Question for Christians who believe in Evolution

[lifepsyop]

Again mainstream scientists will tell you that they cannot confirm or disconfirm supernatural phenomena. It is out of the realm of science.

Exactly. So Theists who say they are just following "the science", are in actuality making a philosophical alignment to a naturalistic interpretation of reality.

(in other words, any Old Testament claims of supernatural demonstrations on the earth, did not actually really happen, because "science")

 

[Brightmoon]

No, mainstream science IS methodological naturalism. It was built on that philosophical foundation. It cannot interpret reality outside of this box.
If creationists have evidence and that’s a big if , where is it ?


I didn't claim all scientists are anti-Bible. What I'm suggesting is that Christians (or any Theists) who accept Evolution, do so not from a specific evaluation of the evidence, but a general alignment with a naturalistic philosophy of the world and its history. (in other words, they would tend to outright reject supernatural accounts in the Old Testament whether or not conventional Evolution/Archeology even comments on them)

 

[Brightmoon]

Exactly. So Theists who say they are just following "the science", are in actuality making a philosophical alignment to a naturalistic interpretation of reality.

(in other words, any Old Testament claims of supernatural demonstrations on the earth, did not actually really happen, because "science")

. These biblical based phenomena involving nature would have left confirming evidence that they had occurred. Where is that evidence? Been asking for 30 years now and I only get silly Just-So stories or mistakes that a high school student wouldn’t have made , from creationists. I tend to think that these are no more valid than any other cultures creation myths and again I don’t worry about it . Myths are important stories we tell about our culture. They don’t have to be historically accurate

 

[Speedwell]

Maybe I worded that poorly... what I meant was that the philosophical basis of modern science is an outright rejection of the supernatural.

. No, you're still overstating your case. The philosophical. basis of modern science is methodological naturalism. Methodological naturalism takes no position on the supernatural--that is why it is compatible with Christianity and other theism. It is metaphysical naturalism which denies the supernatural..

The modern scientific institutions are metaphysically constrained to a naturalistic interpretation of reality.

No, they're just only interested in what they can find out about the natural world by examination, testing and measuring. If the supernatural manifests itself in a way that leaves evidence which can be examined, tested and measured then science will acknowledge it. Until then it does not, cannot, offer an opinion about it.

 

[Strathos]

You said:



So are you basing your historical worldview on the consensus of archeologists or not?

Please read more carefully.

IMO the events happened unless there is unimpeachable physical and historical evidence that not only did they not happen, but something entirely different and mutually exclusive happened instead. Which is not the case for some 99% of the OT.

 

[Speedwell]

You said:



So are you basing your historical worldview on the consensus of archeologists or not?

The consensus of archaeologists is that they can neither confirm nor deny the existence and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah

 

[ZNP]

I feel that some of the stories in the Bible are exaggerated natural phenomena like with Noah’s flood . Some are just tales but we consider them to be important for the message. These are dogmas, Beliefs without evidence. Science simply doesn’t work like that . I don’t worry about it much. I'll accept a verified evidence science account over anything that happens in the Bible. Historical accuracy wasn’t always a literary device especially back then.

Noah's flood is exaggerated? Every aspect of the account has been confirmed scientifically.

1. Rained over the whole Earth for 40 days and 40 nights -- they discovered a very large crater from an asteroid in the bottom of the Indian Ocean. This event caused a Tsunami to create giant chevrons of sand hills in Madagascar from the ocean floor. Those fossils put this event at the end of the last ice age, approximately the same age as we would expect Noah's flood. This event would have caused a huge amount of water to be vaporized and go into the Stratosphere, surround the Earth, and come back down as a worldwide flooding event.

2. Came over the tops of the highest mountains. At the end of the last ice age there were huge floods estimated to be 40 meters deep that came down from the tops of the highest mountains. This happened in India with the Himalayas and in the US with the Rockies. Our theory was that as the ice age ended there were great dams in the mountains holding back huge lakes that then collapsed. However, during this recent climate change we have seen many mountain glaciers melt without a single "ice dam" forming. So, this 40 days of super heated rain coming down on the mountains would have accelerated the melting to the point great glaciers would have given way and as they came down the mountains it would have warmed even more. We are taking about flash floods on top of glaciers, a very bad combination.

3. Noah's ark has been confirmed with over 100 independent accounts from cultures that were not connected. The oldest chinese word for boat is the combination of two words: eight and souls. Noah, his three sons and their wives would be 8 souls.

4. There are 18 large domesticated animals that are absolutely essential to our agricultural economies. Cattle are both a food source and were the power for plows. Horses were our means of transportation and tanks right up until WWI. Of these domesticated animals only Llamas and guinea pigs are not native to Mesopotamia. Having those animals is why the European culture spread around the globe and why the New World was conquered by the Europeans. At the end of the last ice age there were huge number of extinctions on all six continents. No one has been able to explain this. They blame humans yet see no evidence of this in their camps, no bones, no skins to support this. They blame disease but have no idea what kind of disease would strike hundreds of different species on six different continents all at the same time, especially since many of these creatures like saber tooth tigers practiced "social distancing". The account of Noah's ark is the only account that both explains this and makes sense.

5. The flooding of the Black Sea at the end of the last ice age could have flooded like a bathtub filling up and could have been an ideal location for Noah's ark, so although a flash flood coming out of the mountains would roll a boat over and over, the Bhosphorous filling up the Black sea would provide a situation where the boat could have floated without rolling over.

6. When the account of Noah saving all the animals, I see that as saving all the domesticated animals. There is nothing in the account that suggests he was traveling the world, collecting animals for his zoo. I see this boat as a floating barn.

 

[Speedwell]

Noah's flood is exaggerated? Every aspect of the account has been confirmed scientifically.

1. Rained over the whole Earth for 40 days and 40 nights -- they discovered a very large crater from an asteroid in the bottom of the Indian Ocean. This event caused a Tsunami to create giant chevrons of sand hills in Madagascar from the ocean floor. Those fossils put this event at the end of the last ice age, approximately the same age as we would expect Noah's flood. This event would have caused a huge amount of water to be vaporized and go into the Stratosphere, surround the Earth, and come back down as a worldwide flooding event.

2. Came over the tops of the highest mountains. At the end of the last ice age there were huge floods estimated to be 40 meters deep that came down from the tops of the highest mountains. This happened in India with the Himalayas and in the US with the Rockies. Our theory was that as the ice age ended there were great dams in the mountains holding back huge lakes that then collapsed. However, during this recent climate change we have seen many mountain glaciers melt without a single "ice dam" forming. So, this 40 days of super heated rain coming down on the mountains would have accelerated the melting to the point great glaciers would have given way and as they came down the mountains it would have warmed even more. We are taking about flash floods on top of glaciers, a very bad combination.

3. Noah's ark has been confirmed with over 100 independent accounts from cultures that were not connected. The oldest chinese word for boat is the combination of two words: eight and souls. Noah, his three sons and their wives would be 8 souls.

4. There are 18 large domesticated animals that are absolutely essential to our agricultural economies. Cattle are both a food source and were the power for plows. Horses were our means of transportation and tanks right up until WWI. Of these domesticated animals only Llamas and guinea pigs are not native to Mesopotamia. Having those animals is why the European culture spread around the globe and why the New World was conquered by the Europeans. At the end of the last ice age there were huge number of extinctions on all six continents. No one has been able to explain this. They blame humans yet see no evidence of this in their camps, no bones, no skins to support this. They blame disease but have no idea what kind of disease would strike hundreds of different species on six different continents all at the same time, especially since many of these creatures like saber tooth tigers practiced "social distancing". The account of Noah's ark is the only account that both explains this and makes sense.

