Is Evolution A Lie?

[Celtic D]

Most if not all of your points have been addressed in this thread and the other you allude to, but is there really any need to start confusion by quoting between threads

As for discussing controvertial subjects, I don't think a discussion would get very far if we discussed the weather where as this has now reached 200 posts and sparked some life in this part of the board - that was not my aim by the way - I do have an "interest" in the topics or I wouldn't start the threads

And contrary to the belief of some I do enjoy discussing with you guys - I really do not have an issue with people who hold a creationist stance, there are bigger fish to fry out there, on issues that we all agree on

 

[artybloke]

If it was inspired why are there scientific mistakes?

Because:

a) it's not a science book

b) verbal inspiration is just a dogma of the fundamentalist wing of the church and the bible neither teaches nor requires it

c) sorry, you'll have to deal with the fact that the facts don't fit the accounts in Genesis; it's your problem not mine

d) truth can be expressed as easily through symbolic, poetic accounts as through factual accounts

e) it really is your problem you know. All the rest of us can see that the Genesis accounts don't fit the facts but we're not tied to the sinking ship of verbal inspiration as you are

 

[ianb321red]

there are bigger fish to fry out there, on issues that we all agree on

I agree! Amen to that

 

[Nabobalis]

I agree! Amen to that

Prefer my fish battered

 

[lismore]

Some of the evolutionary ideas like survival of the fittest are when I think about them quite horrible. The weak die off, the strong survive.

The gospel is the opposite I think, we are to love one another and help the weak.

 

[Assyrian]

Some of the evolutionary ideas like survival of the fittest are when I think about them quite horrible. The weak die off, the strong survive.

The gospel is the opposite I think, we are to love one another and help the weak.

I think you may misunderstand this nineteenth century use of 'fit'. It does not mean fit because you spend every evening in the gym. It is fit, as in suitable, fit for purpose. It is the organisms most suited to a particular environment that thrive there. Traits that enable species to fit their environment (see what I did there?) can also include caring for their young, cooperating with each other and even a willingness to sacrifice their lives so that other members of their group can survive.

 

[ianb321red]

I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to reconcile the Christian doctrine of Original sin with a Theistic evolution perspective of creation?

 

[SithDoughnut]

I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to reconcile the Christian doctrine of Original sin with a Theistic evolution perspective of creation?

Most of the theistic evolution proponents that I know believe in a metaphorical Genesis.

 

[theFijian]

I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to reconcile the Christian doctrine of Original sin with a Theistic evolution perspective of creation?

Adam was a real person; that's how.

 

[Assyrian]

I would be interested to hear how it would be possible to reconcile the Christian doctrine of Original sin with a Theistic evolution perspective of creation?

What theFijian says is certainly a very common approach, another is to take the opportunity with these questions being raised to go back to scripture and see what the bible actually says about Original Sin and whether the bible actually say anything of the sort.

 

[ianb321red]

Adam was a real person; that's how.

That's not the case - as SithDoughnut says,TE believes that Adam was a metaphor - to be consistent with a metaphorical/ non-literal account of Genesis.

 

[Assyrian]

That's not the case - as SithDoughnut says,TE believes that Adam was a metaphor - to be consistent with a metaphorical/ non-literal account of Genesis.

The Good Shepherd was a metaphor, it was still about a real person.

 

[SithDoughnut]

That's not the case - as SithDoughnut says,TE believes that Adam was a metaphor - to be consistent with a metaphorical/ non-literal account of Genesis.

I said metaphorical Genesis, not metaphorical Adam. I've heard people say that Adam and Eve represent early humanity as a whole, and I've heard others say that there was an actual Adam and Eve, they were just the product of evolution rather than created from dirt.

 

[theFijian]

That's not the case - as SithDoughnut says,TE believes that Adam was a metaphor - to be consistent with a metap
horical/ non-literal account of Genesis.

One wonders why you aren't willing to listen to a person who believes in theistic evolution to find out what those who believe in theistic evolution actually believe.

 

[theFijian]

The Good Shepherd was a metaphor, it was still about a real person.

Also Abraham is mentioned in the parable of the Rich man and Lazarus

 

[ianb321red]

One wonders why you aren't willing to listen to a person who believes in theistic evolution to find out what those who believe in theistic evolution actually believe.

I'm all ears....go ahead...

 

[Mr Dave]

With Original Sin and TE-ism for TEs who don't believe Adam was a real person;
The creation stories and Eden narratives describe a world which, amongst many other things being said in the stories, is not a perfect world (God saw that it was good, humans he saw as very good. Nothing was seen as perfect). By virtue of not being a perfect world, imperfections must therefore exist. Sin/evil/temptation (for want of a better term) is pre-existent, and the humans which are not perfect (only God is perfect), with their free will are liable to succumb to temptation and thus sin.

 

[theFijian]

I'm all ears....go ahead...

You just have to go back and read what I already said.

 

[ianb321red]

You just have to go back and read what I already said.

Just saying that "Adam was a real person" doesn't answer my question

 

[theFijian]

Just saying that "Adam was a real person" doesn't answer my question

Yes it does. Perhaps you should expand upon your question if you're looking for a more detailed analysis.