How Have You resolved the Creationism vs Evolution Debate?

[ALoveDivine]

I can't claim to know for certain how exactly God created the universe, but I think science, as well as scripture obviously, are our best places to look for an answer. I've come to think the following.

1. The universe is billions of years old, because the totallity of scientific knowledge confirms this.

2. The Big Bang did occur 13.7 billion years ago and this was the moment God created the heavens and the earth. Not all at once, but gradually over a long long period of time. Remember a day to God is as a thousand years to us, so cosmological ages can pass and be only a moment in the eyes of Almighty God.

3. Genesis is true but it is not to be interpreted strictly literally. The first few chapters are allegorical; real truth is revealed through stories that need not be historical. The truth is that God created the heavens and the Earth and created us in his image, ie with a spiritual nature. It makes a lot more sense for God to explain these things allegorically than strictly scientifically, especially considering the earliest audience of this story lacked scientific knowledge.

4. I think there was a literal Adam and Eve, the first Homo Sapiens to receive a spiritual nature directly from God. This was the birth of Humanity as we know it, supposing the dividing line between true humanity and animals is spiritual and not strictly genetic.

5. I would even go so far as to say that Genesis specifically references evolution with phrazes such as "let the earth bring forth" and "formed from the dust of the ground". Such language refutes the idea of organisms being created ex nihilo and suggests that we were created out of the earth. Evolution dovetails with this beautifully, which itself provides excellent support for the inspiration of Genesis.

6. The flood of Noah was a local flood, but still wiped out the vast majority of humanity, as humanity was concentrated in the region. I think were the bible refers to the "whole earth", "whole land" would perhaps be a better translation. I have no problem with the idea of a global flood, but there is simply no evidence to think there was one. As scripture and creation, both authored by God, cannot contradict, the two must both be true. This can only be the case if the flood was local but universal in effect, ie the destruction of humanity at that time.

7. Predation is a part of the natural order and yes, God designed it. I think he did so because predation is necessary for balanced ecosystems in a universe with physical laws such as ours, physical laws that allow for regularity of conditions and experience, and indeed life itself. Without predation, ecosystems would collapse and there would be far MORE death and suffering. Predation is, ultimately, much more benevolent than a planet of nothing but vegetarians.

I don't think science and Christianity need to be at odds with each other. Perhaps if more thought this way, and endeavored to understand both without abandoning either, then maybe more skeptical people would take Christianity as a serious possibility. Just some food for thought.

 

[Greg1234]

1. The universe is billions of years old, because the totallity of scientific knowledge confirms this.

2. The Big Bang did occur 13.7 billion years ago and this was the moment God created the heavens and the earth. Not all at once, but gradually over a long long period of time. Remember a day to God is as a thousand years to us, so cosmological ages can pass and be only a moment in the eyes of Almighty God.

Or it could by about 900 billion years old according to some of your peers. The gradualism you assume here would be from spiritual to a full physical manifestation of creation. When you implement such, the rules change.

Genesis is true but it is not to be interpreted strictly literally. The first few chapters are allegorical;

Should we inquire about Einstein's clothes in order to determine the validity of relativity? Also, saying "not-literal" in favor of the new theory being pushed won't help the matter seeing that there's a plethora of interpretive texts which take precedence over random mutation.

especially considering the earliest audience of this story lacked scientific knowledge.

Theological knowledge would be sought rather than natural philosophy.

4. I think there was a literal Adam and Eve, the first Homo Sapiens to receive a spiritual nature directly from God.

Man already had his spiritual nature upon inception. The woman was taken from man not via accident and physical reproduction.

5. I would even go so far as to say that Genesis specifically references evolution with phrazes such as "let the earth bring forth" and "formed from the dust of the ground". Such language refutes the idea of organisms being created ex nihilo and suggests that we were created out of the earth. Evolution dovetails with this beautifully, which itself provides excellent support for the inspiration of Genesis.

Of course we're back to "literalism" now. Unfortunately this does not support the Darwinian paradigm either. That's how commands were issued- based on the element from which they derive their nature. Man, being above all, received no such attribution and him along with other natures were created again in Gen 2.

6. The flood of Noah was a local flood, but still wiped out the vast majority of humanity, as humanity was concentrated in the region.

