(NOT an evolution debate!) Does a belief in Evolution affect going to heaven?

[ebia]

Well then I guess Jesus just isn't for me then. If I have to look at the stars, many of which are hundreds of millions of light years away, and intentionally pretend that the earth is somehow only 6000 years old despite the fact that that's not enough time for the light from most of the stars in the universe to even reach us, then I guess maybe God isn't for me. Because I really do want Christ to save me, but I'm not willing to make myself look like a clown. If you're saying a faith in Christ requires LITERALLY believing that the reason women feel pain during childbirth is because a talking snake told one to eat an apple, then I guess I'm just not cut out for Jesus, because nothing can make me believe that.

As long as you release that, whatever other posters may say, that many (most?) Christians recognise that the early chapters of genesis are a collection of theological narratives, not accounts to be taken factually. And therefore have no problem with both following Jesus and observing that the universe is enormously old.

 

[graceandpeace]

Well then I guess Jesus just isn't for me then. If I have to look at the stars, many of which are hundreds of millions of light years away, and intentionally pretend that the earth is somehow only 6000 years old despite the fact that that's not enough time for the light from most of the stars in the universe to even reach us, then I guess maybe God isn't for me.

You will always get a variety of opinions on a website. Certain denominations teach that Genesis creation stories are factual & literal, so there are going to be posters that hold to that view. I believe most churches either don't teach that view or otherwise don't take a particular view. If you look into a mainline Protestant church, I doubt you will encounter the "literal" view from the faith statement or from the pulpit.

Because I really do want Christ to save me, but I'm not willing to make myself look like a clown.

I understand. If you want to follow Christ, the door is open.

If you're saying a faith in Christ requires LITERALLY believing that the reason women feel pain during childbirth is because a talking snake told one to eat an apple, then I guess I'm just not cut out for Jesus, because nothing can make me believe that.

I agree. The Genesis creation stories are allegorical/myths meant to convey theological truths; they are not "literal" stories. As noted though, you will encounter posters on this website who attend churches that teach they are literal accounts. I just avoid those churches & ignore those opinions.

 

[aiki]

Don't be lured by more liberal-minded "Christians" into thinking that the Genesis account is merely figurative. They like to be dismissive and condescending toward those who read the account in a straightforward manner (even though Jesus himself referred to the Genesis account as a real, not figurative, event) but as Dr. Ross shows in his video, such a reading does not necessarily clash with science, which is what many liberal Christians are afraid of.

Selah.

 

[food4thought]

I do not think belief or disbelief in evolution is going to keep anyone from salvation unless they let it... As Aiki has pointed out, there are problems with reconciling the evolutionary view with things the Bible says, and not just limited to the book of Genesis. If you are able to set these problems aside, and have faith in Jesus as the Bible presents Him- God the Son, One with the Father and the Spirit, together the great "I AM", the transcendent, all powerful Creator of all things, Jesus is that eternal Son who condescended to be confined to a human nature in order to redeem humanity from their sins through His sacrifice on the cross and resurrection- then questions about how God went about His creative work is only an interesting area of study.

Your salvation depends entirely on your relationship to Christ Jesus: is He the One true God made flesh, the only Lord and Savior of yourself and all mankind, the promised Messiah of Israel? Or is he just another great religious figure that taught us to love each other, but his way is just one of many ways to an ultimately unknowable god? Is He the Person that you love, the One who made it possible for God's Spirit to dwell within you? Or is he just another purveyor of morality that has some good things to suggest for your life? Did He really rise from the dead? Just who is Jesus, and what is your relationship to Him? Find the right answer to these questions. Read the Bible for yourself, with much sincere prayer for God to speak to you, and do not place your trust in man, but in the God who delights in revealing Himself to those that seek Him with an open heart. As you read the Bible, keep what Jeremiah records for us in mind:

Jer 17:5-8 NASB Thus says the LORD, "Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind And makes flesh his strength, And whose heart turns away from the LORD. (6) "For he will be like a bush in the desert And will not see when prosperity comes, But will live in stony wastes in the wilderness, A land of salt without inhabitant. (7) "Blessed is the man who trusts in the LORD And whose trust is the LORD. (8) "For he will be like a tree planted by the water, That extends its roots by a stream And will not fear when the heat comes; But its leaves will be green, And it will not be anxious in a year of drought Nor cease to yield fruit."

