Was Jesus a Creationist?

How far is that, and what stops it?

Please define "kinds".

Then people should be more specific instead of lumping everything together. Evolution is, plain and simple: "Evolution is a change in the gene pool of a population over time. A gene is a hereditary unit that can be passed on unaltered for many generations. The gene pool is the set of all genes in a species or population."
Introduction to evolutionary biology.

I think my point flew above your head on both matters. I was trying to show you that your 'lumping everyone together' was based on your perception of what evolution is and means.

That's not what I'm telling you at all. What I'm telling you is I'm not going to force my beliefs down other peoples throats and I'm not going to insist that I am the ultimate authority on God, which is what you are trying to do.

Please reread what I have written. I stated: "I'd disagree with them, not try to reinterpret their beliefs."
Which goes directly against your false assertion that I do not disagree with 'these folk'.
I like the little rhetoric at the end, but it doesn't give you the right to dictate what other people believe.

Which does nothing to support the faith they should have. They are putting their faith into your husband's version of science and not in the bible/God.

So why are you presenting this 'truth' on a message board instead of trying to change what you believe to be false science?

Assumptions. I actually don't think I've ever run into you on another forum. If I have, please point it out to me.

I totally agree with you here, and I ask that you follow your own advice. All my questions have been straight from 'me' and not as part of the conspiracy that seems to follow you around.

Again, if your such the expert why are you wasting time on message boards? Why not put your skills to use and tackle science head on in the form of peer-reviewed journals? I don't claim to know whether or not all (or even most) creationists are wrong-I just haven't agreed with any I've run across (well, lately, I mean I used to be one, so...).

Easy to say.

I totally agree with all of this.

Alright, perhaps I was a little too rushed. Forgive me for misinterpreting you.

 

It's incomprehensible how anyone can assume that a scientific theory, especially one that was brought forth by two men who were Christians at the time, could be based in a "rebellion against God". Indeed, since evolution is the way God does things in this world, He would have to be rebelling against Himself.

But this is one belief that Helen will cling to regardless of the evidence. If pushed she will admit that Christians who accept evolution don't really do so to rebell against God.

 

i would like to ask a few questions if i may, because i have never had any deep discussions with theistic-evolutionists about their beliefs. do you believe in the worldwide flood as recorded in genesis? do you believe in the biblical account of adam and his descendants?
what parts of the bible do you not believe? and also, how do you personally believe that life began on this planet? i would much appreciate your answers, as i am not entirely certain what the thiestic-evolution standpoint is.
thank you

 

"Indeed, since evolution is the way God does things in this world..."
also if The Galatian would care to explain this.
if it is saying what i think it is, it is quite laughable (poor God up there in Heaven with no way to do anything without the use of evolution).
however i may have failed to grasp the true meaning. sorry if i did.

 

The Ark story is allegorical, not literal. We know this, because it would be impossible to bring in every kind of animal on an Ark that size, among other things.

There had to be a first human with an immortal soul, regardless of how God chose to make it happen. Of course there was an Adam. The geneologies are not possible, since humans have been on the planet a lot longer than 10,000 years.

All of the books of the Bible are true. There are certainly details that someone got wrong, such as pi being 3 and grasshoppers with four legs. But those are incidental errors, and have no bearing on what the Bible tells us.

In Genesis, God says that the earth and waters brought forth living things. Scientists are just beginning to realize that's right.

It's just orthodox Christianity.

Barbarian observes:
"Indeed, since evolution is the way God does things in this world..."

God does almost everything in this world by natural means. As the early Christians observed, some sort of evolution was necessary to be consistent with His creation. We can observe this going on, with new species evolving from old, and abundant evidence in the fossil record and in the genetics and molecules of living things. God is a great deal more amazing and powerful than creationists realize.

One might as well say "Poor God up there in Heaven with no way to do anything, than make his creatures one at a time". It seems to me that God is able to do it any way He wants, but chose nature to do His will here.

A Christian should never be afraid of the truth. If you accept that, then you will find the journey easier.

 

I beg to disagree. I feel all the animals needed
to establish the animal kingdom as it presently
exists, could be placed on the ark. The Bible
is about common observations and not scientific
calculations (cubits and not meters). The Bible
is not about fables unless it is presented as
as one.

 

johndcal's question: "Was Jesus a Creationist?" is pretty interesting. But for Bible believing Christians (and this is a Baptist discussion board) there can be no misunderstanding about the role of Jesus in creation - for He is the Creator! We ascertain this from the gospel of John, in 1:1-3 & 14, as shown below:

 

Orthodox Christians think God is the creator, too. Creationism is not the same as believing in His creation.

We just know a few more of the details.

 

Hi, AC! Its a matter of evidence. There isn't any evidence of a world wide flood in the past 10,000 years.

And all you have to do is interpret the "world" of Noah to be the world as it was known in his day to him. This is a perfectly defensible position.