That's like isolating the effect of a meteor impact (worldwide fire) to that of a bush fire (local).

7. Predation is a part of the natural order and yes, God designed it. I think he did so because predation is necessary for balanced ecosystems in a universe with physical laws such as ours, physical laws that allow for regularity of conditions and experience,

Only if the conditions which exist in organisms necessitate such.

I don't think science and Christianity need to be at odds with each other. Perhaps if more thought this way, and endeavored to understand both without abandoning either, then maybe more skeptical people would take Christianity as a serious possibility. Just some food for thought.

Some abandon Intelligent Design, some don't. Another reason for emphasis on the interpretation of texts is so that your interpretation of the data does not come into question. That's what a creator does- it creates and creates and creates and then creates some more. The intelligent mechanism and limits of adaptation are there for all to see.

 

[gluadys]

Apples have spirit?

(I know they can be used to make spirit but that's a whole 'nuther ball game.)

Actually, I agree with Anthony here. In fact I would go farther. I would not limit spiritual nature to what is alive, but extend it to all physical being alive or not.

Of course, that doesn't mean that apples have human spirit. There can be as much diversity in spiritual nature as in physical nature.

 

[gluadys]

6. The flood of Noah was a local flood, but still wiped out the vast majority of humanity, as humanity was concentrated in the region.

I agree with most of your post, but I question this statement. At what point in human history would the vast majority of humanity be concentrated in one region? Consider the following essay, based on archeological discoveries in many parts of the world:



OneDayinArchaeology


And that is about a traditional date for creation, while the traditional date for Noah's flood is about two millennia later.

Genesis does say that civilization preceded the flood; indeed it attributes the first city to Cain. But humanity was scattered all over the globe long prior to civilization.

 

[Old Seer]

I can't claim to know for certain how exactly God created the universe, but I think science, as well as scripture obviously, are our best places to look for an answer. I've come to think the following.

1. The universe is billions of years old, because the totallity of scientific knowledge confirms this.

2. The Big Bang did occur 13.7 billion years ago and this was the moment God created the heavens and the earth. Not all at once, but gradually over a long long period of time. Remember a day to God is as a thousand years to us, so cosmological ages can pass and be only a moment in the eyes of Almighty God.

3. Genesis is true but it is not to be interpreted strictly literally. The first few chapters are allegorical; real truth is revealed through stories that need not be historical. The truth is that God created the heavens and the Earth and created us in his image, ie with a spiritual nature. It makes a lot more sense for God to explain these things allegorically than strictly scientifically, especially considering the earliest audience of this story lacked scientific knowledge.

4. I think there was a literal Adam and Eve, the first Homo Sapiens to receive a spiritual nature directly from God. This was the birth of Humanity as we know it, supposing the dividing line between true humanity and animals is spiritual and not strictly genetic.

5. I would even go so far as to say that Genesis specifically references evolution with phrazes such as "let the earth bring forth" and "formed from the dust of the ground". Such language refutes the idea of organisms being created ex nihilo and suggests that we were created out of the earth. Evolution dovetails with this beautifully, which itself provides excellent support for the inspiration of Genesis.

6. The flood of Noah was a local flood, but still wiped out the vast majority of humanity, as humanity was concentrated in the region. I think were the bible refers to the "whole earth", "whole land" would perhaps be a better translation. I have no problem with the idea of a global flood, but there is simply no evidence to think there was one. As scripture and creation, both authored by God, cannot contradict, the two must both be true. This can only be the case if the flood was local but universal in effect, ie the destruction of humanity at that time.

7. Predation is a part of the natural order and yes, God designed it. I think he did so because predation is necessary for balanced ecosystems in a universe with physical laws such as ours, physical laws that allow for regularity of conditions and experience, and indeed life itself. Without predation, ecosystems would collapse and there would be far MORE death and suffering. Predation is, ultimately, much more benevolent than a planet of nothing but vegetarians.

I don't think science and Christianity need to be at odds with each other. Perhaps if more thought this way, and endeavored to understand both without abandoning either, then maybe more skeptical people would take Christianity as a serious possibility. Just some food for thought.