5. The flooding of the Black Sea at the end of the last ice age could have flooded like a bathtub filling up and could have been an ideal location for Noah's ark, so although a flash flood coming out of the mountains would roll a boat over and over, the Bhosphorous filling up the Black sea would provide a situation where the boat could have floated without rolling over.

6. When the account of Noah saving all the animals, I see that as saving all the domesticated animals. There is nothing in the account that suggests he was traveling the world, collecting animals for his zoo. I see this boat as a floating barn.

All you are suggesting is that at some time there was an immense flood and an individual saved himself and his family as well as his domestic animals and perhaps a selection of local wild fauna on a barge or raft of his own construction. No one will argue with you about such a proposition. But none of that happened in the 2nd millennium BC, so it's not biblical creationism.

 

[ZNP]

All you are suggesting is that at some time there was an immense flood and an individual saved himself and his family as well as his domestic animals and perhaps a selection of local wild fauna on a barge or raft of his own construction. No one will argue with you about such a proposition. But none of that happened in the 2nd millennium BC, so it's not biblical creationism.

I did not respond to the evolution question because I don't see the difference between Darwin's version and the Bible's version.

1. The account in Genesis 1 does not match the geologic history of life on Earth. For example, grass is one of the last things to evolve whereas it is virtually the first to show up in chapter 1. So, instead I think that account correlates much better with the end of the last ice age and the retreat of the ice.

2. Instead, I see the account of God's creation of man is to "make man from the dust of the ground" which is simply a far more elegant way of presenting Darwin's theory of how we evolved from microscopic creatures.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Noah's flood is exaggerated? Every aspect of the account has been confirmed scientifically.

1. Rained over the whole Earth for 40 days and 40 nights -- they discovered a very large crater from an asteroid in the bottom of the Indian Ocean. This event caused a Tsunami to create giant chevrons of sand hills in Madagascar from the ocean floor. Those fossils put this event at the end of the last ice age, approximately the same age as we would expect Noah's flood. This event would have caused a huge amount of water to be vaporized and go into the Stratosphere, surround the Earth, and come back down as a worldwide flooding event.

2. Came over the tops of the highest mountains. At the end of the last ice age there were huge floods estimated to be 40 meters deep that came down from the tops of the highest mountains. This happened in India with the Himalayas and in the US with the Rockies. Our theory was that as the ice age ended there were great dams in the mountains holding back huge lakes that then collapsed. However, during this recent climate change we have seen many mountain glaciers melt without a single "ice dam" forming. So, this 40 days of super heated rain coming down on the mountains would have accelerated the melting to the point great glaciers would have given way and as they came down the mountains it would have warmed even more. We are taking about flash floods on top of glaciers, a very bad combination.

3. Noah's ark has been confirmed with over 100 independent accounts from cultures that were not connected. The oldest chinese word for boat is the combination of two words: eight and souls. Noah, his three sons and their wives would be 8 souls.

4. There are 18 large domesticated animals that are absolutely essential to our agricultural economies. Cattle are both a food source and were the power for plows. Horses were our means of transportation and tanks right up until WWI. Of these domesticated animals only Llamas and guinea pigs are not native to Mesopotamia. Having those animals is why the European culture spread around the globe and why the New World was conquered by the Europeans. At the end of the last ice age there were huge number of extinctions on all six continents. No one has been able to explain this. They blame humans yet see no evidence of this in their camps, no bones, no skins to support this. They blame disease but have no idea what kind of disease would strike hundreds of different species on six different continents all at the same time, especially since many of these creatures like saber tooth tigers practiced "social distancing". The account of Noah's ark is the only account that both explains this and makes sense.

5. The flooding of the Black Sea at the end of the last ice age could have flooded like a bathtub filling up and could have been an ideal location for Noah's ark, so although a flash flood coming out of the mountains would roll a boat over and over, the Bhosphorous filling up the Black sea would provide a situation where the boat could have floated without rolling over.

6. When the account of Noah saving all the animals, I see that as saving all the domesticated animals. There is nothing in the account that suggests he was traveling the world, collecting animals for his zoo. I see this boat as a floating barn.

