Irrantionality of Creationism

[ProDeoEtVeritate]

Since I have read many posts under the Origins Theology threads and post on some it seems that many people are trying to make 'sense' out of how the universe and life came to be. As I have posted on one thread: God does not make sense.

1Co 1:25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

We can try all we want to figure God out and try to make Him look reasonable, but we can't. We cannot understand God and His ways.

Isa 55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD.

Remember the account of Jericho's walls falling down. It doesn't make sense for God to tell Israel to walk around Jericho as the way to defeat the city. However, that's want won the victory.


Miracles also defy reason and science. Miracles don't make sense and yet God uses miracles for His purpose and glory. Remember God created science and he can break the rules of science whenever He so chooses.


What God wants from us is obedience and faith in Him. Obedience in what He tells us to do. And faith that He is faithful and true and all that is in His Word, the scriptures, is completely true.

So since God is irrational so is creationism.
I would rather be irrational and believe God than to be rational and be without salvation.

 

[WAB]

Since I have read many posts under the Origins Theology threads and post on some it seems that many people are trying to make 'sense' out of how the universe and life came to be. As I have posted on one thread: God does not make sense.





We can try all we want to figure God out and try to make Him look reasonable, but we can't. We cannot understand God and His ways.





Remember the account of Jericho's walls falling down. It doesn't make sense for God to tell Israel to walk around Jericho as the way to defeat the city. However, that's want won the victory.


Miracles also defy reason and science. Miracles don't make sense and yet God uses miracles for His purpose and glory. Remember God created science and he can break the rules of science whenever He so chooses.


What God wants from us is obedience and faith in Him. Obedience in what He tells us to do. And faith that He is faithful and true and all that is in His Word, the scriptures, is completely true.

So since God is irrational so is creationism.
I would rather be irrational and believe God than to be rational and be without salvation.

Generally agree with this post; with the observation that just as genuine miracles are rare, so is God's departure from what mankind might judge to be rational.

In addition, in the two references where the KJV (which I use regularly) mentions "science" a better rendition would be as Young's Literal has it: "O Timmotheus, the thing entrusted guard thou, avoiding the profane vain words and opposition of the falsely-named knowledge..." (1 Tim. 6:20)

Or... the O.T. ref. in Daniel 1:4... "...youths without blemish, of good appearance and skillful in all wisdom, endowed with knowledge, understanding learning, and competent to stand in the king's palace..." (from the ESV).

No doubt some will object to using any other version than the KJV, but the meaning is the same. The very first words from Webster's definition of "science"...are... "...having knowledge..."

What God through Paul was objecting to was that which (in his day and in ours), was being presented by the "elite" ones as being the last word in science/knowledge, but was in reality false.

 

[chilehed]

God is supremely rational, and it is supremely rational to believe in him.

 

[LewisWildermuth]

Since I have read many posts under the Origins Theology threads and post on some it seems that many people are trying to make 'sense' out of how the universe and life came to be. As I have posted on one thread: God does not make sense.

We can try all we want to figure God out and try to make Him look reasonable, but we can't. We cannot understand God and His ways.

Remember the account of Jericho's walls falling down. It doesn't make sense for God to tell Israel to walk around Jericho as the way to defeat the city. However, that's want won the victory.

Miracles also defy reason and science. Miracles don't make sense and yet God uses miracles for His purpose and glory. Remember God created science and he can break the rules of science whenever He so chooses.

What God wants from us is obedience and faith in Him. Obedience in what He tells us to do. And faith that He is faithful and true and all that is in His Word, the scriptures, is completely true.

So since God is irrational so is creationism.
I would rather be irrational and believe God than to be rational and be without salvation.

Hmmm... So the more irrational the belief the closer one is to God? Good news for the geocentrists and flat-earthers I guess. Not to mention the sociopaths, the insane, and the mass murderers.

And by your last sentence, I take it you believe the TE's here are without salvation?

 

[sampson x]

Hmmm... So the more irrational the belief the closer one is to God? Good news for the geocentrists and flat-earthers I guess. Not to mention the sociopaths, the insane, and the mass murderers.

And by your last sentence, I take it you believe the TE's here are without salvation?

A little harsh aren't we?

I think he's just trying to say in a nice way that God is just plain smarter than us.

In the end, everything God has done is rational, though perhaps not humanly. So, it doesn't matter whether God created the world directly or with evolution, what matters is that we believe God could have done it either way because even if it doesn't seem rational to us, it is in God's eyes.