At Odds with each other. Why not look at biblical creation from a spiritual standpoint. If you look again you can see that creation is out of sequence. Being a physicist I can see that very plainly. There-fore =ti has to mean something else. If we live in a world of "the superficial" then it's material creation out of order. BUT. if you see creation as a spiritual/mental construction then you have a different story. Interpret earth as "soul" and waters as mind or mental, light as enlightenment----in that order of things. when you understand this ---you'll have it right. The tendency is- to interpret the book from this world minds eye---that has never worked.

[Alpha Guardianship: a team of explorers/adventurers, of which are also academics in engineering, psychiatry, archeology, physics, law, the medicines, and other fields. In 1985 we took on the bible as a project of study. Our studies were completed in the summer of 1992. We are making the effort to rely the findings to others. We are not Theists, Deists, Atheists, Christians, and are of no religion other then one we have encountered/found. We are voices calling in the wilderness.]

 

[lucaspa]

I would like to read discussions of how other Christians have thought about this debate. Serious and theological discussions only, please.

God created thru the processes we discover thru science. God created the universe by the Big Bang, galaxies, stars, and planets by gravity, life by chemistry, and the diversity of life by evolution.

By Christian doctrine, God sustains the universe. Every "natural" process depends on God in order to happen. A Law of Nature then is the rule and Law, according to which God resolved that certain Motions should always, that is, in all Cases be performed. Every Law does immediately depend upon the Will of God." Gravesande, Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, I, 2-3, 1726, quoted in CC Gillespie, Genesis and Geology, 1959.

Also by Christian doctrine, God has 2 books: scripture and Creation. When the 2 seem to conflict, then the first quote in my signature comes into play. God's Creation tells us how God created. The creation stories in Genesis provide theological truths, not a literal history.

On top of that, creationism is atheism in disguise. It is god-of-the-gaps theology which accepts as true the basic atheist statement of faith: natural = without God.

"There are profound biblical objections to such a "God-of-the-gaps," as this understanding of God's relation to the universe has come to be called. By "gap" it is meant that no member or members of the universe can be found to account for regularly occurring phenoma in nature. God is inserted in the gaps which could be occupied by members of the universe. This is theologically improper because God, as creator of the universe, is not a member of the universe. God can never properly be used in scientific accounts, which are formulated in terms of the relations between members of the universe, because that would reduce God to the status of a creature. According to a Christian conception of God as creator of a universe that is rational through and through, there are no missing relations between the members of nature. If, in our study of nature, we run into what seems to be an instance of a connection missing between members of nature, the Christian doctrine of creation implies that we should keep looking for one. ...But, according to the doctrine of creation, we are never to postulate God as the *immediate* cause of any *regular* [emphases in original] occurrence in nature. In time, a "God of the gaps" was seen to be bad science as well as bad theology. Science now is programamatically committed to a view of nature in which there are no gaps between members of the universe."
Diogenes Allen, Christian Belief in a Postmodern World, pp. 45-46.

 

[Mr.Waffles]

I would like to read discussions of how other Christians have thought about this debate. Serious and theological discussions only, please.

This issue is resolved once it is understood how the Darwinian prediction is false. From the fossil evidence to the genetic evidence, it is very clear that species do not "evolve" into entirely new species indistinguishable from its predecessors "given enough time" via the mechanisms proposed by the theory. Evolutionary theory dictates a reality of biological life that does not exist. The myth is that since we observe biological "commonality" with the fossils "arranged" in a specific order, that means "evolution" is true. There is no need to deny the commonality (which is the fact), just the idea that Darwinian evolution explains the commonality (which isn't fact).

 

[Mikecpking]

This issue is resolved once it is understood how the Darwinian prediction is false. From the fossil evidence to the genetic evidence, it is very clear that species do not "evolve" into entirely new species indistinguishable from its predecessors "given enough time" via the mechanisms proposed by the theory. Evolutionary theory dictates a reality of biological life that does not exist. The myth is that since we observe biological "commonality" with the fossils "arranged" in a specific order, that means "evolution" is true. There is no need to deny the commonality (which is the fact), just the idea that Darwinian evolution explains the commonality (which isn't fact).

5th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism - YouTube

 

[Mr.Waffles]

5th Foundational Falsehood of Creationism - YouTube

Way to quote an atheist youtube user who presents nothing but straw men and misconceptions for his arguments on religion. I know about AaronRa already.

