Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
God has guided my life in many entirely natural ways, and God made me through entirely understood biological processes.
Ultimately physical, "natural" science in its reigning anti-spiritual philosophy will reach a road block in endeavors and sulk and stagnate. Or it will traverse in the realization that the spiritual foundation is there for a purpose, that geology respects micro biology, not try to usurp it.
For now though physical science is heading towards God. But religion is already there. That's the difference.
gluadys said:IOW, at the time Lamarck wrote it was a scientific given that changes in inorganic nature (physical, chemical, geological changes) did not require specific miraculous interposition. God does not have to call up each thunderstorm or rainbow individually. These things happen through understandable natural processes.
These "things" are dictated by an underlying supernatural law.
I'm a deist. So this entail me believing that a being (call it god) set the universe in motion and continues to watch it. HOWEVER, he interferes in no way, and everything that has happened since the beggining he has had no hand in.
Of course. I don't think Lamarck or Darwin were disputing that. They were extending the application of the same principle to organic life.
We have an understandable biological process that gives rise to biological change and diversity.
But underlying that is supernatural law.
Science deals with the observable process.
It doesn't deal with the underlying supernatural law.
That is the case whether the science is astronomy, meterology, chemistry, geology or biology.
Science is not anti-spiritual, if anything it is the opposite.
However one does not have to believe in a god to be spiritual.
It's been said before, but it struck me as rather awesome when I first heard it ----- a reference to the miracle of Creation that was mirrored in Jesus' first miracle, i.e., the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding in (Canaan?).
Water contains two elements in the basic molecule (Hydrogen and Oxygen). Alcohol (the wine) is an organic compound and therefore must contain a Carbon atom, as all organic compounds do. We must assume that Jesus created the carbon atoms, and the alcohol molecule in the making of the wine ------ and since this was his first miracle of his ministry, it is a statement of his Divinity and the confirmation that He was there as the Co-Creator of the Universe and the world (with the Father and the Holy Spirit).
It was just as straightforward to create wine as it was to create Adam. Both were miracles, and God was quite modest in demonstrating this awesome event, with eye witnesses to attest to it.
How do you like that, Greg1234?
I love it !!
I have no idea where you get the notion that Creationists are deists but it's absurd. I am a young earth creationist by default which means I will maintain that view unless or until I am persuaded otherwise. I went through a transition as well and it when from core conviction, sound doctrine, exposition, apologetics and finally creationism and other intellectual pursuits. What is more I'm an evolutionist as well differing from atheistic materialists only with regards to the time and means of evolution.
Have a nice day
Mark
Unless God is the universe, then why does this stop the universe from evolving?Yes, but there is this matter of "the Divine" that I cannot see as something that evolves. If God is immutable, then He did not evolve.
Maybe you're reading more into scripture than is actually there? Unless by 'image' you mean that we're 'physically' like God, which would be odd, considering that God is not physical, but spiritual. So it seems that we're 'spiritually' made in the image of God; but physically, we're apes.Could this possibly mean that "the Divine" was imparted to Adam, and therefore Adam was NOT a product of evolution theory?
Yes, but there is this matter of "the Divine" that I cannot see as something that evolves. If God is immutable, then He did not evolve.
Plus, He is (by definition) Omnipresent (also indicating He did not "evolve"). The Genesis account says that God (The Trinity, indicated by verbage.... "Let US create man in our image"). Could this possibly mean that "the Divine" was imparted to Adam, and therefore Adam was NOT a product of evolution theory?
It's been said before, but it struck me as rather awesome when I first heard it ----- a reference to the miracle of Creation that was mirrored in Jesus' first miracle, i.e., the miracle of turning water into wine at the wedding in (Canaan?).
Water contains two elements in the basic molecule (Hydrogen and Oxygen). Alcohol (the wine) is an organic compound and therefore must contain a Carbon atom, as all organic compounds do. We must assume that Jesus created the carbon atoms, and the alcohol molecule in the making of the wine ------ and since this was his first miracle of his ministry, it is a statement of his Divinity and the confirmation that He was there as the Co-Creator of the Universe and the world (with the Father and the Holy Spirit).
It was just as straightforward to create wine as it was to create Adam. Both were miracles, and God was quite modest in demonstrating this awesome event, with eye witnesses to attest to it.
How do you like that, Greg1234?
I love it !!
Of course not. God does not change. God is not a creature or part of the universe (apart from the Incarnation of course). Evolution deals with created things, those which are creatures, created, material, natural and organic. God is God, not a creature.
Again, of course God doesn't evolve. God isn't a creature. However the "image and likeness of God" should probably be understood contextually here as Genesis 1 functions in part as a Temple narrative--mankind is God's image which He has placed in His Temple (the heavens and the earth) to reflect His glory and be steward of it.
Of course the Imagio Dei has further theological meaning, but there is nothing that says God cannot have created Homo sapiens sapiens through the mechanism and processes of evolution and made "Adam" in His image and likeness; where Adam is the first truly human person in the hominid lineage in whom God breathed life, giving man a truly spiritual component, morally culpable and aware and able to be intimate with his Creator and in this reflecting the Divine Image and Likeness.
-CryptoLutheran
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?