My view: Origins theology, while interesting and debatable, is really not that important. Does it really matter whether God made us directly or through evolution? Does that have any direct impact on our lives today? Either way, we ended up where we are today, so it doesn't really matter. No matter which way he did it, whether humanly ratjional or not, God knew what he was doing and it was the right thing to be done.

 

[chaoschristian]

My view: Origins theology, while interesting and debatable, is really not that important. Does it really matter whether God made us directly or through evolution? Does that have any direct impact on our lives today? Either way, we ended up where we are today, so it doesn't really matter. No matter which way he did it, whether humanly ratjional or not, God knew what he was doing and it was the right thing to be done.

You are correct: one's POV on origins and Creation has no bearing on one's salvation.

However, we debate because there are those who would assert that one's POV on origins and Creation does have a direct bearing on salvation. There are also those who argue that if one does not hold strict adhearance to one particular interpretation of scriptural and Creational revelation then one's salvation is in question. We debate to refute those assertions.

And there is a real world impact beyond the data stream of this internet discussion forum, and I cite the Dover, PA situation as a prime example of what can go wrong when bad science, misguided devotion and political power all come together in corruption.

So again, you are right. All Christians are Creationists, and Creation is a revelation of His Will, Truth and Power, Majesty and Mystery. But not all Christians are creationists, and for those of us who are not we debate to assert and defend our POVs.

 

[depthdeception]

Since I have read many posts under the Origins Theology threads and post on some it seems that many people are trying to make 'sense' out of how the universe and life came to be. As I have posted on one thread: God does not make sense.

We can try all we want to figure God out and try to make Him look reasonable, but we can't. We cannot understand God and His ways.

Remember the account of Jericho's walls falling down. It doesn't make sense for God to tell Israel to walk around Jericho as the way to defeat the city. However, that's want won the victory.

Miracles also defy reason and science. Miracles don't make sense and yet God uses miracles for His purpose and glory. Remember God created science and he can break the rules of science whenever He so chooses.

What God wants from us is obedience and faith in Him. Obedience in what He tells us to do. And faith that He is faithful and true and all that is in His Word, the scriptures, is completely true.

So since God is irrational so is creationism.
I would rather be irrational and believe God than to be rational and be without salvation.

I don't think any TE's would deny that miracles are outside of the boundaries of science. But that is exactly the point: If one believes that miracles provide the explanation for the mechanism of creation, then one has effectively precluded oneself from speaking about "science." Therefore, creationism cannot, ultimately, be an rebuttal to evolutionary theory and big bang cosmology, as each is speaking about entirely different categories.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

God can be understood. He made us in His image and likeness. If we understand ourselves properly, we can understand God. Instead of trying to figure out the 'who' of God, we should investigate the 'why' of God, then the who will become clear. Then, and only then will we understand anything about God. Example: If you can figure out why Eve was created from Adam's rib you'll have a start, or exactly why 'sin' came into being, or why God allowed Satan to tempt Eve. The 'rationality' of anything is that as mysterious and confusing it may be there is a REASON for it. That is the WHY that most of Christianity is ignorant of. Most focus on the who, what , when, and where of things. Discover why.

oldwiseguy

 

[shernren]

It's scary to have to say the same thing twice.

I wonder if Christians can afford to simply throw out 1 Corinthians 1-2 as proof texts every time the world starts throwing brickbats and insults. "Gee, we're being laughed at, it's because the world is going to hell and we're not!" What I always say in response is that sometimes the world laughs because we're Christian, and sometimes the world laughs because we're plain silly.

Let's examine the context in which Paul writes 1 Corinthians 1 and 2. In 1 Cor 2, he says that he first came to them "in weakness and in trembling". In 1 Cor 1, he talks about how the cross is both repulsive to the Jews and the Greeks. Plug this into the historical context of his first coming to Corinth. What had happened to cause him to go "in weakness and in trembling"? Does that sound like the first thing that comes to mind when we think of Paul, the fearless missionary?

In Acts 17 we find that prior to Corinth, Paul had been in Athens where he debated at length with the Greek philosophers. Then when he first came to Corinth, he was rejected by the Jews of the synagogue. He reached such a low point that God had to appear to him to remind him to not be afraid (18:9), and this is probably what is meant by Paul's "fear and trembling" upon meeting the Corinthians and in coming to them with "nothing but Jesus crucified".