All the knowledge and wisdom of mankind is an ever changing sea with unpredictable weather. For all the good that science has done for mankind, remember that what is scientific truth today will in many cases be a historical curiosity 100 years from now. Think about dark matter and dark energy... the vast majority of what makes up the visible universe is a complete mystery to us, even though we had such great confidence in our knowledge a short time ago. I believe that this is God's way of sending us a message at just this time in history, and that message is: "You don't know half of what you think you know." God, on the other hand, dwells in eternity, knowing all things with perfect clarity. Place your trust in the truth of what He says, not man, who has a hard time even coming up with a satisfactory definition of truth, let alone being sure of what it is.

Hope this helps.

 

[Parogar]

Before you completely over-react check out this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKGFezN0Cd4



Make no mistake: Even if you do have good scientific reasons of the sort Dr. Hugh Ross possesses for his belief in God, there will be many who still think your belief is ridiculous. If you're going to be a true follower of Christ, sometimes being regarded as a clown is part of the deal.



Eve was cursed, not because of a talking snake, but because she chose to disobey the command of her Creator. In any case, God does not need you to believe in Him. He is perfect and requires nothing from us. We, however, desperately need Him. You, then, are the only loser when you demand to relate to God on your terms.

Selah.

I only watched the first 34 minutes of that video. At no point during those 34 minutes--neither in the beginning of it nor the end--did this man make any attempt to discuss anything scientific or even so much as provide any evidence.

In a nutshell, he more-or-less made general remarks that resembled the following construction.

"God must exist because someone made a theorem. This is what the theorem says. The theorem had lots of pages in it. The theorem took 10 years. So this all means that what I'm saying is science. If you want absolute scientific proof that God exists, then I've already given it to you ... because of this theorem."

What I don't get is why you claim to be such a devout follower of Christ, while somehow believing that His existence an be proven. Why would God require us to have faith if there is scientific proof He exists?

It almost seems as though the only belief that runs directly contrary to His wishes is yours: that His existence does not require faith, but only to conduct research into His existence.

If that is so, then you are basically the one calling Christ a liar, because Christ asked us to put our faith into him, but faith is nothing if not a belief not based on proof. If you think we have said proof, then you are in essence saying that faith is not required.

Putting that aside, this man never made any real arguments that were scientific in nature. Most were the sorts of things that were philosophical in nature. From all accounts, he took a philosophical, not scientific discussions: and he did a good job.

Truly, I mean that. His made a very good philosophical argument, but (and I'm sorry to say this), it was not in any way scientific. It was entirely and completely philosophical.

 

[aiki]

I only watched the first 34 minutes of that video. At no point during those 34 minutes--neither in the beginning of it nor the end--did this man make any attempt to discuss anything scientific or even so much as provide any evidence.

Oh? I don't think so. Keep in mind Dr. Ross isn't speaking to a group antagonistic to his position. This has a bearing on how he makes his case.

At 10:45 in the video Dr. Ross explains that Stephen Hawking forty years ago wrote:

"If the universe contains mass and general relativity reliably describes cosmic dynamics, then space and time must be created by a Causal Agent who transcends space and time."

Dr. Ross goes on, as a PhD-level astronomer, to explain that the theory of general relativity "...ranks as the most exhaustively tested and best proven principle in all of physics." From this, he points out that the universe must, then, have had a transcendent Causal Agent as Hawking predicted.

So, we have two highly credentialed scientists - only one of whom is a Christian - both asserting that the theory of general relativity requires the acknowledgement of a transcendent Causal Agent.

Dr. Ross then goes on to explain how the recently published Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem, which was aimed at finding a way around the prediction of Hawking concerning a Causal Agent of the universe, ended up establishing Hawking's prediction. Ross quotes the conclusion of the paper discussing the theorem:

"Any universe that expands on average has a beginning in the past and must be created by a transcendent causal agent."

Ross proceeds to point out that the well-established space-time theorems of physics clearly indicate, as both Hawking and the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin Theorem assert, that a Causal Agent (or God) exists.

I don't see, then, this total absence of evidence or argument that you say exists in the video.

What I don't get is why you claim to be such a devout follower of Christ, while somehow believing that His existence an be proven. Why would God require us to have faith if there is scientific proof He exists?

There is scientific evidence God exists, but the proof of His existence is obtained in my daily experience of Him. My experience of God, however, requires the exercise of faith because I cannot interact with God in exactly the same manner as I would with another human being. I don't have my physical senses confirming to me God's presence as they do when I am in the company of another person. I have to trust that, even though my senses do not perceive God, He is nonetheless present. Fortunately, God impresses upon me His presence in other ways: A deep, unshakeable sense of His being; a multitude of specific answers to prayer; the experience of His power in the transformation of my conduct and attitudes; the clear testimony of nature and reason to His existence, and so on.