Bwahahaha. Creation Ministries must be very pleased to have somebody being sucked in so completely. Have you actually bothered checking any of those claims for yourself? Most can be debunked via a simple online search.

 

[HTacianas]

In considering the accounts of miracles in the Old Testament (e.g. the Exodus Red Sea parting, the supernatural destruction of Jericho, Samson's supernatural strength, Elijah summoning fire down on God's enemies, etc. )

Do you believe these are generally all mythologized stories? As in, the stories are there to convey a spiritual message, but the actual supernatural events did not actually happen?

I am curious because most of these events (after you get through the first few books of Genesis) have little to do with the basic Evolutionary story of the development of life on earth, and yet I wonder if those Christians who believe in Evolution, also tend to have a problem accepting any of the major accounts of supernatural events in the Old Testament as real, actual events?

I believe that the miraculous events of the old testament are real, founded in fact, though embellished to convey a spiritual truth.

 

[coffee4u]

The issue is not that they are scientifically impossible, or that there is no physical evidence that they happened, but rather there is no physical evidence showing that something else happened instead.

For example, if we found Sodom and Gomorrah, and could confirm they were the same cities mentioned in scripture, and they were completely intact and did not show any signs of ever being damaged, and they had history and signs of habitation lasting for many centuries after they were supposed to have been destroyed, then that would mean there could only be two possibilities:

1. The destruction of the cities as narrated in the OT never happened - perhaps it was not literal history.

2. The destruction did happen, but some supernatural power wiped all evidence of it from history, and replaced it with a false history that never happened.

In that case, I would have to go with option 1, as option 2 would imply a deceptive creation.

However if, as is the case in real life, archaeologists have never positively identified the locations of Sodom and Gomorrah, then there is no contradiction when it comes to believing that they were destroyed as written in the Bible.

If they ever 'find the cities' then they are mistaken. We can be quite sure that anything they find is neither Sodam or Gomorrah because God left them as ashes. The simple answer is that man, once again, has it wrong.

Genesis 19:24
Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah--from the LORD out of the heavens.

Matthew 11:23-24
And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day. Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you.”

2 Peter 2:6-9
and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds),read more.
then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

If they ever 'find the cities' then they are mistaken. We can be quite sure that anything they find is neither Sodam or Gomorrah because God left them as ashes. The simple answer is that man, once again, has it wrong.

Genesis 19:24
Then the LORD rained down burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah--from the LORD out of the heavens.

Matthew 11:23-24
And you, Capernaum, will not be exalted to heaven, will you? You will descend to Hades; for if the miracles had occurred in Sodom which occurred in you, it would have remained to this day. Nevertheless I say to you that it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for you.”

2 Peter 2:6-9
and if He condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by reducing them to ashes, having made them an example to those who would live ungodly lives thereafter; and if He rescued righteous Lot, oppressed by the sensual conduct of unprincipled men (for by what he saw and heard that righteous man, while living among them, felt his righteous soul tormented day after day by their lawless deeds),read more.
then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from temptation, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgment.

If archaeologists find the ashes of two cities under, or mixed with, unusual quantities of sulphur, that would be supporting evidence.

Interesting that it's a description that would fit a volcanic eruption with sulphurous pyroclastic flows very well.

 

[lifepsyop]

. These biblical based phenomena involving nature would have left confirming evidence that they had occurred. Where is that evidence? Been asking for 30 years now and I only get silly Just-So stories or mistakes that a high school student wouldn’t have made , from creationists. I tend to think that these are no more valid than any other cultures creation myths and again I don’t worry about it . Myths are important stories we tell about our culture. They don’t have to be historically accurate

It doesn't matter how much evidence there is. It would still be filtered through the "scientific" lens of naturalism.

For an example, look at the treatment of the last decade of discoveries of preserved dinosaur soft-tissues/proteins. (original organic material that no evolutionist thought could possible last 65+ million years and yet with increased technology is now being regularly discovered in fossils) ...

