How does one become a Theistic Evolutionist?

[marlowe007]

I've given up on trying to find the truth about human origins.

 

[Chesterton]

I've given up on trying to find the truth about human origins.

Ditto.

 

[PT Calvinist]

The Bible is not the sole container of truth.

We live off of every word that proceeds out of God's mouth right? or is there a loophole that i'm not seeing. What is the sole container of truth, keeping in mind that we are flawed in thinking and ourselved can replicate fossils.

 

[LightSeaker]

We live off of every word that proceeds out of God's mouth right? or is there a loophole that i'm not seeing. What is the sole container of truth, keeping in mind that we are flawed in thinking and ourselved can replicate fossils.

I say that God's own creation fits the bill.

.

 

[Tiberius]

Sorry for the tangent here, but this little tidbit caught my attention:

"The specimen is therefore reasonably attributable to A. anamensis (Leakey et al. 1995), although the results of this study indicate that the Kanapoi specimen is not much more "human-like" than any of the other australopithecine fossils, despite prior conclusions to the contrary" (Lague and Jungers 1996)

I'm sorry, but I can't find that quote anywhere on the page I linked to...

 

[gluadys]

I'm sorry, but I can't find that quote anywhere on the page I linked to...

It's not on the page you linked to but on the page titled Creationist Arguments to which there is a link partway down that page.

KP 271, "Kanapoi Hominid", Australopithecus anamensis
Discovered by Bryan Patterson in 1965 at Kanapoi in Kenya (Patterson and Howells 1967). This is a lower left humerus which is about 4.0 million years old. Creationist Arguments: Anomalous Fossils

 

[John 10:10]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

 

[LightSeaker]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

I don't see anything here that would take anything away from the wonderful windows into God's creating process that He as given us which we call evolution and geology.

.

 

[Mick116]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

Whether we are considering the past 6000 or the past 3.5 billion years, short of a time machine we cannot know anything "to a high degree of accuracy" (if we mean by this, direct, visual, primary observation); at least there is some (rather convincing) evidence that points to a 3.5 billion year history of life; there is no evidence that I can see that reasonably points to the earth being merely thousands of years old. We don't even have a theology of divine inspiration that can be determined "with a high degree of accuracy".

With so much uncertainty, I think it's best to go with the theory which makes the most sense of the data available, and which allows us to make accurate predictions, e.g. where fossils of particular organisms are buried. If things turn out to differ significantly from our current understanding of evolutionary origins, then good, we'll wait until that day when new and revolutionary evidence is brought to light, but until then we go where the available evidence carries us (including the intersection of fossil, genetic, biogeographic, anatomical, geological and astronomical evidence).

 

[Assyrian]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

What is this 'high degree of accuracy' you keep going on about? It sounds like you are taking one aspect of physics and claiming that is what makes it a science, but it is really an excuse to reject biology because it doesn't always involve multi decimal place measurements. Were chemistry and atomic physics not sciences before the mass of a carbon atom was measured to ten decimal places? How many decimal places did Newton calculate gravity to?

What does 'according to their kinds' mean other than God created different kinds of animals? And how does that mean God could not have used evolution to create the different species?

 

[The Lady Kate]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

And no doubt it infuriates you to no end that neither evolutionists nor anybody else is going to gain their "true science" or wisdom from you.

 

[Tiberius]

The truth about human origins is that God created all plant, animal and human life forms "after their own kinds" as He said in His Word.

If evolutionists, even those who call themselves theistic evolutionists, want to believe in a theory that they now consider scientific fact that would require millions of years to determine to a high degree of accuracy if life actually evolved into the first species and then onward to all other species, then evolutionists have no understanding what true science is, nor how man is given wisdom by God to know the things that are given to us by God that govern the way God created His universe and holds it together.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how this follows. Many Christians do not hold that the entirety of the Bible is completely literal, but some parts are meant to be metaphorical. They view the Bible not as a historical textbook full of just facts, but as a way of understanding God. Thus we have a book that contains not only prose, but poetry and song.

So I can't see that holding an interpretation of Genesis that is not 100% literal is having "no understanding what true science is".

 

[PT Calvinist]

So I can't see that holding an interpretation of Genesis that is not 100% literal is having "no understanding what true science is".

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

 

[2 King]

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

Not all people are literalists...Thus your propsal carries little weight.

 

[Tiberius]

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

I didn't realise we had the original texts of Genesis.

 

[pgp_protector]

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

You've got an original copy of Genesis :wow: you have any idea how many Billions of $$$ that's worth !!!!

 

[The Lady Kate]

You've got an original copy of Genesis :wow: you have any idea how many Billions of $$$ that's worth !!!!

Craigslist!

 

[Assyrian]

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

Not all people are literalists...Thus your propsal carries little weight.

It is not just the readers who aren't always literalists, the ancient Hebrews weren't either. Gen 49:9 Judah is a lion's cub; from the prey, my son, you have gone up. He stooped down; he crouched as a lion and as a lioness; who dares rouse him? Given PT's use of the capital A, he is not talking about the human writers, but I am pretty sure the Author isn't either. Exodus 19:4 You yourselves have seen what I did to the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings and brought you to myself.

 

[JusSumguy]

Perhaps the thing is, no one has to guess anymore and just pick a side, since we can look into the original Hebrew and see what the Author meant..

I know what you meant..

Not all people are literalists...Thus your propsal carries little weight.

But, shouldn't they be?

I didn't realise we had the original texts of Genesis.

He knew what you meant..

You've got an original copy of Genesis :wow: you have any idea how many Billions of $$$ that's worth !!!!

Same here... Not fair folks.

Craigslist!

But this here is funny.


-

 

[gluadys]

But, shouldn't they be [literalists]?

-

What for? What is so special about literalism?