Really, living life requires faith whether you believe in God or not. God is not asking something unusual of us when He asks us to trust in Him. We do no more in exercising faith in God than we do when we trust the taxicab driver to get us where we want to go, or the dentist to properly repair our teeth, or the surgeon to correctly operate upon us. Faith in God is necessary because it is important to normal living.

It almost seems as though the only belief that runs directly contrary to His wishes is yours: that His existence does not require faith, but only to conduct research into His existence.

Quite the contrary. The Bible clearly points to nature as a secondary revelation of God. (Ps. 19:1,2) It is no surprise to me, then, that when science investigates creation, God is revealed (or proved, if you like). And this is exactly what God intended.

If that is so, then you are basically the one calling Christ a liar, because Christ asked us to put our faith into him, but faith is nothing if not a belief not based on proof. If you think we have said proof, then you are in essence saying that faith is not required.

"You do err, not knowing the Scriptures." Paul the apostle wrote,

2 Timothy 1:12
12 ...for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day.

Paul did not believe in Christ in a vacuum of reason to do so. He knew in whom he believed and, persuaded by that knowledge, believed in Christ to save him from his sins and give him the gift of eternal life. No Christian is called to believe in God or Christ blindly.

Truly, I mean that. His made a very good philosophical argument, but (and I'm sorry to say this), it was not in any way scientific. It was entirely and completely philosophical.

I'm afraid - especially since you only watched about a third of the video - that you are quite mistaken. But even if Dr. Ross did only make good philosophical arguments, if they succeed logically, they are as true as anything the scientific method uncovers.

Selah.

 

[Parogar]

"I'm afraid - especially since you only watched about a third of the video - that you are quite mistaken. But even if Dr. Ross did only make good philosophical arguments, if they succeed logically, they are as true as anything the scientific method uncovers."

That's not how philosophy works...

 

[aiki]

Then you misunderstand the rules of logic and reason.

 

[oi_antz]

The reason I ask this question is because of the following quote from John 3:16: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

In this passage, it is said that whosoever believes in Jesus (assumed to mean accepts as savior) will go to heaven.

If what the bible says is true, then that's the only requirement.

Look at this:

Matthew 5:20

For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.

This suggests that there is more to the stated "believing in him" than to merely think He has saved you. It suggests that we must believe His every word. Here are a couple more that He said:

Matthew 7:24

“Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock:

.. doesn't this mean that to accept and apply what Jesus says is wise in His opinion? The same statement goes on to say those who do not apply His teaching are like a fool who built his house on sand. The house did not survive the flood.

John 14:6

“I am the way, the truth, and the life.

.. there are many large claims and strong statements that Jesus made. There is enough in what has been handed down to us, to challenge everyone. So believing in Jesus does not seem like having to do just one thing, as you have said. It will always begin with one decision though.

So where this leads to in your OP, is why you would think that the Genesis story is something you must believe so that you can say that you believe in Jesus. I understand that the Genesis stories were recorded many hundreds of years before Jesus was born, so the stories cannot be reasonably assumed to have been written by Him. Therefore it is my expectation that choosing to question the validity of the claims made by those writings is not the same as questioning the validity of the claims Jesus has made, and therefore my expectation is that believing or disbelieving the claims made in Genesis does not necessarily impact your belief in Jesus. So my opinion at this time is that John 3:16 does not refer to a belief in the claims made in the book of Genesis.

 

[BaconWizard]

Post removed: I followed a link and did not notice I am on part of the forum where only Christian opinions are permitted.

 

[Joshua260]

Post removed: I followed a link and did not notice I am on part of the forum where only Christian opinions are permitted.

I appreciate your removing the post in compliance with this forum's rules. I hope you understand that this forum was not designed to restrict opposing opinions, but rather to address non-believers' questions. Therefore, it is more proper to start a thread asking a question,that may even be directed from an non-Christian view, such as "why does God allow evil?" instead of asserting a claim such as "the bible endorses slavery, rape, and murder". I hope you can see the difference.

"Your beliefs don't make you a better person. Your behavior does."

That's a catchy tag line, but I hope you understand that the discussion of "who is a better person" is quite different from "who is a saved creature". The goal of Christianity is "to save the lost".