wishful thinking as a "fact." this is the kind of stuff we are arguing against. You have absolutely NO reason for your remark, no knowledge other than that you don't believe this to be true; yet you decided to make an absolutist claim about science. That's not entirely honest is it now? That is the bearing of False Witness that I am talking about. Either you know what you are talking about, or you should avoid making absolutist claims of your personal, subjective opinion being "fact."

I hope that at least makes a little bit of sense to you?

First of all, I don't want anything except the truth. I'm not interested in promoting an agenda other than God's. If you wish to claim it being false witness or anything else, be my guest. Yes it makes sense, you believe I'm a false witness.

There is no pleasure in witnessing fellow believers making outright false claims, either per ignorance or per malicious dishonesty.

No one is asking you to witness to YECs, obviously this isn't something you have any desire to do, besides they're believers.

What belief? That TE or Christans in general are taking delight in speaking against God by criticizing YEC? That patently is false, so I hope that settles it for you.

No, speaking against a brother in front of a non-brother.

It has been.

I'm glad you're confident of that.

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

John 1: 11-13 states - He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

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?

I have no fear of science.

 

[vossler]

From my little humble observations, Vossler, I'd just like to remind that arguements for IDism equal "we were designed by ___ (fill in the blank)."

I'm not here promoting or demoting IDism.

Even when I was completely YEC, I understood that the TEs stood as a witness to show non believing evolutionists that one does not have to give up on science to be a Christian.

That's all I'm calling for them to be now.

 

[Pats]

I'm not here promoting or demoting IDism.

Your OP sounds like IDism, though, vossler.

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?

The only "whitness" attempt I've ever seen from a evolutionary viewpoint is ID.

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?

That arguement is an ID arguement, not YEC. And, it is explainable through evolution.

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!

I would say there might be a small minority who are like that, but as far as "belittling" goes, it's a minority. Crevo is an evolution vs. creation debate. It seems to me that TEs would be on the same side as evolutionists when debating YEC vs Evolution.

Even when I was completely YEC, I understood that the TEs stood as a witness to show non believing evolutionists that one does not have to give up on science to be a Christian

That's all I'm calling for them to be now.

When they argue against special creation for a scientificlly based theory such as evolution, this is what they are doing.

Christian brother's argue against Christian brothers all the time. An atheist does not need to visit the Crevo forum to see this. On CF, they can simply observe the diversity in the "Congregation" forums, or any number of other forums. Christian's aren't perfect, we have disagreements. It's just reality. It's nothing we can hide.

 

[vossler]

Your OP sounds like IDism, though, vossler.

The only "whitness" attempt I've ever seen from a evolutionary viewpoint is ID.

That arguement is an ID arguement, not YEC. And, it is explainable through evolution.

If TEs don't believe God had anything to do with the design of His creatures, which lately is another point I wasn't aware that TEs held, then I suppose I could see how all of this could be considered ID.

I would say there might be a small minority who are like that, but as far as "belittling" goes, it's a minority. Crevo is an evolution vs. creation debate. It seems to me that TEs would be on the same side as evolutionists when debating YEC vs Evolution.

Yes it is a minority but there are plenty of examples to the contrary of the majority. In other words it is not an isolated event. However, I will say that as of late the instances of such behavior have diminished.

When they argue against special creation for a scientifically based theory such as evolution, this is what they are doing.

Yes this is what they do, I don't believe it to be in anyway biblical, but at least they're presenting their case. From that standpoint I have no problem whatsoever.

Christian brother's argue against Christian brothers all the time. An atheist does not need to visit the Crevo forum to see this. On CF, they can simply observe the diversity in the "Congregation" forums, or any number of other forums. Christian's aren't perfect, we have disagreements. It's just reality. It's nothing we can hide.

If we're called to love our neighbor, yet can't love our brother, what kind of witness is that? This has nothing to do with perfection.

 

[Pats]

First of all, I'm not really argueing as a TE here, since I consider myself open minded toward origin theology at this time, and leaning away from YEC.

If TEs don't believe God had anything to do with the design of His creatures, which lately is another point I wasn't aware that TEs held, then I suppose I could see how all of this could be considered ID.

