Intelligent Design, Science & Religion

[Jostler]

18 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

This is also largely untrue. I, and many of my colleagues, accept the theory of evolution AND the inerrancy of God’s Word.

Again, you may certainly disagree, but I suggest taking care with assertions that can easily be proven false.

I have to wonder if you even believe that yourself.

If God has no more ability to  be precise than to make up  a story  out of whole cloth, then you're free to disbelieve  ANY  part of His Word.  You elevate your own intellect above the sure  Word of God and then claim you believe in "inerrancy"?  Man I'd love to see how  you define that one....

 

Quote

Gen 2:7-8

Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.  The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed.

 

There is no sane way to read that except to understand intimate, personal and present interaction in a specific place at a specific time, where  God created a man and a Garden suitable for him to live in.   If you  think that is some metaphorical story Moses made up then there's nothing to stop you from dismissing any other passage you don't want to believe..

 

Quote

2Pe 1:20

But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,

 

I really  don't have any say in  what  you believe about anything, but good grief....at least have the intellectual integrity to avoid claiming belief in  "inerrancy".

[dhchristian]

32 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

This is your opinion, but as someone that could be classified as a theistic evolutionist, my opinion differs completely. In the words of 19th century theologian, Charles Kingsley,

“Shall we quarrel with Science if she should show how those words (Darwin’s) are true? What, in one word, should we have to say but this?–We knew of old that God was so wise that He could make all things; but behold, He is so much wiser than even that, that He can make all things make themselves.”

My awe of the Lord’s beauty, power, and creativity is only enhanced by the complexity of the evolutionary process.

The Quote to me is a cop out. About Mr. Kingsley… 

He is particularly associated with Christian socialism

He was a friend and correspondent with Charles Darwin.

He was sympathetic to the idea of evolution and was one of the first to welcome Charles Darwin's book On the Origin of Species.

Kingsley was accused of racism towards the Roman Catholic Irish poor^[11] and wrote in a letter to his wife from Ireland in 1860, "I am haunted by the human chimpanzees I saw along that hundred miles of horrible country [Ireland]...to see white chimpanzees is dreadful; if they were black one would not see it so much, but their skins, except where tanned by exposure, are as white as ours."^[12] 

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Kingsley

Good choice of supporting quote, explains exactly where you are coming from...Limiting God to natural processes for creation is to deny the Sovereignty of God and His omnipotence. You of course are free so to believe, But I would rather be shown to be wrong by Charles Darwin, than almighty God.

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

11 hours ago, dhchristian said:

And who wrote the understanding that the definition of life is the ability to reproduce? You see, you cannot have it both ways. You cannot accept evolution and the Word of God simultaneously.

You can certainly believe in a 6000 year old earth and a 144 hour creation period, however it is absolutely false to claim that one cannot accept both God’s Word and evolution. You can disagree with me, but you cannot tell me what I accept.

You cannot accept the Word of God as inerrant if you accept evolution. It is a compromise, When you compromise, like this, the Word of God is compromised. This is akin to partial unbelief. 

[enoob57]

People can notice that to claim a thing and then believe other is ridiculous... If I were to believe something yet claim something else what would I be... The greatest error of evolution is it builds upon death not life.... 

John 14:6

6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
KJV

If something builds upon death then it is not built upon Christ....

[dhchristian]

2 hours ago, maryjayne said:

With respect, this sentence does (or can) read as suggesting that indigenous or previous cultures were stupid. We know this is not the case. Maybe 'sophisticated' may be what you mean?

Thanks, Yes my wording was not very good, and I attempted to correct this here...

13 hours ago, ChessPlayer said:

19 hours ago, dhchristian said:

We see this history at work today as well as the gathering cultures (Native Americans, Inuit, tribal cultures) are dying out being replaced by more intelligent and industrialized cultures.

Wow. Just wow. Did you take this line from the 19th century colonialism talking points? 

Almost sounds like the original Title of Darwin's Book, doesn't it..."The Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life.".

This is a statement of fact, not colonialism. I am not justifying the elimination of native cultures by it, merely stating a fact that they are on the verge of extinction because they have not adapted. Some have adapted and are surviving while maintaining their way of life, but that is the exception. Tribes such as those in the Amazon, have for the most part assimilated into the cultures of the countries they live in, the ones that have not have a low life expectancy and their numbers are dwindling. Do I like it? No, But it is a fact. This fact shows the sinfulness of man, and the fact that creation itself is groaning due to this sinfulness, exactly as the Word of God predicts. The Wicked prosper, while the meek are killed off.

 

[one.opinion]

22 hours ago, Jostler said:

I have to wonder if you even believe that yourself.

You can disagree, but you have exactly zero standing suggesting I do not believe what I do.

22 hours ago, Jostler said:

You elevate your own intellect above the sure  Word of God and then claim you believe in "inerrancy"?

I understand it is difficult to consider that a literal interpretation of the Scriptures is not the only possible interpretation. For much of my life, to my shame, I tended to look down on individuals that did not accept a 144-hour creation period. You may possibly remember that back in history, astronomers began to teach that the sun did not revolve around the earth and were persecuted by the church that stood firmly on a particular literal interpretation.