 

Quote: "There isn't any evidence of a world wide flood in the past 10,000 years."
so, how do you account for the finding of seashells and fish skeletons on the peaks of some of the taller mountains? or the fairly recent find of the fossilized remains of the two velociraptors locked in battle (one was in the act of clawing the other in the chest)? and the discovery of a fish skeleton stuck half in one layer of rock and half in another? all three of these are well documented finds (and not by young earth creationists, by the way). and there are more.

 

and about the whole "animals not being able to fit into the ark" thing. does anybody really believe that they were all full grown animals? and that there were nearly as many species variations as there are today? there were most likely a great deal fewer species than there are today. things do evolve. it seems that it would be quite possible to fit two of every species (not of every species AND all of the variations of that species) into the ark. and do notice that the bible never says they were full grown. i'm sure God isn't that stupid. he would know if every species was going to fit. and it's not as if humpback whales were expected to go into the ark as well.

 

Plate tectonics. Hey, it works!

Since they are well-documented, perhaps you could do so for us. We cannot evaluate what you are saying without some reference to the actual evidence. I suppose I could make some vague refutation, but that wouldn't be very satisfactory to any of us.

 

i will attempt to gather the information as quickly as possible : ) the one about the velociraptors was in national geographic i believe.
also, would you say that the fossils of the fish and shells were formed prior to the mountains? because it required a great deal of pressure to make the fish fossilize before completely deteriorating. if so, how many years took place in between the fossilization and the mountains? i have only heard vague or illogical explanations of this. and one more thing. do you think man evolved from a lower life form? because there have been no findings of multiple missing links. there have only been a few supposed discoveries that are far from convincing. there should be quite a few not-quite-human-yet skeletons around here somewhere, for it took so many years to evolve. i have never heard this explained well either. perhaps you have the logical and scientific explaination. i would be very grateful. : )

 

It would be interesting, but I'm not sure what it has to do with evolution or an old earth.

Exactly. It is the only way to explain the geometry of the fossil beds with respect to topography.

Well, there you are. They were first buried and then later uplifted to their current positons.

Depends on the age of the strata and the age of the mountain range.

Reading some websites is pretty unsatisfactory, I'm sure you agree.

Yes, it is the best explanation of the data that we have.

I think the record might be richer than you think and, regardless, even with scattered data, we still have to explain what we know.

Sure. There are several reasons a fossil species might be rare. First of all, the preservation of terrestrial animals is a very chancey thing. I think Galatian has a lot of information on hominid fossils and he would be much more knowledgable than I on this subject.

 

Hi Johndcal, I wasn't sure we'd be hearing from you again. I'd like to hear more about your views. Come and visit with us down here in the Baptist Board basement now and then.

Brother Rob

 

Varation within kind is fact (I don't look exactly
like you and you don't look exactly like me, and
twins don't behave exactly the same).

To suggest that creation didn't happen the way
the Bible says is to call into question the Flood.
To call the Flood into question is to say Noah
never needed to build the ark. To call the ark
into question is to call Jesus Christ a LIAR.
LIARS are sinners, therefore Jesus saves no one.

You also distroy GOD's dispensations. GOD
expected certain things from Adam. Then GOD
expected certain things form Noah. Then GOD
expected certain things from Abraham. Presently,
GOD expects us to trust in Jesus----the fulfillment of the Law.

Will there be a rapture of the CHURCH? It is
ONLY found in the BIBLE. Can you trust it?

Jesus will return again with HIS CHURCH to
rule the world for 1000 years. It is ONLY found
in the BIBLE. Will you accept it?

The world that was judged by water will be judged
by fire. It is found ONLY in the Bible. Can
you believe it?

You see EVERYTHING in the BIBLE hinges on
EVERYTHING else. You can not be a pick and
choose believer. You will surely have second
thooughts about your salvation and become LUKE
WARM.

 

Rom 14:4
4 Who are you to judge the servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls; and stand he will, for the Lord is able to make him stand.
NAS

 

Creationism denies Genesis. Creation of life ex nihilo is directly contradicted by Scripture.

However, one should always be careful to remember that one's particular interpretation of God's word is not God's word.

That is not the way to Him.

 

Paul of Eugene:

Christians are NEVER to rely on THEIR own opinions
nor their own logic nor their schooling to
judge another. The Bible is what Christian are
to use as the foundation of godly judgement
through the interpretation given by the Holy Spirit through prayer. The Word of God IS the
ONLY standard for judging the "works" of another.

You judge the Bible and Creationists through
YOUR "scientific" knowledge. I am to point out
to you, that as a Christian, your faith must
rest on the Word of God and NOT with the logic
of men.

God's Word is but man's logic changes to suit
the situation and is self-centered and corrupt.
Even your scientific knowledge is incomplete
and is bias.