I don't know that "TEs" can be lumped together in this fashion. For reasons that have nothing to do with this thread, I'm considering that the theory of evolution is correct. From what I've learned, TEs vary as to the degree they feel God is/was involved in the evolutionary process. I have not seen any TEs post that they think God was abscent from the process of evolution.

Yes this is what they do, I don't believe it to be in anyway biblical, but at least they're presenting their case. From that standpoint I have no problem whatsoever.

As you may recall, I have a friend who is an evolutionist and a non Christian. He's a pretty dang close friend. During the time when he really took the time to discuss the Bible with me, we wasted a lot of time argueing over origins. I think, to this day, if I get the chance to talk to him again, I'm going to show him how Genesis can be seen as allegory and move away from that topic. Even he himself, a non Christian, tried to suggest to me that "maybe the story of creation is Genesis is just God's way of simplifying the explination of His creation of the earth," and I brushed him off.

If we're called to love our neighbor, yet can't love our brother, what kind of witness is that? This has nothing to do with perfection.

I think we should be able to follow Jesus' example of speaking the truth in love. If anyone's temper keeps him from this, he should refrain from responding.

Debating a brother in a non-deminishing manor is not the abscence of love. It is easier for nonChristians to understand the debate between YECs and TEs, I think, than certain denominations of Christians pointing the finger at other denominations and saying, "they're not practicing Christianity," especially when they could easily modify that by saying, "I don't think that is what the Bible teaches," or "I think they take this too far."

 

[Mallon]

If we're called to love our neighbor, yet can't love our brother, what kind of witness is that? This has nothing to do with perfection.

Vossler, with all due respect, I think you're pointing your finger in the wrong direction and making a mountain out of a molehill. If it's TEs you feel are guilty of acting judgmental or critical of faith, then perhaps you should have another look at this thread (which I see you did earlier this morning):
http://www.christianforums.com/t2969222-who-are-we-dealing-with.html
You might do well to start a new thread either here or in the creationist subforum and accuse your fellow creationists of doing the very same thing.
I'm also curious to see the list of examples you have amassed where TEs have attacked the poster and not their position. While I'm sure there are some examples (people like dad or JohnR7 make it too easy), I would also be willing to bet there are at least as many examples of poor Christian attitude coming from your side of the fence. I often think YECs might have an easier time getting their message across if they acted more Christ-like and questioned the science rather than the faiths of those people who practice scientific methodology.

 

[vossler]

I have not seen any TEs post that they think God was abscent from the process of evolution.

Within this very thread, posts # 12, 17, 21, 24, & 25 could certainly lead one to believe that.

Debating a brother in a non-deminishing manor is not the abscence of love.

You say non-diminishing, yet that isn't even close to my point.

 

[Pats]

I understand your point, vossler. You didn't really comment on my point that we are called to speak the truth in love, even if it is disagreeable to our brother. That's what I'm refering back to.

I agree that any poster here should refrain his/herself from posting if they cannot accomplish this.

 

[vossler]

I understand your point, vossler. You didn't really comment on my point that we are called to speak the truth in love, even if it is disagreeable to our brother. That's what I'm refering back to.

I didn't respond because that goes without saying we should do so. In no way am I advocating otherwise.

 

[vossler]

Vossler, with all due respect, I think you're pointing your finger in the wrong direction and making a mountain out of a molehill. If it's TEs you feel are guilty of acting judgmental or critical of faith, then perhaps you should have another look at this thread (which I see you did earlier this morning):
http://www.christianforums.com/t2969222-who-are-we-dealing-with.html

The thread you cited is among like minded people discussing an issue. No where is another Christian being belittled in front of a non-Christian.

You might do well to start a new thread either here or in the creationist subforum and accuse your fellow creationists of doing the very same thing.
I'm also curious to see the list of examples you have amassed where TEs have attacked the poster and not their position. While I'm sure there are some examples (people like dad or JohnR7 make it too easy), I would also be willing to bet there are at least as many examples of poor Christian attitude coming from your side of the fence.

I have yet to see a YEC openly mock a TE in a public forum. I can't say that it hasn't happened, just that I haven't seen it.

I often think YECs might have an easier time getting their message across if they acted more Christ-like and questioned the science rather than the faiths of those people who practice scientific methodology.

There probably is some truth to what you say here, at least for those who argue the science. As for me I don't argue evolutionary science, I'm not qualified to and find the subject far to abstract to entertain.