Not to mention how the post iself is misplaced to begin with, as "creationism" isn't the topic of conversation.

 

[TasManOfGod]

I don't think science and Christianity need to be at odds with each other. Perhaps if more thought this way, and endeavored to understand both without abandoning either, then maybe more skeptical people would take Christianity as a serious possibility. Just some food for thought.

But it is food laced with poison. It seems that what is being said is that scientists should embrace a creationless religion while christians should embrace an evolution based science

 

[Mikecpking]

Way to quote an atheist youtube user who presents nothing but straw men and misconceptions for his arguments on religion. I know about AaronRa already.

Not to mention how the post iself is misplaced to begin with, as "creationism" isn't the topic of conversation.

Have look at the very first video and he menetions very clearly that it is a falsehood to equate acceptance of evolution with atheism and mentions Ken Miller (a Christian) who not only nbelieves in evolution, but even lectures in it.

I posted that video, because you were proporting Darwinism ( assuming you meant evolution) is false and I was using this video to correct you based on evidence. And AronRa presents it in quantity and quality.

 

[Mr.Waffles]

Have look at the very first video and he menetions very clearly that it is a falsehood to equate acceptance of evolution with atheism

You were not paying attention.

 

[Old Seer]

God created thru the processes we discover thru science. God created the universe by the Big Bang, galaxies, stars, and planets by gravity, life by chemistry, and the diversity of life by evolution.

By Christian doctrine, God sustains the universe. Every "natural" process depends on God in order to happen. A Law of Nature then is the rule and Law, according to which God resolved that certain Motions should always, that is, in all Cases be performed. Every Law does immediately depend upon the Will of God." Gravesande, Mathematical Elements of Natural Philosophy, I, 2-3, 1726, quoted in CC Gillespie, Genesis and Geology, 1959.

Also by Christian doctrine, God has 2 books: scripture and Creation. When the 2 seem to conflict, then the first quote in my signature comes into play. God's Creation tells us how God created. The creation stories in Genesis provide theological truths, not a literal history.

On top of that, creationism is atheism in disguise. It is god-of-the-gaps theology which accepts as true the basic atheist statement of faith: natural = without God.

"There are profound biblical objections to such a "God-of-the-gaps," as this understanding of God's relation to the universe has come to be called. By "gap" it is meant that no member or members of the universe can be found to account for regularly occurring phenoma in nature. God is inserted in the gaps which could be occupied by members of the universe. This is theologically improper because God, as creator of the universe, is not a member of the universe. God can never properly be used in scientific accounts, which are formulated in terms of the relations between members of the universe, because that would reduce God to the status of a creature. According to a Christian conception of God as creator of a universe that is rational through and through, there are no missing relations between the members of nature. If, in our study of nature, we run into what seems to be an instance of a connection missing between members of nature, the Christian doctrine of creation implies that we should keep looking for one. ...But, according to the doctrine of creation, we are never to postulate God as the *immediate* cause of any *regular* [emphases in original] occurrence in nature. In time, a "God of the gaps" was seen to be bad science as well as bad theology. Science now is programamatically committed to a view of nature in which there are no gaps between members of the universe."
Diogenes Allen, Christian Belief in a Postmodern World, pp. 45-46.

They're both wrong.
Biblical creation isn't a material creation, it's spiritual. Material wan't made in this sequence IE- first the light and then the sun. It's symbolism for spiritual things such as - Light=enlightenment, waters =though or state of mind, earth=soul, greater light=knowledge of being rightful, lesser light=knowldge of the dark side or evil-etc. Biblical creaton is the creation of a personage not a material universe. Christianity is about spiritual condition of one's self not about where material things came from. the evolutionist is wrong in that ---the study of the body or where it came from does not make one human. Human is a spiritual entity not a physical one. There-fore to say they are studying humanity is not so. The bod is material and that is the physical--the physical is still material and cannot be human. There's no such thing as a "human" body. Only one's personage can be human. Both are in the same mistake.

