Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
No, I guarantee you will not be able to actually explain why the fact that abiogenesis (the origin of life) remains largely a mystery justifies the conclusion that evolution is "dead in the water".I know, I know, evolution doesn't deal with where life came from.
Well, for that reason... it is dead in the water... pun intended.
Slanderous. What is the matter with you people? I haven't brought up the theory of evolution at all in this discussion. I don't really care about the theory of evolution. It's only a scientific theory, and scientific theories come and go--the history of science is littered with failed theories. My faith is based on Christ. It will stand whatever happens to a mere scientific theory.You claim the "overwhelming evidence" in support of evolution as your reason for believing in it, yet turn around and say that you would believe what you believe whether or not evolution was proven true or false.
So what exactly DO you found your belief on? Because it certainly isn't the Scriptures.
You speculate - with no supporting evidence - about motive, just like some other creationists have done. That is not legitimate debate - you have no magical powers to discern what goes on in the minds of others.BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO IF THEY WANT TO BELIEVE IN THEIR SALVATION.
Name one.In other words, scientific studies of natural selection demonstrate, without exception, that Darwin was wrong.
When the facts are not on your side, your only option is to morph the focus onto the moral character of those who do have the facts on their side.All I read is the same ubiquitous drum role of the Liberal Theologian being regurgitated through a different perverted means and having the same intent to sway people away from the testimony of God and to lead them to the testimony of reprobate men who live in their generation.
I remain convinced that there is something else in play here besides a desire to protect what they see as the biblical basis of essential Christian doctrine. The amount of slanderous filth generated doesn't seem justified by it. Something else must be at stake for them.You speculate - with no supporting evidence - about motive, just like some other creationists have done. That is not legitimate debate - you have no magical powers to discern what goes on in the minds of others.
We Christians who accept reality - and evolution has the status of being a fact about reality - are simply being rational and honouring facts. You can rail and protest against reality all you like but reality is what it is. There is no credible explanation why tens of thousands of highly trained experts would all be wrong, or all be conspiring to hide truth.
And we needn't be having this battle anyway, save for the stiff-necked refusal of (mostly American) fundamentalists to accept the demonstrable possibility that the Genesis account is inspired myth.
I guarantee you are making this up - you will not be able to support the absurd claims.The theory of evolution has always been dependent on a deliberate falsifying of the fossil evidence, hiding evidence detrimental to faith in evolution,....
To quote Steven Pinker:The amount of slanderous filth generated doesn't seem justified by it. Something else must be at stake for them.
I was unclear as to what the OP's train of thought was...you know, given that I'm the OP...I said to myself, "Self (because that's what I call me) what do you mean by what you posted here? I hope some well meaning soul comes along and explains our words to us." And you did, so thank you for that.The original poster reiterates exactly what the leading advocate of Liberal theology states below....
No word is objective; hence no word ever passes from the lips of one person into the hearing of another without being changed in meaning. … Words are never the truth. They are only the medium of truth … Words become the vehicles by which experiences are shared.
And this is what the OP states.......
When stories are told from one generation to the next things change. Some things may be added, others taken away...things become embellished...that's just how it is. It doesn't mean that anyone is lying, necessarily, just that what we hear as a child and what we teach to our children about a subject may change slightly based on our recollection. And then there are those that like to add their own spin to make things more interesting, and it sticks...
So the question that needs to be answered is, does this thread fall within the same intent of Liberal Theologians who want to do away with God's word by imposing their shared community experience over and above the factual text type that is the Genesis account.
Liberal Theologians can not put their own spin on the book of Genesis, they must read it as the factual text type it is.
If you ask a liberal theologian do you apply your own narrative into a factual text type?
They would say no.
So why impose your narrative into a text type that is a factual text type.
Just because one doesn't understand it, it doesn't mean that there are contradiction that permits a person or a group of people to alogorize a factual text type.
All I read is the same ubiquitous drum role of the Liberal Theologian being regurgitated through a different perverted means and having the same intent to sway people away from the testimony of God and to lead them to the testimony of reprobate men who live in their generation.
Nothing under the Sun is new!
Why is it that otherwise intelligent people willfully embrace ignorance when it suits them?Try actually reading the order in the accounts themselves. The order differs.
What about if you actually READ the book of Genesis?For my part, if the theory of evolution was overturned tomorrow, I would not change my view of Genesis on account of it.
I prefer to be part of the tribe who serves God and goes to Heaven, not the tribe who is cast into the hellfire and consumed with the false teachers. Teaching things contrary to the Scriptures will incur the wrath of God. Seriously, it's better to say "This is what I believe" rather than saying "Evolution is a fact and the Bible is false."I though this sounds snotty, but I prefer to be a member of the tribe whose members share the attribute of commitment to rational, evidence-based thinking.
I'm quite confident that Jesus Christ would be called an evolution denier by those who think like you do. I wonder if He would consider you any better than the Pharisees who also taught false doctrine. You stand with your science teacher. I'll stand with my Lord.I understand the motive - the Christian (who knows better and accepts evolution) sees his fellow believer who denies the plain fact of evolution and bends over backward not to offend them by setting them straight.
What makes you think I haven't? I particularly like the Garden story for its subtle complexity. Almost every time I read it I find something new to think about.What about if you actually READ the book of Genesis?
I was told the earth was billions of years old. After actually reading the Bible I leaned that this was impossible. It's easy to have opinions regarding things about which you know very little.
So we're going to hell for not being YECs? And all you want to do is gloat about it--it's the YEC Christian thing to do.I prefer to be part of the tribe who serves God and goes to Heaven, not the tribe who is cast into the hellfire and consumed with the false teachers. Teaching things contrary to the Scriptures will incur the wrath of God. Seriously, it's better to say "This is what I believe" rather than saying "Evolution is a fact and the Bible is false."
I prefer to be a member of the tribe whose members share the attribute of commitment to rational, evidence-based thinking. That way, my identity is not at such high risk of being challenged.
The first time I read that I thought WOW there's something supernatural going on. On a later reading I considered that the pealed sticks would have left stains on the wool. Not so supernatural after all, but it would leave all of the healthy sheep and goats in Jacobs flocks striped and spotted. Jacob was, after all, a duplicitous person.Any question about how literal Genesis is should be put to rest by:
Genesis 30:37 Then Jacob took fresh sticks of poplar and almond and plane trees, and peeled white streaks in them, exposing the white of the sticks. 38 He set the sticks that he had peeled in front of the flocks in the troughs, that is, the watering places, where the flocks came to drink. And since they bred when they came to drink, 39 the flocks bred in front of the sticks and so the flocks brought forth striped, speckled, and spotted.
So, is it possible that this is what happened with Genesis? That after years of oral tradition some of the "facts" changed? I'm not saying this as a dig at creationism, or anything like that. Nor am I saying that there is no truth to be found in Genesis...I believe it paints a beautiful picture of creation, of God's desire to have a relationship with His people, of man's biggest obstacle to overcome being his sinful nature, and how the foundation was being laid for the Christ.
I don't find your view stupid, at all. Thank you for explaining it so nicely, and not labeling me a heretic, as others in this thread have.Personally I think Genesis should be taken literally. I'm not a scholar, I don't read it in the original Hebrew, but one thing I know, I can trust Jesus. There are some things that seem to contradict. OK. Maybe it doesn't really, and I just don't know enough, or I'm not inherently capable of understanding what was really going on. I can admit that. I know I'm not capable of speaking a universe into being. But I know that God is.
Is it possible that Moses, (or whoever, we have it, it was written, I don't care what the guys name was, mostly because that's irrelevant) got his information not from human sources but from God himself when he was up on that mountain? Is it possible that God made sure that the important, essential bits got included in the Genesis account?
Is is possible that a serpent in the Garden of Eden could talk? What were the characteristics of a serpent before the fall of man? I don't know, I have a parrot that talks so that doesn't seem to me to be a huge leap. Maybe that's just because my mind is too simple and I can't see the obstacles.
Do I need to know for sure that the world was created the way the Bible says it was? Do I need to know for sure that Sodom was destroyed by a storm of fire and brimstone? I don't know but there is that great big salt sea unlike anything anywhere else. Do I need to know whether Jacob wrestled with God or an angel? I don't know. Does it matter? It just seems that there is enough information given in the Genesis account where you could look at it and say, maybe.
Maybe I'm just stupid, but every time I read the Genesis account it just seems to have an indefinable something about it that always leaves me thinking WOW, what an awesome God I serve. So until someone comes up with an explanation that crosses all the t's and dots all the i's, I'll just muddle along believing that it's literally true.
Hence the assertion that those who happen to approach the world rationally are "reprobate".
Hence the assertion that those who happen to approach the world rationally are "reprobate
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?