Instead of inspiring a discussion of the possibility that "science" may be wrong about the age of dinosaur fossils, it only caused an institution-wide doubling-down that the Evolutionist worldview must be true and this just proves that organic material can last much longer than any scientists thought possible.

Again, "Science" has no choice but to operate in this way. They are completely boxed in by their metaphysical philosophy. Evidence can only be followed in one direction - to a reaffirmation of a naturalistic cosmogony.

 

[Brightmoon]

I guess it just doesn’t bother me that I’m related to my beloved dogs and other animals I had as pets . Not only did I see that they were family but they saw that they were family . I see my plants as family and honestly I don’t know how they feel . The fact that humans are great apes doesn’t faze me in the least because I feel a profound healing connection to everything that lives around me . I’ve felt that way since I was a child . I feel sorry for creationists because they feel that they’re other than kin. That kinship engenders respect ( of course I’m an environmentalist, most biologists are as well). I guess I’ll never understand the sick dread creationists feel about evolution because I’ve never felt that . I do understand that it’s based on the nonsense and lies they get told about evolution

 

[lifepsyop]

The consensus of archaeologists is that they can neither confirm nor deny the existence and destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah

Okay, what about the cases where consensus history/archeology claims to have disproved a Biblical account. Based on their chosen model of Egyptian chronology, practically the entire Book of Exodus is claimed to be a myth... Is that your view as well? I'm still not clear on if you're simply going with consensus opinion of the academic institutions.

 

[Speedwell]

It doesn't matter how much evidence there is. It would still be filtered through the "scientific" lens of naturalism.

For an example, look at the treatment of the last decade of discoveries of preserved dinosaur soft-tissues/proteins. (original organic material that no evolutionist thought could possible last 65+ million years and yet with increased technology is now being regularly discovered in fossils) ...

Instead of inspiring a discussion of the possibility that "science" may be wrong about the age of dinosaur fossils, it only caused an institution-wide doubling-down that the Evolutionist worldview must be true and this just proves that organic material can last much longer than any scientists thought possible.

Again, "Science" has no choice but to operate in this way. They are completely boxed in by their metaphysical philosophy. Evidence can only be followed in one direction - to a reaffirmation of a naturalistic cosmogony.

You wish. But no, that's not what happened. You're just wasting your time. We've seen this act, or one like, it too many times to be taken in. Science isn't metaphysical naturalism, and the fact that scientific findings undercut your particular interpretation of scripture is not evidence of a global struggle between theism and atheism.

 

[lifepsyop]

Noah's flood is exaggerated? Every aspect of the account has been confirmed scientifically.

1. Rained over the whole Earth for 40 days and 40 nights -- they discovered a very large crater from an asteroid in the bottom of the Indian Ocean. This event caused a Tsunami to create giant chevrons of sand hills in Madagascar from the ocean floor. Those fossils put this event at the end of the last ice age, approximately the same age as we would expect Noah's flood. This event would have caused a huge amount of water to be vaporized and go into the Stratosphere, surround the Earth, and come back down as a worldwide flooding event.

2. Came over the tops of the highest mountains. At the end of the last ice age there were huge floods estimated to be 40 meters deep that came down from the tops of the highest mountains. This happened in India with the Himalayas and in the US with the Rockies. Our theory was that as the ice age ended there were great dams in the mountains holding back huge lakes that then collapsed. However, during this recent climate change we have seen many mountain glaciers melt without a single "ice dam" forming. So, this 40 days of super heated rain coming down on the mountains would have accelerated the melting to the point great glaciers would have given way and as they came down the mountains it would have warmed even more. We are taking about flash floods on top of glaciers, a very bad combination.

3. Noah's ark has been confirmed with over 100 independent accounts from cultures that were not connected. The oldest chinese word for boat is the combination of two words: eight and souls. Noah, his three sons and their wives would be 8 souls.

4. There are 18 large domesticated animals that are absolutely essential to our agricultural economies. Cattle are both a food source and were the power for plows. Horses were our means of transportation and tanks right up until WWI. Of these domesticated animals only Llamas and guinea pigs are not native to Mesopotamia. Having those animals is why the European culture spread around the globe and why the New World was conquered by the Europeans. At the end of the last ice age there were huge number of extinctions on all six continents. No one has been able to explain this. They blame humans yet see no evidence of this in their camps, no bones, no skins to support this. They blame disease but have no idea what kind of disease would strike hundreds of different species on six different continents all at the same time, especially since many of these creatures like saber tooth tigers practiced "social distancing". The account of Noah's ark is the only account that both explains this and makes sense.

5. The flooding of the Black Sea at the end of the last ice age could have flooded like a bathtub filling up and could have been an ideal location for Noah's ark, so although a flash flood coming out of the mountains would roll a boat over and over, the Bhosphorous filling up the Black sea would provide a situation where the boat could have floated without rolling over.

6. When the account of Noah saving all the animals, I see that as saving all the domesticated animals. There is nothing in the account that suggests he was traveling the world, collecting animals for his zoo. I see this boat as a floating barn.

This is actually a good example of a "naturalizing" of the Biblical accounts... appealing to naturalistic causes and mechanisms to explain every aspect of the Genesis flood account.

So instead of God leading all the animal types to Noah through his supernatural guidance (as is suggested in Genesis 6:20) ... instead it must have been a completely naturalized sequence of events (e.g. Noah collecting domesticated animals in a fashion that would accord with the natural capabilities of men )

 

[coffee4u]

I guess it just doesn’t bother me that I’m related to my beloved dogs and other animals I had as pets . Not only did I see that they were family but they saw that they were family . I see my plants as family and honestly I don’t know how they feel . The fact that humans are great apes doesn’t faze me in the least because I feel a profound healing connection to everything that lives around me . I’ve felt that way since I was a child . I feel sorry for creationists because they feel that they’re other than kin. That kinship engenders respect ( of course I’m an environmentalist, most biologists are as well). I guess I’ll never understand the sick dread creationists feel about evolution because I’ve never felt that . I do understand that it’s based on the nonsense and lies they get told about evolution

You are sorry that we don't feel that our dogs and plants are related to us? We don't have to feel we are related to our pets to love them.

"I’ll never understand the sick dread creationists feel about evolution"
Because it goes against every word of scripture.
perhaps evolution makes you feel somehow more open and loving but that isn't how it affects a lot of people.
How do you think the Nazi's got their 'master race ideas'? They thought they were more evolved than everybody else.
"Nazi racial theorists did indeed embrace human and racial evolution. They not only taught that humans had evolved from primates, but they believed the Aryan or Nordic race had evolved to a higher level"
https://www.csustan.edu/sites/defau.../Weikart/Darwinism-in-Nazi-Racial-Thought.pdf

We have a great connection to all of what is around us because we are fearfully and wonderfully made and we view God as the creator. We love God so by extension of that we love creation. We also believe all people are related and equal because we all came from Adam and Eve. You do not need belief in evolution to have a love for nature.

 

[lifepsyop]

You wish. But no, that's not what happened. You're just wasting your time. We've seen this act, or one like, it too many times to be taken in. Science isn't metaphysical naturalism, and the fact that scientific findings undercut your particular interpretation of scripture is not evidence of a global struggle between theism and atheism.

Struck a nerve, did I?

And yes, that is exactly what happened. Evolutionists collectively laughed at the suggestion that original protein material could have been preserved in dinosaur remains (it had to be outside contamination).... then they realized it could no longer be denied... then they upended their entire understanding of organic decay rates... all to preserve a naturalistic view of reality...

Again, "Science" has no choice but to do this. It cannot accept evidence that contradicts an evolutionary interpretation of the history of the earth. That is the metaphysical philosophy the institution is founded upon.