 

[gluadys]

They're both wrong.
Biblical creation isn't a material creation, it's spiritual. Material wan't made in this sequence IE- first the light and then the sun. It's symbolism for spiritual things such as - Light=enlightenment, waters =though or state of mind, earth=soul, greater light=knowledge of being rightful, lesser light=knowldge of the dark side or evil-etc. Biblical creaton is the creation of a personage not a material universe. Christianity is about spiritual condition of one's self not about where material things came from. the evolutionist is wrong in that ---the study of the body or where it came from does not make one human. Human is a spiritual entity not a physical one. There-fore to say they are studying humanity is not so. The bod is material and that is the physical--the physical is still material and cannot be human. There's no such thing as a "human" body. Only one's personage can be human. Both are in the same mistake.

Speaking of bad theology. At least for a Christian. One of the things that distinguished Christianity from the popular Platonism, neo-Platonism, Gnosticism, etc. of the Patristic period was the Christian affirmation that God created a material universe, that the material universe is inherently good, that Christ was conceived and born into a physical human body and was also resurrected bodily, and that the whole of the person (body as well as soul) and indeed the whole of the created universe (matter as well as spirit) is the object of redemption. A human personage is always embodied. Even in the resurrection.

Rejection of God's physical, material creation is not consistent with two millennia of Christian theology. No more than rejection of the spiritual aspects of creation would be. The affirmation of the Church has always been that God created all things "visible and invisible".

 

[Old Seer]

Speaking of bad theology. At least for a Christian. One of the things that distinguished Christianity from the popular Platonism, neo-Platonism, Gnosticism, etc. of the Patristic period was the Christian affirmation that God created a material universe, that the material universe is inherently good, that Christ was conceived and born into a physical human body and was also resurrected bodily, and that the whole of the person (body as well as soul) and indeed the whole of the created universe (matter as well as spirit) is the object of redemption. A human personage is always embodied. Even in the resurrection.

Rejection of God's physical, material creation is not consistent with two millennia of Christian theology. No more than rejection of the spiritual aspects of creation would be. The affirmation of the Church has always been that God created all things "visible and invisible".

Alpha Guardianship: a team of explorers/adventurers, of which are also academics in engineering, psychiatry, archeology, physics, law, the medicines, and other fields. In 1985 we took on the bible as a project of study. Our studies were completed in the summer of 1992. We are making the effort to rely the findings to others. We are not Theists, Deists, Atheists, Christians, but independent thinkers, and are of no religion other then one we have encountered/found.. We are voices calling in the wilderness.

Yer rowng. Christianity is about ones' own spiritual condition--not about material studies or adoring the physical. Material studies belong to another science. Christianity is not about the material sciences. Everyone has been deceived by Dark Age, Medieval interpretations and translations. Why is it that anything new that's been found is attributed to Satan or improper biblical understanding. The Pope and his minions have been claiming such since Europeans got a hold of the book. It's their way or the highway. There's a new Sheriff in town with (finally) the proper shootin irons and ammo. Christianity is about one's person not one's bod or where it came from. Bear in mind--the end times happen because Proper interpretaions arrive, and ruins conventional idea and thinking.

 

[gluadys]

Alpha Guardianship: a team of explorers/adventurers, of which are also academics in engineering, psychiatry, archeology, physics, law, the medicines, and other fields. In 1985 we took on the bible as a project of study. Our studies were completed in the summer of 1992. We are making the effort to rely the findings to others. We are not Theists, Deists, Atheists, Christians, but independent thinkers, and are of no religion other then one we have encountered/found.. We are voices calling in the wilderness.

Since Alpha Guardianship, whatever that is, is not Christian, I don't expect them to promote Christian theology.

Yer rowng. Christianity is about ones' own spiritual condition--not about material studies or adoring the physical. Material studies belong to another science.

I agree. Christianity is not about studying the material world. One doesn' t have to be a scientist or have an opinion on scientific matters to be a Christian. And I have never said one word about "adoring the physical". Don't put false words into my mouth.

However, though it is not about the material sciences, Christianity does have a theology about the material world and it is not a theology that denigrates it. Unlike the neo-Platonist, a Christian is not called to live "as if ashamed of having a body", nor does a Christian identify salvation with the soul's "escape" from the body. In Christian theology, the physical world is not a trap.

The physical world in all its complexity, beauty and fruitfulness is seen as God's gift to us, a gift entrusted to our care, given to provide for us and for us to enjoy as God does. And far from seeking to escape our bodies, we anticipate life in resurrected bodies.