What I gain from this is that we can only claim that people are laughing at us for being Christian, when we have done all we can to make sure that we are not being silly. This is in contrast to some people's approach who say at the first rebuke "This is the foolishness of the cross!" and plow ahead even if the objections are legitimate. When Paul said "this is the foolishness of the cross to the world which is perishing" he said this at the end of a lengthy and certainly sound discourse with the most intellectual of the Jews and the Greeks and failing to win them unanimously. He did not draw back and say "of course they don't understand me, they're perishing!" after a simple initial presentation with initial resistance - he did this after full-blown battles strong enough to leave the Apostle to the Gentiles in "fear and trembling".

And be careful about quoting Scripture ... 1 Cor 1:19 is itself a quote of Isaiah 29:14, which refers to the destruction of wisdom and intelligence not among the people of the world but among God's own people. We must be careful that what we ourselves say is solid before turning the flamethrowers on the world.

 

[FreezBee]

I wonder if Christians can afford to simply throw out 1 Corinthians 1-2 as proof texts every time the world starts throwing brickbats and insults. "Gee, we're being laughed at, it's because the world is going to hell and we're not!" What I always say in response is that sometimes the world laughs because we're Christian, and sometimes the world laughs because we're plain silly.

....

Well said, shernren


As for the OP:

What God wants from us is obedience and faith in Him. Obedience in what He tells us to do. And faith that He is faithful and true and all that is in His Word, the scriptures, is completely true.

So since God is irrational so is creationism.
I would rather be irrational and believe God than to be rational and be without salvation.

The Word of God is Jesus - and if you really want to go with Scriptures, try reading the Book of Job and then ask you, if that teaches us that God is irrational


- FreezBee

 

[ProDeoEtVeritate]

The Word of God is Jesus - and if you really want to go with Scriptures

True, Jesus is the Word become flesh, but don't use "The Word of God is Jesus" as an excuse for not believing of following God's Word (the Bible). If we don't follow the Word of God we open ourselves up to false doctrines and cult like beliefs.

 

[sampson x]

God can be understood. He made us in His image and likeness. If we understand ourselves properly, we can understand God. Instead of trying to figure out the 'who' of God, we should investigate the 'why' of God, then the who will become clear. Then, and only then will we understand anything about God. Example: If you can figure out why Eve was created from Adam's rib you'll have a start, or exactly why 'sin' came into being, or why God allowed Satan to tempt Eve. The 'rationality' of anything is that as mysterious and confusing it may be there is a REASON for it. That is the WHY that most of Christianity is ignorant of. Most focus on the who, what , when, and where of things. Discover why.

oldwiseguy

I'm not an authority on the Bible or Theology, but I have some ideas...

First, I do believe that Humans were created in the likeness of God, it even says so in the Bible. But, I also believe that because of the fall, humans were some seriously tainted. Notice how Adam and Eve could talk and interact with God freely before the fall, but not so easily afterwards. So, perhaps we could have understood God before the fall, but now we cannot, at least not in the sense I'm getting you're getting at.

But, interesting point. WHY is important, though almost always the hardest to answer (especially on Math tests when you've already shown all your work and put an answer down and then it asks you why you got the answer you did...off subject). Why cannot be answered directly like other questions. Therefore, we stay away from it.

 

[FreezBee]

True, Jesus is the Word become flesh, but don't use "The Word of God is Jesus" as an excuse for not believing of following God's Word (the Bible). If we don't follow the Word of God we open ourselves up to false doctrines and cult like beliefs.

Such as irrationalism and creationism?

- FreezBee

 

[ProDeoEtVeritate]

Such as irrationalism and creationism?

- FreezBee

Tisk! Tisk! So you are following your own "truth". Welcome to the cult of FreezBee!

 

[Willtor]

Tisk! Tisk! So you are following your own "truth". Welcome to the cult of FreezBee!

I'll support FreezBee's statement about Christ. Jesus is my "truth." If the Bible ever takes the place of Christ in your understanding, be very concerned. You may not be able to see the difference, as it works itself out in Philosophy, Theology, and Science, but the difference is there.

 

[ProDeoEtVeritate]

I'll support FreezBee's statement about Christ. Jesus is my "truth." If the Bible ever takes the place of Christ in your understanding, be very concerned. You may not be able to see the difference, as it works itself out in Philosophy, Theology, and Science, but the difference is there.

THere is no difference. Jesus fulfilled the Law and OT prophecy. And without Jesus there is no NT. We can only know Jesus through the Bible and the Holy Spirit illuminiating that Scripture. To not believe the bible is heresy and blasphemy. You can't have Jesus without the scriptures.

If you don't believe the scriptures then you don't believe in the One and Only True God.

 

[Willtor]

THere is no difference. Jesus fulfilled the Law and OT prophecy. And without Jesus there is no NT. We can only know Jesus through the Bible and the Holy Spirit illuminiating that Scripture. To not believe the bible is heresy and blasphemy. You can't have Jesus without the scriptures.

It is true that without Jesus there would not be a New Testament. As to whether we can only know Jesus through the Bible, is that how Paul came to Christ? How about the Christians who were born, lived, and died (young) between the Ascension and the writing of the first of the New Testament books?

If you don't believe the scriptures then you don't believe in the One and Only True God.

This might be true. I'd have to think about it, more. At any rate, it doesn't put the Scriptures on the same level as Christ.

 

[chaoschristian]

We can only know Jesus through the Bible and the Holy Spirit illuminiating that Scripture.

False. There is no place in scripture, tradition or orthodox theology where this is stated, implied or understood. It's not even in the Nicene Creed. Belief in Christ comes through grace sustained faith - alone. While scripture can be one means through which one encounters that saving grace, it is not necessary for such an encounter.

To not believe the bible is heresy and blasphemy.

Orthodox Christianity presumes that scripture is divinely inspired. We know that we can trust that the truth, will and character of God will be revealed by scripture. Does that necessarily mean that the only faithful interpretation of scripture is an indicative one?

You can't have Jesus without the scriptures.

{EDIT: In light of Mark's Mod warning I'm modifying this statement to say: "This falls outside of an orthodox understanding of Christianity"}{Also note I never delete anything out of my posts, since I think that's a dishonest practice.}

While not blashemy per se, this is heresy, as it falls outside of an orthodox understanding of Christianity. Funny, coming from one who so willingly throws these words around.

If you don't believe the scriptures then you don't believe in the One and Only True God.

This statement is interesting, because it is both true and false.

It is true, because once you've encountered scripture as a Christian you will know that it is a revelation of God. To reject scripture, writ large, after the fact would, I think, equate to a rejection of God. This is how I would look at this statement in its indicative sense.

It is false, because what it implies is that the only way to understand that belief is the way that the poster understands that belief. This of course is patently untrue. This is how I would look at this statement in its connotative sense.

 

[KerrMetric]

THere is no difference. Jesus fulfilled the Law and OT prophecy. And without Jesus there is no NT. We can only know Jesus through the Bible and the Holy Spirit illuminiating that Scripture. To not believe the bible is heresy and blasphemy. You can't have Jesus without the scriptures.

If you don't believe the scriptures then you don't believe in the One and Only True God.

This is heretical. Check your faith icon I feel it is incorrect.

 

[mark kennedy]

MOD HAT ON​

Would anyone like to guess why this is the number one rule? It's proably because it is the number one rule violation. Calling one another heretics is not allowed on here or in any of the other forums for that matter. It is especially bad when this kind of thing is being posted in not only a Christians only section, but a theology forum. Pay particular attention to the bolded area:

Forum Rule 1


Rule No. 1 - No "Flaming"
1.1 You may discuss another individual's beliefs or religious organization but you will not harass, insult, belittle, threaten, defame or flame the individual (member or non-member) as this is considered personal (ad hominem) attacks in posts, PMs and any other communication within the site. This includes, but is not limited to:
a. Directly calling another member “cultist”, “heretic” or “bigot” as these are personal attacks and are not conducive to civil discussion.
b. Calling famous individuals derogatory names (unless it is a well-known nickname) as this may be considered defamation.
1.2 You will not directly call another member or his or her religious organization a “cult”, “heretic”, “demonic” or “satanic” but you may discuss doctrines, teachings, practices or writings of other religious organizations as long as empirical evidence is provided.
1.3 You will only post negative statements about another individual’s belief or religious organization (including non-Christian religions) with objective evidence provided. Members are allowed to say “The doctrines X church is false because of Y scriptures and Z other relevant evidence”.
1.4 You will not misquote another member regardless of context.
1.5You will not directly state or otherwise imply that another member is not a Christian if he or she falls under Rule 6.5 and 6.6 and he or she does not have a hidden faith icon without providing substantiation from scripture or doctrine or historic church writtings.​

If I see this again there will be action taken.

MOD HAT OFF​