Question From A New Christian

[Nathan Poe]

Bearing in mind Jesus did not question Genesis in fact if you read John, Jesus created the world. Now Jesus came to dispell many mis interpretations etc. You think he would have started on Genesis if it were wrong but he didn't.

1 In the beginning was the word (jesus), and the word was with God, and the word was God. (trinity of father, son, holy ghost being God)
2 He was with God in the beginning.
3 Through him ALL things were made...... now look at Genesis.

IOW... Because Jesus used Genesis as a teaching tool to prove a point to people who believed it, it must be literally true.

By that same logic, since I use The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn as a teaching tool, I must think it's literally true as well.

Every time someone uses logic like this, it sends another potential Christian running for the hills.

 

[h2whoa]

But can you imagine how many new Christians have been sent scurrying back to Atheism because they were lead to believe that "the Faith" requires swallowing the hogwash you responded to?

Very very true. It's been one of my biggest issues.

H2

 

[hussbob]

Jesus used Genesis as a teaching tools but regarded it as the word of God. Not as ficticious story. He used parables when wanting to teach from fiction.

I will admit my in depth knowledge of genetics is low and that I am just relaying what I have read and seen. but what I have read and seen has convinced me that there is no need to compromise the bible to get science to fit it.

 

[Split Rock]

But light was created before plants. Plants don't need the sun they need light. Just so happen that now the light is supplied by the sun.

According to Genesis God created Light, when there was none before. God later created the Sun (presumably) to bathe the Earth with light. Considering the fact that all light (of any consequence) that is intercepted by earth and plants comes directly from the Sun, your statement makes little sense.

I could also ask if it is accurate to call the Moon a "light," when it reflects the light produced by the Sun. Should it not have been called a mirror? Is it possible that the Bronze-Age Sheepherders who wrote Genesis simply did not know that the Moon reflected sunlight and produces no light of its own? Do you really believe it was necessary for God to explain to these people about how the solar system came into existance? Would they have understood? Would it be necessary for them to understand such things to understand that God created everything and what he expected from them?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Jesus used Genesis as a teaching tools but regarded it as the word of God. Not as ficticious story.

(a) assumption
(b) false dichotomy.

He used parables when wanting to teach from fiction.

Indeed. Which shows that a story doesn't need historicity to be theologically true.

I will admit my in depth knowledge of genetics is low

But you thought it was good enough to know that people with PhDs in the subject were wrong?

and that I am just relaying what I have read and seen.

Which has now been shown to you to be incorrect.

but what I have read and seen has convinced me

But since it's been shown to be wrong isn't a reconsideration now intellectually essential?

that there is no need to compromise the bible to get science to fit it.

No-one talked about compromising the Bible. Reconsidering a particular modernist (i.e. historical/literal) interpretation of it might be necessary, though.

 

[h2whoa]

I will admit my in depth knowledge of genetics is low and that I am just relaying what I have read and seen. but what I have read and seen has convinced me that there is no need to compromise the bible to get science to fit it.

I don't see it as compromising the Bible. It's just acknowleging that the depth of our knowledge has dramatically altered in the millenia since it was written, allowing us to understands God's acheivement that much better.

Don't forget as well, as has already been seen earlier in this post, that certainly some what you have seen and read is demonstrably incorrect.

H2

 

[Hydra009]

Welcome to CF. It's like this all the time.

 

[Lioness816]

Now my issue is that, from what I have seen, the theory of Evolution is fundamentally sound. Now I'm not saying that it's not open to change or even that we understand it especially well but the central principle, I believe, is true.

What I want to know, is there room for my belief in God and Jesus to believe Evolution? Does creation have to be taken literally or is it possible it was a metaphor to give people in the pre-science age a general picture of how things began?

You see, I believe that science and religion can actually co-exist.

Am I alone in that belief?

H2

I too always struggled with this, but, I believe God created all, so if it was evolution, it started with God some where at some time.

There is room for both, in my opinion.

P.S. Welcome

 

[Gwynne]

My first thought when reading the "lack of information" theories was "so God tweaked things..." If God can create the world, he can do so in anyway he pleases, either "poof" out of nothing, or a slow evolutionary process. It doesn't matter to me, I know that at the beginning, either 6000 years ago or billions of years ago, God was there. Science explains how, but not why. Genesis explains why, it doesn't have to be literal to explain why.

H2whoa, you'll do just fine here

 

[Raydar]

What is light? A wavelength or a partical? A wavical maybe?

 

[hussbob]

I have seen pople with PhD's rip apart others PhD theories so much it is hard to know where to look.

I choose to follow the creationist POV when it come to science and the bible and therefore I follow creationist theroies and the evidence they have put forward is very strong usually refuting evolution in head to head comparisons. (naturally I follow the bible first)

At the end of the day though the main thing is God created the universe and everything in it.

We will never understand how and since we can't travel back in time we will never really know while we are alive.

I will now bow out of this in the shame of knowing i have not been able to fullfil my christian reponsibility of being able to give account for my belifes. I have alot more learning to do as do we all.

Good luck with your new found Christianity.

Hope I haven't caused upset and will hold my tongue in future.

Should have remembered the saying that goes something like "It is better to be silent and be thought a fool, than speak and remove all doubt."

 

[Jimmy The Hand]

Hi h2whoa. Welcome to the boards.

As you are seeing and will continue to see, there are plenty of Christians who also understand, explore and accept Evolution. To parrot Nathan a bit, when I was a Christian, my personal understanding was that I should strive to be Christ-like. Believing in the literalism of stories written by shepherds 2000 - 3000 years before any knowledge of modern science did not affect my faith in the least. Not to diminish those stories in any way. They are what they are. Elegant tales that demonstrate the fundamentals of morality and humanity.

And I wouldn't worry about those that someone called the ultimate arbiters of truth. It seems they have their own playhouse now where than can sit and take pot shots at the this playhouse and accuse the inhabitants of being ant-christian. This thread and the fine people here just go to show once again that some refuse to actually look at the evidence.

Keep searching and have some fun!

 

[Raydar]

Should have remembered the saying that goes something like "It is better to be silent and be thought a fool, than speak and remove all doubt."

How about this from, Rom 1:22, "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools"

 

[Vance]

Theistic evolution here. Please read my original post in this thread, which is entitled "why I post, or "yes, you can be a Christian and accept evolution""

http://www.christianforums.com/t886416

 

[kenneth558]

I will now bow out of this in the shame of knowing i have not been able to fullfil my christian reponsibility of being able to give account for my belifes. I have alot more learning to do as do we all.

hussbob, you gave your account. It is not your responsibility to make others believe. Not even Jesus could do that all the time.

 

[Nathan Poe]

How about this from, Rom 1:22, "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools"

How about this from Shakespeare, "The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool."
--As You Like It, V.i (IIRC)

 

[leoj]

I personally am a christian and do not believe in evolution. It contradicts the bible. Why would God, all powerful, all knowing create the world taking millions of years, its just stupid. How do you explain in
Genesis 1:8b, it says ''And the evening and the morning were the second day."

There's no room for millions of years. Check out the AnswersInGenesis website (search on Google)
it has more info.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I personally am a christian and do not believe in evolution. It contradicts the bible.

Does it?

Or does it contradict the way you choose to read and interpret the Bible?

Why would God, all powerful, all knowing create the world taking millions of years, its just stupid.

Why would it take him six days? Is that any less stupid?

How do you explain in
Genesis 1:8b, it says ''And the evening and the morning were the second day."

Repetition of a key line or phrase is common in poetry and oral tradition. Genesis was both.

There's no room for millions of years. Check out the AnswersInGenesis website (search on Google)
it has more info.

Years are like Jello: there's always room

Do you honestly think we're not familiar with AiG?

 

[Split Rock]

Why would God, all powerful, all knowing create the world taking millions of years, its just stupid.

Why would he make Adam from dirt and then make Eve from one of his ribs, its just stupid. If you cloned a human from one of Adam's ribs, you would get another Adam, not Eve.

 

[h2whoa]

I personally am a christian and do not believe in evolution. It contradicts the bible. Why would God, all powerful, all knowing create the world taking millions of years, its just stupid.

You see, I just don't think it does contradict the Bible. As I said in my first post, I believe that the story of Creation was a suitable metaphor for the pre-science days of millenia ago to help those people have a concise idea of the start of the world. WE live in a world where understand more and so the metaphor does not work as well for us.

However it does not detract from the wonder of God. God spent millions of years devoting love and effort into creating life. Is that stupid? Is it love to devote yourself to something for a long time. Or is it love to just click your fingers because you feel like making something? Hmmm...

The more I come to understand of the areas of science I study, the more I think "wow! This is amazing, just imagine the awesome power that was behind this." Whether we understand them fully or not is neither here nor there, there are laws in science that make the universe work. How does this fit with God?

As CS Lewis says in Miracles (Fontana, 1947) p110, "Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator" (quoted from Nicky Gumbel's Searching Issues book).