My brother, not only do I CLAIM to believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, I DO believe it. I suggest not lowering yourself to the point of doubling-down on your accusation of falsehood, since the Bible teaches very strongly about that. I believe that the Bible is 100% accurate in what it affirms. The Genesis account affirms God as sole Creator of the entire universe and everything in it.

Just as most Christians do not hold to a literal interpretation of passages suggesting a solid "dome" (raqia), or the earth and sky supported by physical pillars, or the sun revolving around the earth, I do not hold to a literal interpretation of a 144-hour creation period roughly 6000 years ago. Viewing the Bible with a different interpretation does not mean that I believe the Bible is in error.

 

[one.opinion]

22 hours ago, dhchristian said:

He is particularly associated with Christian socialism

He was a friend and correspondent with Charles Darwin.

He was sympathetic to the idea of evolution and was one of the first to welcome Charles Darwin's book On the Origin of Species.

Kingsley was accused of racism towards the Roman Catholic Irish poor^[11] and wrote in a letter to his wife from Ireland in 1860, "I am haunted by the human chimpanzees I saw along that hundred miles of horrible country [Ireland]...to see white chimpanzees is dreadful; if they were black one would not see it so much, but their skins, except where tanned by exposure, are as white as ours."^[12] 

None of this has anything to do with the quote I presented. I am simply making the point that His creation is even more amazing and complex than I first considered. The more I understand about the intricacies of life at a molecular level, the more I am in awe of my Creator! For me at least, God-guided evolution in no way detracts from His amazing power.

22 hours ago, dhchristian said:

Limiting God to natural processes for creation is to deny the Sovereignty of God and His omnipotence.

I certainly do not limit God to natural process, God is THE CREATOR of natural processes. Your point is off-base and moot.

22 hours ago, dhchristian said:

You cannot accept the Word of God as inerrant if you accept evolution.

Yes, you've mentioned this, but it just as untrue now as it was earlier in the thread.

 

[one.opinion]

10 hours ago, Abdicate said:

Evolution by natural selection ended when "Hello World" code was invented in computers.

Yes, there are smart men that have important things to say about a form of evolution WITHOUT GOD. None of these points address a form of evolution that was set in motion by an omnipotent, omniscient Creator.

[dhchristian]

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

None of this has anything to do with the quote I presented. I am simply making the point that His creation is even more amazing and complex than I first considered. The more I understand about the intricacies of life at a molecular level, the more I am in awe of my Creator! For me at least, God-guided evolution in no way detracts from His amazing power.

It most certainly does, It denies his Ability to create something out of nothing instantaneously, by His Spoken Word. Jesus is the Word of God, and you deny His role in that creation. Let there be Light, and there was Light, And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

All of them created instantly with the ability reproduce, and be fruitful and multiply. They were perfect and complete, and divided by "kinds".

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

On 8/25/2019 at 12:31 AM, dhchristian said:

Limiting God to natural processes for creation is to deny the Sovereignty of God and His omnipotence.

I certainly do not limit God to natural process, God is THE CREATOR of natural processes. Your point is off-base and moot.

 Yes, God did create natural processes instantly by his spoken Word. Your Point is off base and moot. 

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

On 8/25/2019 at 12:31 AM, dhchristian said:

You cannot accept the Word of God as inerrant if you accept evolution.

Yes, you've mentioned this, but it just as untrue now as it was earlier in the thread.

You add your interpretation to the Word of God, and remove it from the plain easily understood text. By adding your own interpretation you say it is inerrant and untrue what is said therein, That God created everything in six days. You have compromised the Word of God, and thus robbed God of His Glory. In Order for your theory to work, you have to remove six days (mornings and evenings) from the text.  

[Justin Adams]

We discuss stuff we really have nothing but opinions about.

God did it all. He did not use millions of years of experimental creatures leaving a trail of half alive corpses and billions of half-made things until He got it correct. Nonsense.

And to play the 'inerrant' card is harking back to the dark ages when the priestly class subjugated us peasants by jail, death and dismemberment, just to prove they were in charge of 'love'.

More nonsense.

God is Himself in no need of us. He desires to include us and has made us His imagers. In His likeness. Do some historical study. When has the 'ruling class' ever been doing what they do in God's Image?
Yeshua/Jesus GAVE us Salvation, yet we will try to sell subscriptions to heaven in spite of this.
We proclaim that He only kick-started our journey, and to get the 'real' itinerary, we have to make our checks payable to...

Edited August 26, 2019 by Justin Adams

[one.opinion]

5 hours ago, dhchristian said:

It most certainly does, It denies his Ability to create something out of nothing instantaneously, by His Spoken Word.

This is another erroneous claim. In my post, I said God was omnipotent (all-powerful). God can absolutely create out of nothing (I believe He did) and instantaneously (if He chose to). However, I believe that what we can see of God’s creation strongly suggests that it was an unfolding of the earth and the universe over time. 

Genesis 1:24 - Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds.