How would a TE look forward?

[juvenissun]

I think TE would be put at a very awkward position when formulate the end-time prophecy with the spirit (or doctrine) of evolution.

This is another symptom that suggests the theology of TE is wrong.

 

[gluadys]

I think TE would be put at a very awkward position when formulate the end-time prophecy with the spirit (or doctrine) of evolution.

This is another symptom that suggests the theology of TE is wrong.

Rather another indication that you have no comprehension of TE.

Why would one even attempt to formulate eschatology with the spirit (or doctrine) of evolution. ? Evolution is not a theological category.

 

[Mallon]

Evolution is a scientific theory, and is not meant to be used to used as a means of discerning Christian eschatology, juvie. It would be like using the theory of gravity to do the same.

Seriously, juvie. You're crazy.

 

[crawfish]

Why?

 

[Melethiel]

Evolution is science, not theology. The two have little relationship with each other.
Science is based on observing the natural world.
Theology is based on Scripture.

Speaking for myself, eschatology is very simple..."[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end." "[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come."[/FONT]

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Is it just me or does this make no sense???

Let's replace some words and see if it makes sense...

I think car enthusiast would be put at a very awkward position when formulate the end-time prophecy with the spirit (or doctrine) of internal combustion.

This is another symptom that suggests the theology of car enthusiast is wrong.

Nope, let's try again...

I think NASCAR fan would be put at a very awkward position when formulate the end-time prophecy with the spirit (or doctrine) of go really fast.

This is another symptom that suggests the theology of NASCAR fan is wrong.

Nope, still doesn't make sense...

I think stamp collector would be put at a very awkward position when formulate the end-time prophecy with the spirit (or doctrine) of postage.

This is another symptom that suggests the theology of stamp collector is wrong.

To quote Marlin dad from "Finding Nemo"

"It's like he's trying to speak to me, I know it. Look, you're really cute, but I can't understand what you're saying. Say the first thing again."

 

[Mallon]

Just so we're clear, the Bible is a book of theology. And we evolutionary creationists, as Christians, look to it for our theology (including information about the end-times).
The Bible is not a book of science. Therefore, we do not look to it when we try to figure out how old the earth is or how life diversifies. So just because we may subscribe to what science currently has to say about evolution, doesn't mean our theology is somehow haphazard or un-biblical.

 

[juvenissun]

Evolution is science, not theology. The two have little relationship with each other.
Science is based on observing the natural world.
Theology is based on Scripture.

Speaking for myself, eschatology is very simple..."[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]He shall come again with glory to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end." "[/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come."[/FONT]

So, all (so far) of you think evolution is not a part of theology.

Did I hear that TE said: God uses evolution to create? To me, that is not only a perfect doctrine of theology, but is an extremely critical one.
According to the model, evolution is slow and long. This concept is in extreme contrast with everything said in end-time prophecies. So, the implication is that the concept of evolution is extremely disharmonious with the rest of the Christian theology. If one had evolution in mind as a way of God's creation, then the message of end-time is very very odd. It would be like the strings snapped all at once during a guitar concert.

So, I insist that evolution and theology have to be integrated. TE is cheating itself by separating the two.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

So, all (so far) of you think evolution is not a part of theology.

Did I hear that TE said: God uses evolution to create? To me, that is not only a perfect doctrine of theology, but is an extremely critical one.
According to the model, evolution is slow and long. This concept is in extreme contrast with everything said in end-time prophecies. So, the implication is that the concept of evolution is extremely disharmonious with the rest of the Christian theology. If one had evolution in mind as a way of God's creation, then the message of end-time is very very odd. It would be like the strings snapped all at once during a guitar concert.

So, I insist that evolution and theology have to be integrated. TE is cheating itself by separating the two.

Okay... So instead of researching a theology to see what it actually states you just make up a lie about said theology and then accuse us of believing the lie you just made up???

Sounds fun! Let me try... I do not accept creationism because they believe that a unicorn farted the universe into existence. Creationists must now convince me that unicorn farting is the proper theology or else they are wrong.

So Juv, what about unicorn farts?

What? You do not believe in unicorn farts? I just made that up? My lying about your beliefs do not make your beliefs wrong?

Wow, maybe that is why God asked us not to lie about each other...

 

[juvenissun]

Okay... So instead of researching a theology to see what it actually states you just make up a lie about said theology and then accuse us of believing the lie you just made up???

Sounds fun! Let me try... I do not accept creationism because they believe that a unicorn farted the universe into existence. Creationists must now convince me that unicorn farting is the proper theology or else they are wrong.

So Juv, what about unicorn farts?

What? You do not believe in unicorn farts? I just made that up? My lying about your beliefs do not make your beliefs wrong?

Wow, maybe that is why God asked us not to lie about each other...

Very bad analogy. Evolution is certainly much better than unicorn farts. Even you do not agree with creation, you do not have to insult evolution like that.

 

[metherion]

Did I hear that TE said: God uses evolution to create? To me, that is not only a perfect doctrine of theology, but is an extremely critical one.
According to the model, evolution is slow and long. This concept is in extreme contrast with everything said in end-time prophecies. So, the implication is that the concept of evolution is extremely disharmonious with the rest of the Christian theology. If one had evolution in mind as a way of God's creation, then the message of end-time is very very odd. It would be like the strings snapped all at once during a guitar concert.

If I understand what you said correctly, juvenissun, you are trying to say that since things took a long time to come into being, it CAN"T be right that they can end quickly. But we need to take a look at that.

How long did it take to make and compile the library of Alexandria? And much shorter did that fire that destroyed it take?

How long did it take to erect the Twin Towers of the WTC? And they crumbled in a few hours.

How long did it take to make the first nuclear bomb? And how long to explode it?

How many thousands of years to make a star? How many billions of years can it burn? And how long does it take to go nova? Well, you may not accept an old universe, but for those of us who do, we get the point.

Or even for the ending of something that ISN"T destroyed. How long does it take to set up a football game? Arrange the schedule, sell the tickets, move the teams, move the refs, let the fans get there, transport the food the vendors will sell, play the game? And yet it all ends in a one or two second whistle blow once the clock runs out.

No, even in things where God is not as directly involved as He is in blatant miracles like curing the blind (God is of course involved in everything) it takes far less time to destroy or end something than it does to set it up. So the idea that because the universe as it is took billions of years to create means it can't end in the blink of an eye of nonsensical at best. And if God is involved, anything is possible. He's GOD for crying out loud.

Metherion

 

[juvenissun]

If I understand what you said correctly, juvenissun, you are trying to say that since things took a long time to come into being, it CAN"T be right that they can end quickly. But we need to take a look at that.

How long did it take to make and compile the library of Alexandria? And much shorter did that fire that destroyed it take?

How long did it take to erect the Twin Towers of the WTC? And they crumbled in a few hours.

How long did it take to make the first nuclear bomb? And how long to explode it?

Very good examples. I should thank you for giving more demonstrations.

I did not say it "can't" end abruptly. I say IF it does, it would be very odd.
All your three examples illustrated that nature.

But, if it were NOT evolution but were creation, then there would be NOTHING odd. Would that be a much better theology?

 

[Joykins]

This book presents an eschatology this TE can get behind.

 

[juvenissun]

This book presents an eschatology this TE can get behind.

How does it relate the TE to the Rapture?
Hope you can introduce it well enough so I would buy it.

 

[theFijian]

Is it just me or does this make no sense???

It's not just you.

So juve, you'll have to explain to me what impact being a TE has on my Amillenialism. I look forward to your reply.

 

[juvenissun]

It's not just you.

So juve, you'll have to explain to me what impact being a TE has on my Amillenialism. I look forward to your reply.

I have no idea. That is why I don't think TE make a sense in theology.

If I were a TE, and I firmly believe that it took so much time and complicate processes to bring me into existence, then I would have very very hard time to believe that this processes would abruptly end in the next few hundred years. I would expect that human continues to evolve, at least for another few tens of millions of years. If the end-time were set at that time, then it would make a little sense. But even TE would have hard time to accept this scenario, right?

 

[stumpjumper]

Aren't we, as Christians, proclaiming a belief in a coming "new heavens and a new earth"?

It isn't already created at least not on this earth right now, no?

Sounds like a progressive creation process to me in many ways...

 

[stumpjumper]

So, I insist that evolution and theology have to be integrated. TE is cheating itself by separating the two.

Well not all TE's do, though. Some do and they are certainly justified in not speculating about aspects that are greater than that which we can comprehend. At the most basic level, all a TE happens to be is a theist who accepts the scientific theory of evolution.

However, though, some theists do speculate about things that are beyond our full comprehension. There are process theists out there that would have a good many things about eschatology to say to your OP. John Haught in his God After Darwin did indeed touch upon eschatology as well as my personal favorite Father Rahner in many of his writings.

You could also look up Tielhard De Chardin and his Omega Point too That's pretty much straight up eschatology as well...

 

[Joykins]

How does it relate the TE to the Rapture?
Hope you can introduce it well enough so I would buy it.

It doesn't--but it does present the ecological aspects of the New Heaven and New Earth in a way I find compelling and presents no conflict with TE.

 

[shernren]

I'm another person who doesn't get the argument. As an avid gamer it takes me about half an hour (if I'm teching) to build up a massive armada in Starcraft or Total Annihilation. It then takes me about a minute or two to wipe all the AIs out, if I've done it right. Slow processes often build up to catastrophically rapid conclusions. (Just ask anyone who's ever had a breakup for another demonstration of the same.)