Christianity is not about the material sciences.

True, but it is not about rejecting the material sciences either. Why should we not study the wonderful material creation God made to be our home? Have you ever noted that when Satan and all his host have been definitively done away with, the new world is inaugurated by the heavenly Jerusalem descending to earth? Why do you think we pray "Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

Everyone has been deceived by Dark Age, Medieval interpretations and translations. Why is it that anything new that's been found is attributed to Satan or improper biblical understanding. The Pope and his minions have been claiming such since Europeans got a hold of the book. It's their way or the highway. There's a new Sheriff in town with (finally) the proper shootin irons and ammo.

Yeah, conspiracy theories are a staple of anyone who has no real case to make.

Christianity is about one's person not one's bod or where it came from.

One's bod [sic] is an essential component of one's person. One is not a person without it.

That said, it is true that Christianity is not about the biological history of the human body. It is about being reconciled to God through our Lord Jesus Christ.


Now you may prefer the teachings of the Alpha Guardianship to the teachings of Christianity and that is your right and privilege. I do not ask (since they say they are not Christians) that they subscribe to Christian teaching. I just ask that non-Christian teaching not be promoted as if it were Christian teaching.

Since you are posting here, I assume you identify yourself as a Christian. And in that case, I would recommend studying Christian theology with Christians, not self-professed non-Christians.

 

[Old Seer]

Since Alpha Guardianship, whatever that is, is not Christian, I don't expect them to promote Christian theology.

Yer rowng. Christianity is about ones' own spiritual condition--not about material studies or adoring the physical. Material studies belong to another science.

I agree. Christianity is not about studying the material world. One doesn' t have to be a scientist or have an opinion on scientific matters to be a Christian. And I have never said one word about "adoring the physical". Don't put false words into my mouth.

However, though it is not about the material sciences, Christianity does have a theology about the material world and it is not a theology that denigrates it. Unlike the neo-Platonist, a Christian is not called to live "as if ashamed of having a body", nor does a Christian identify salvation with the soul's "escape" from the body. In Christian theology, the physical world is not a trap.

The physical world in all its complexity, beauty and fruitfulness is seen as God's gift to us, a gift entrusted to our care, given to provide for us and for us to enjoy as God does. And far from seeking to escape our bodies, we anticipate life in resurrected bodies.




True, but it is not about rejecting the material sciences either. Why should we not study the wonderful material creation God made to be our home? Have you ever noted that when Satan and all his host have been definitively done away with, the new world is inaugurated by the heavenly Jerusalem descending to earth? Why do you think we pray "Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven."




Yeah, conspiracy theories are a staple of anyone who has no real case to make.







One's bod [sic] is an essential component of one's person. One is not a person without it.

That said, it is true that Christianity is not about the biological history of the human body. It is about being reconciled to God through our Lord Jesus Christ.


Now you may prefer the teachings of the Alpha Guardianship to the teachings of Christianity and that is your right and privilege. I do not ask (since they say they are not Christians) that they subscribe to Christian teaching. I just ask that non-Christian teaching not be promoted as if it were Christian teaching.

Since you are posting here, I assume you identify yourself as a Christian. And in that case, I would recommend studying Christian theology with Christians, not self-professed non-Christians.

I see you are highly superficial. That's something proper Christian's aren't
There are no true Christians in the world today. Christianity became extinct before 100 Ad when it was taken over by authoritarians who tuened it back into Europeanism. There won't be any proper Christians until during the end times and have gone through a tribilation which is caused by the arrival of proper Christianity, You may think you're a Christian but we know better. Everyone today who claims to be a Christian is a victim of (as previously mentioned) of a 1800 year old European interpretation. We in our team have not gone through a tribulation as yet to decide if we want to be Christian or not. Some of us may have. That's what causes the end times---proper Christianity arrives. Evolution has no place in Christianity, as it is a study of material origin. Christianity doesn't deal with material construction. While a Christian may study these things the material knowledge remains outside the bounds of Christianity and unattached. One is not unrighteous in undertaking such studies. But, a Cristian has no place in arguing the point as evolution is of it's basis and Christianity of it's. If you recheck the teachings of the Apostles and JC you will find they teach things from the "beginning"-which that beginning is Creatuion from which righteous man is founded, such as -invisible things of Creation etc----that refers to creation as invisible, and the only thing invisible are spiritual things, thus rendering Creation as a non-material construction. You're not going to be a Christian until you put aside the superficila mentality of the which the man made world operates and depends on. "Human" is a spiritual enity not a physical body. There's no such thing as a human body. Whether you realize it or not you are a body worshiper, we know.from the word one speaks---by their fruits you will know then---he said.

 

[gluadys]

Since Alpha Guardianship, whatever that is, is not Christian, I don't expect them to promote Christian theology.

Yer rowng. Christianity is about ones' own spiritual condition--not about material studies or adoring the physical. Material studies belong to another science.

I see you are highly superficial. That's something proper Christian's aren't
There are no true Christians in the world today. Christianity became extinct before 100 Ad .

Well, if you are going to defame every Christian since the first century there is no reason to take you seriously at all.

 

[Old Seer]

Since Alpha Guardianship, whatever that is, is not Christian, I don't expect them to promote Christian theology.




Well, if you are going to defame every Christian since the first century there is no reason to take you seriously at all.

We're not defaming anyone. we're telling all --yer wrong. Your interpretations are made by dark age Europeans that simply adapted their ancient religions to the bible or vice -versa. We didn't maen to get off subject of this threas--so OK back to evolution. Christians (if they're proper) don't argue with material science. To argue material science as connected to Christianity doesn't work, as Christianity is about ones spiritual makeup. material is material and no matter who or what it's origin is not a matter of Christian process. Christianity and material are not linked, only within the fact that one has a material body, but the body is not the person. Christianity is about "what" manner of person one is. Look again at an apostles input "first there was the physical and then the spiritual". That means the material came first. The book only begins "after" material was formed, and then deals only with the spiritual as man. There-fore then- Biblical Creation is of a spiritual nature not material. That's why it doesn't make sense if interpreted as material. Light can't come before the sun. Our rule of thumb on these matters is--if it doesn't make sense materially then it's spiritual. Now--you have to understand yourself. You and all other (as we here) are mentally made in accordance with State mandates-that's why we werre forced to go to school--to be n=made into government specifications for commercial purposes. You are here to make(gather) m$ney, and the more you collect the more you pay taxes so the gov can do all those wonderful materialistic things that keep you materialistic and superficial--the system depends on it. That's to say---we were all made according to this world's minds eye, and that eye is not Christianity-why do you suppose these wars take place--over material gatherings, right. There's nothing you can do about it except change to what a christian is supposed to be and then----the systems fail. How else do you think the end time can take place. It happens because people leave civilization behind and give up materialism. People are dieing endlessly because of the lust for material goodies. AND, any government will force you if need be onto a battle field for that purpose. Civilization is man's idea not the creators, and cannot be fixed as can be seen by history. You need to do some real looking as we did. You can bet the government doesn't like us.

 

[gluadys]

We're not defaming anyone. we're telling all --yer wrong.

Sounds like the same thing to me. It is very hubristic to think no one got it right for nearly 2,000 years until some wonder-wizard came along and cleared everything up.

And what does it say about the ministry of the Holy Spirit to think that there was not one person who knew Christ and followed him for two millennia?

We didn't maen to get off subject of this threas--so OK back to evolution. Christians (if they're proper) don't argue with material science.

Right. Material science, properly done, gives us good information about the material world and there is no point arguing with that. After all, to the extent that science is right about the material world, it is presenting us with the wonders of God's creation. And God's creation is not wrong about itself. It is to marvel at and to praise God for, even to join in with the praise of the creation itself. For we ourselves are also part of the same material creation--so what science discovers about God's world is important to understanding ourselves, not just oak trees or cuttlefish or distant stars.

One thing science has discovered about the material world is the process of evolution. No point arguing about it. It's just one thing more we know about the creation. It doesn't really have anything to say about our faith, one way or another. No doctrine of Christianity stands or falls on the basis of evolutionary science.

To argue material science as connected to Christianity doesn't work, as Christianity is about ones spiritual makeup.

Depends on what you mean by that. If you mean it is about being reconciled to our Creator from whom we have been alienated by sin--ok. If you mean something different, then clarify.

Christianity and material are not linked, only within the fact that one has a material body, but the body is not the person.

Right, the body is not the person, or a corpse would be a person. The spirit is not the person either. The person is the spirit-animated body--a living being. The body is not the person, but the person doesn't exist without the body. Nor does the person exist without the indwelling spirit.

Christianity is about "what" manner of person one is. Look again at an apostles input "first there was the physical and then the spiritual".

Citation? I don't recognize that phrasing. Which apostle?
Is not God, who is entirely spiritual, prior to matter? The existence of matter has a beginning; God is eternal.

That means the material came first. The book only begins "after" material was formed, and then deals only with the spiritual as man.

Which book? I don't know any book of the Bible which supports a human being spirit only.

There-fore then- Biblical Creation is of a spiritual nature not material.

Absolutely not! This is one of the bases of the early Church's struggle against Gnostic misinterpretations of Christianity. The material world is God's creation.

Gnostics (and other dualists) thought of matter as eternal and uncreated. They also thought of it being separated from God--at the opposite end of a spectrum from the pure Spirit of God to the absolute non-spirit of brute matter. Salvation for humans was seen as a process of "escaping" from matter to return to God.

By contrast, the Bible does not depict matter as eternal. It is created. The material world has a beginning. It was made by God. And it is not alienated from God. It is, in God's sight, "very good". We have no calling to "escape" matter in order to be united to God. God's intention is to bring us, redeemed body and redeemed soul together, into a loving relationship with him. And all of the material creation with us!

That's why it doesn't make sense if interpreted as material. Light can't come before the sun. Our rule of thumb on these matters is--if it doesn't make sense materially then it's spiritual. Now--you have to understand yourself. You and all other (as we here) are mentally made in accordance with State mandates-that's why we werre forced to go to school--to be n=made into government specifications for commercial purposes. You are here to make(gather) m$ney, and the more you collect the more you pay taxes so the gov can do all those wonderful materialistic things that keep you materialistic and superficial--the system depends on it.

Hey, I am with you in fighting materialism. May I suggest some good reading on this subject? Start with a short book by Brian McLaren called Everything Must Change. What you just described is what he calls the Suicide Machine. And it is true, we are all caught up in the Suicide Machine. It destroys us (body and soul), destroys our communities, destroys God's beloved material creation. It is the antithesis of a biblical relation to the material world. Another good read along the same lines is The Powers that Be by Walter Wink. This is a one-volume summary of a more lengthy three-volume work in which he analyses everything the New Testament has to say about the powers and principalities of this world which are at war with God.

There are a lot of other Christians deeply concerned by the forces of materialism and consumerism that have taken over the world. So you are in good company there. You might check out phrases like "emerging church" "theology of empire" "integrity of creation/creation care/creation-centred spirituality".

One doesn't need to undermine Christian teaching about the material world or our human nature to understand the dangerous power of materialism and the need to resist it.

People are dieing endlessly because of the lust for material goodies. AND, any government will force you if need be onto a battle field for that purpose.

True, too true.

btw, what have you read by anarchists? Some of your ideas seem to have an affinity with that line of thought. I have just finished reading Conquest of Bread by Kropotkin, one of the original shapers of the anarchist vision. I am ambiguous about anarchism, myself. Don't like libertarian anarchism at all: a recipe for plutocracy IMO. But communal anarchism, a la Kropotkin, has its attractions. It was a form of communal anarchism which was practiced in the first church in Jerusalem under the guidance of the apostles. I wonder if in God's kingdom we will have something like communal anarchism. I don't know that it can be achieved apart from God. It seems too utopian for human effort alone.

Civilization is man's idea not the creators, and cannot be fixed as can be seen by history. You need to do some real looking as we did. You can bet the government doesn't like us.

Any church the government likes has lost its credentials as Christian. We follow the crucified one and we should be expecting persecution ourselves. Including persecution from the religious authorities whom the government does like! Just as Jesus did.

When religion becomes allied with the state, it becomes the servant of the state and the opium of the people, not the servant of God who casts down the mighty from their thrones and lifts up those of low degree.

One reason I don't support the Religious Right. Hmmm! We should probably be moving this discussion to the social justice forum. We are a long way from science, but deep into biblical hermeneutics as they apply to politics and economics.