Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[Hoghead1]

Luke 17, I don't know where you are getting your ideas about theistic evolution. Being affiliated with the movement, I know your claims here seem more like stereotypes than reality. Theistic evolution does not attack the Bible. It does , however, challenge your interpretation, your a priori assumptions about Scripture. Also, no, we don't have a weak God. Where did you get that idea from?

 

[Hoghead1]

ScottA, you are assuming divine omnipotence. However, omnipotence may well be a major theological mistake. If God predetermines or predestines everything that happens, then we have no real freedom of choice, and God becomes the author of evil. Many Christians do tend to view God as a cosmic dictator, the Ruthless Moralist, Ruling Caesar, and Unmoved Mover. Bit I and many others do not think this is a superior model of power. Compared to a dictatorship, it takes far more talent to govern over a democracy, the be in power over powers, participating in the free self-decisions of others.

 

[Hoghead1]

Extraneous, trying to downgrade fellow Christians by saying their theology is nothing but a harbor for the flesh is totally inappropriate in a serious theological discussion. One of the reasons why there isn't always peace in the Christian community is because some feel they have the right to insult and rundown fellow Christians who do not share their beliefs. Unfortunately, you post is a prime example of this problem.

 

[Hoghead1]

Hier, when you say God is a liar, that is coming from your preconceived-of dogmas. You are assuming that the Bible has to be inerrant, or God is a liar. But who says that God intended Scripture to be an inerrant geophysical witness? That is your human-made theory. OK, fine. But where is the evidence? Also, you seem to be assuming that God dictated the Bible word for word to purely passive scribes who wrote it down exactly as God had said it. OK, fine. But where is your evidence for that? That's precisely why I went into modern biblical studies. I want to test out the preconceived-of biases we may have about Scripture. Now when I see the tension between the biblical cosmology and modern science, my conclusion is that God did not intend Scripture to be an inerrant scientific witness. When I look at the contradictions in Scripture, I am compelled to say it is not inerrant, something God dictated word for word. My conclusion, then, is that Scripture is the product of a God-human interaction and therefore there are human fingerprints all over the Bible. Matter of fact, what books are or are not canon was based on the human decision-making of the church fathers. Also, I don't see this as an either-or matter. Either Scripture is inerrant or it is all errant and should be thrown out. Either-or thinking is irrational and unrealistic. Reality is a shade of grey.

 

[Extraneous]

Extraneous, trying to downgrade fellow Christians by saying their theology is nothing but a harbor for the flesh is totally inappropriate in a serious theological discussion. One of the reasons why there isn't always peace in the Christian community is because some feel they have the right to insult and rundown fellow Christians who do not share their beliefs. Unfortunately, you post is a prime example of this problem.

Actually its up to par with true theology. It may not be watered down as you would like, but its surely serious theology none the less. Coming from a guy who doesn't quote scripture, but instead quotes his own opinions, im not surprised by your objection.

 

[Extraneous]

Hoghead isnt actually posting real theology, and that is evident by his lack of scripture references in almost all his posts. His opinions are only bare assertions.

 

[Faith77]

Actually, bare assertions are assertions that are not backed up. He has provided support for his position, so his statements are not bare assertions. Real theology is not described by how many scriptures are referenced. Rather, it is about theological perspectives. Simply quoting scriptures does not provide support when the point is that interpretation of scriptures is the issue here. If I say to my kids, "Go jump" and one takes that to mean to lift off their feet off the ground, and another takes that to mean to leave the room, and yet another takes that to mean something else like the point is being dismissed, then each child is not going to validate his/her understanding of that statement simply by repeating that Mom said, "Go jump", or insisting that any child who doesn't interpret it the way he/she understands it is a liar or disobedient.

 

[Extraneous]

Actually, bare assertions are assertions that are not backed up. He has provided support for his position, so his statements are not bare assertions. Real theology is not described by how many scriptures are referenced. Rather, it is about theological perspectives. Simply quoting scriptures does not provide support when the point is that interpretation of scriptures is the issue here. If I say to my kids, "Go jump" and one takes that to mean to lift off their feet off the ground, and another takes that to mean to leave the room, and yet another takes that to mean something else like the point is being dismissed, then each child is not going to validate his/her understanding of that statement simply by repeating that Mom said, "Go jump", or insisting that any child who doesn't interpret it the way he/she understands it is a liar or disobedient.

He gave no scripture reference to back up his arguments concerning what is and is not sound doctrine. Thats what im talking about

 

[ScottA]

Again, you assume God is the author of the scripture. I do have a choice about weather or not I believe the grossly exaggerated narratives written by the self important so called "chosen people" who reject Christ.

Jesus sent the spirit of truth for all people of the earth.

So, then, in your way of thinking...God is not in control of people and His word? 'Cause that is what you are suggesting.