 

[Mallon]

The thread you cited is among like minded people discussing an issue. No where is another Christian being belittled in front of a non-Christian.

You're right. They're being belittled in front of fellow Christians. What's the difference? Besides that, Christians and non-Christians alike can read any forum they wish.

I also notice that you specifically reference a few of my posts as being belittling of you. How so? While I disagree with both your science and theology, I fail to see why you think my posts "belittled" you in any way.

 

[vossler]

You're right. They're being belittled in front of fellow Christians. What's the difference? Besides that, Christians and non-Christians alike can read any forum they wish.

No where is an individual being belittled, that's quite a difference if you asked me.

I also notice that you specifically reference a few of my posts as being belittling of you. How so? While I disagree with both your science and theology, I fail to see why you think my posts "belittled" you in any way.

I've never stated that you have belittled me. As far as I know you've treated me well (at least publically ), I certainly have nothing against you. If there is such a reference I'd surely like to see it.

 

[Mallon]

No where is an individual being belittled, that's quite a difference if you asked me.

Right again. An entire group (TEs in general) is being belittled, accused of blasphemy, having their faiths questioned and the like. What's worse?

I've never stated that you have belittled me. As far as I know you've treated me well (at least publically ), I certainly have nothing against you. If there is such a reference I'd surely like to see it.

My apologies, I misread the context of your post.
That said, I would like to clarify my position, which you seem to have mistook. I strongly believe that God works through the process of evolution. In fact, I think He founded the very process Himself. When the weatherman on TV says that it's going to rain because of an incoming low-pressure system, do you accuse him of being godless for not attributing the rain to God? No. We know that while rain can be explained scientifically, we continue to give glory to God because we know that He works through the processes He has established. The same holds for evolution. I do not need to see a miraculous speciation event to see the hand of God at work. I take it on faith that He acts through all processes, be they natural (such as evolution, precipitation, or gravity) or miraculous (such as the virgin birth, the resurrection, etc.).

 

[vossler]

Right again. An entire group (TEs in general) is being belittled, accused of blasphemy, having their faiths questioned and the like. What's worse?

I'm sorry but I don't see the problem with a believer going to other like minded believers to ask whether selected points could justify blasphemy or heresy. No one is being directly belittled in any way shape or form. What did occur was an honest solicitation of input concerning some rather potentially questionable remarks on the resurrection and truth. If one can't ask those type of questions in a forum designed specifically for other like minded people, then what has this place become?

My apologies, I misread the context of your post.

Apology accepted.

I do not need to see a miraculous speciation event to see the hand of God at work. I take it on faith that He acts through all processes, be they natural (such as evolution, precipitation, or gravity) or miraculous (such as the virgin birth, the resurrection, etc.).

Do you believe that God works miraculously through evolution?

Do you believe, as gluadys does, there will come a day when all of nature can be explained via science and that creation could be solely an evolutionary process. This means to me, correct me if I'm wrong, that God isn't involved, right?

 

[Willtor]

I believe God works providentially through evolution. I don't have good reason to think He works miraculously through it. I think you'll find that most (maybe not all) TEs hold this view.

 

[Mallon]

I'm sorry but I don't see the problem with a believer going to other like minded believers to ask whether selected points could justify blasphemy or heresy. No one is being directly belittled in any way shape or form. What did occur was an honest solicitation of input concerning some rather potentially questionable remarks on the resurrection and truth.

I'm not going to drag this out any further, except to point out that accusing a group of blasphemy in a forum where TEs are prohibited from responding to such accusations hardly seems "honest".

Do you believe that God works miraculously through evolution?

No. I believe He works naturally through evolution. Do you believe God works miraculously through rain? In your mind, why does God have to perform a miracle in order for us to attribute an action to Him? Did Jesus not say, "A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a miraculous sign"?

Do you believe, as gluadys does, there will come a day when all of nature can be explained via science and that creation could be solely an evolutionary process. This means to me, correct me if I'm wrong, that God isn't involved, right?

Why??????? Haven't you read anything I've written so far? Why do you feel that God is only capable of acting through miracles? If there ever does come a day where we can fully explain nature through science (and that day seems to be getting closer), why do you feel this will necessarily exclude God? God is beyond science.