 

[Colter]

So, then, in your way of thinking...God is not in control of people and His word? 'Cause that is what you are suggesting.

The Word is God, the Bible books are mans written word about the doings of God as they understood it.

 

[Abraxos]

When I was little I believed in Evolution without a moments thought to ever question it. I believed we used to live in caves and hunt Mammoths and what-have-you. I've seen the iconic picture of the ape slowly transitioning into a man and thought it was real because scientists said so, right?

I started to see the inconsistencies in the "science" that evolutionists had in backing up their theory and found the evidence for evolution to be quite laughable and dishonest. I quickly began to realize that convincing others how stupid the theory of evolution was (even though the evidence is clear)was not an evidential problem, but a spiritual problem. When I walked with God and studied the Bible and it's history diligently (took a few years) I learned it was only through the Bible I was able to distinguish truth from lie otherwise I would perhaps still be believing evolution was a scientific fact.

That said, I've known many Christians who love Jesus Christ and God as much as the next Christian and still believe evolution is scientific fact. What's important is they are good people and love Jesus Christ and accept him as their lord and saviour, right? Personally, the book of revelation speaks of the different standpoints in the faith and I see this theory as a necessity.

 

[Extraneous]

The Word is God, the Bible books are mans written word about the doings of God as they understood it.

We are however suppose to believe that you understand better than they did? After all, you learned from atheist scientists, not prophets who spoke Gods word at the expense of their own lives.

 

[ScottA]

ScottA, you are assuming divine omnipotence. However, omnipotence may well be a major theological mistake. If God predetermines or predestines everything that happens, then we have no real freedom of choice, and God becomes the author of evil. Many Christians do tend to view God as a cosmic dictator, the Ruthless Moralist, Ruling Caesar, and Unmoved Mover. Bit I and many others do not think this is a superior model of power. Compared to a dictatorship, it takes far more talent to govern over a democracy, the be in power over powers, participating in the free self-decisions of others.

That certainly would be the popular perspective from inside the creation bubble.

But that assumes that God is not greater than His creation, that He has rolled the dice and looks on from afar...which is not true. History (His creation) is His story. It is only our story within that context...which makes freedom of choice, completely subject to His will. And then again, time is a mere part of His created bubble too, as the mere media by which He tells His story...which just happens to eliminate any idea that any of this is actually on a timeline...but rather, as the scripture elude...all exists within the twinkling of an eye.

Bubble, bubble.

 

[Colter]

We are however suppose to believe that you understand better than they did? After all, you learned from atheist scientists, not prophets who spoke Gods word at the expense of their own lives.

Not all scientist are atheist.

Btw, it wasn't scientist who mistreated the prophets, it was closed minded religious people.

The common people heard Jesus gladly, but the theology lawyers not so much.

 

[ScottA]

The Word is God, the Bible books are mans written word about the doings of God as they understood it.

And God's not in control of that?

'Cause what you are suggesting would be that He is not. Also, that would mean that He is not the Word (because, as you say, it's all a pack of lies), but instead He is only the spirit of truth, and that is the only way He conveys His truth.

So...is God the Word that does not allow it to return void, or is the word all just man's lies - which is it?

 

[Colter]

"John answered and said, "Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name; and we tried to prevent him because he does not follow along with us." But Jesus said to him, "Do not hinder him; for he who is not against you is for you."

 

[Colter]

And God's not in control of that?

'Cause what you are suggesting would be that He is not. Also, that would mean that He is not the Word (because, as you say, it's all a pack of lies), but instead He is only the spirit of truth, and that is the only way He conveys His truth.

So...is God the Word that does not allow it to return void, or is the word all just man's lies - which is it?

Never said "it's all a pack of lies."

God allows free will mankind to learn and grow in wisdom. Jesus never forced anyone to believe anything.

And obviously the Gods allowed Lucifer to rebel.

 

[Hoghead1]

Extraneous, true theology is anything but insulting and casting aspersion on your fellow Christians who don't share you views. In a true theological dialogue, you address your opponents arguments. If you disagree, you should provide a rational rebuttal. There is no excuse for attacking someone's character. Also, all you have stated here are your opinions, your interpretation of Scripture. OK, fine. That's what we are here for. However, your posts are your opinions and just that. So they can and should be questioned. And those who question you should be treated with respect. That's the rule here.

 

[Hoghead1]

ScottA, it definitely does not assume that creation is greater than God. That's a totally irrational reply. Where did you get that idea?

 

[Extraneous]

Not all scientist are atheist.

Btw, it wasn't scientist who mistreated the prophets, it was closed minded religious people.

The common people heard Jesus gladly, but the theology lawyers not so much.

How would you know? That story is just fallible words written by men. THey are not truth, according to you.