10 Dangers of Theistic Evolution

[Aaron]

How could you not GET the point???

Aaron asked me to site early church people who espoused a flat-earth.

No I didn't. I challenged you to cite your basis for the assertion that "most Christians" believed in a flat earth and that it was a central tenet with which "the church" was loathe to part.

Out of the vast body of the works of the fathers, you cite only one, and he one of the least influential, who in one place passingly dismissed the idea of a round earth, and lightly ridiculed the speculations of pagans.

Your other citation is of one who argued not against a spherical world, but the pagan assertion of fanciful races outside the lineage of Adam and Noah on the other side to which travel was impossible, at least in accordance with the prevailing scientific speculations concerning the globe at the time.

I will respond in more detail later. In short, the idea that "the church" taught or that even most Christians believed the earth was flat is a myth, and I will cite sources. (Hard to do in the fifteen minutes allotted for my afternoon break.)

 

[Luke2427]

No I didn't. I challenged you to cite your basis for the assertion that "most Christians" believed in a flat earth and that it was a central tenet with which "the church" was loathe to part.

Out of the vast body of the works of the fathers, you cite only one, and he one of the least influential, who in one place passingly dismissed the idea of a round earth, and lightly ridiculed the speculations of pagans.

Your other citation is of one who argued not against a spherical world, but the pagan assertion of fanciful races outside the lineage of Adam and Noah on the other side to which travel was impossible, at least in accordance with the prevailing scientific speculations concerning the globe at the time.

I will respond in more detail later. In short, the idea that "the church" taught or that even most Christians believed the earth was flat is a myth, and I will cite sources. (Hard to do in the fifteen minutes allotted for my afternoon break.)

Pitiful.

You wanted citations that supported the notion that the church once believed a flat earth.

I provided the most respected theologian and church father of ALL TIME saying that the earth was not spherical and you STILL balk.

What the heck do you want me to do? Provide a thousand quotes from laymen to prove that they believed what Augustine believed????

UTTERLY, UTTERLY,UTTERLY RIDICULOUS and ABSURD!!!

 

[OldRegular]

Secondly, he assumes that science and the Bible are at odds. They are not- ever.

Your understanding of Lisle is faulty. He is a scientist with a PhD in astrophysics and is engaged in scientific research. He would argue that true science agrees with Scripture.

For every one person like Lisle in that field there are a thousand who think he is a moron.

A thousand "who", astrophysicists or people like you. Whichever, you are writing from an uninformed position by making such a statement. Have you ever studied any branch of science?

Sad to say but you sound {metaphorically speaking} like one of the Bio Logos converts.

"You sound like a..." is always a snotty statement to me.

It is not an argument. It is designed to demean or lump someone in a category in a negative way.

I can do it, too.

"You sound like one of those backwards, backwater, snake-handling moron converts."

See, its kind of a jerk thing to do isn't it?

Even if it is true.

Luke,
I posted some insightful comments by Jason Lisle who is head of research at the Institute for Creation Research that address the OP. You don't agree with his position and make a statement that has no basis in fact, the first quote presented above. I present the chronology of posts that follow just to show that your remarks about Lisle are uninformed but based on your dislike of anyone who disagrees with you, resorting to calling Lisle a moron..

The University of Colorado obviously did not believe he was a moron or they would not have granted a doctors degree in Astrophysics. Just what qualifies you to make any of the successive insulting comments in the following posts?

You claim to be a pastor then behave like one!

 

[Aaron]

You wanted citations that supported the notion that the church once believed a flat earth.

Right. The church as a whole, not one or two people.

I provided the most respected theologian and church father of ALL TIME saying that the earth was not spherical and you STILL balk.

If by that you mean Augustine, he did not argue against a spherical earth as I said. You're wrong.

What the heck do you want me to do?

Read more carefully. What did you do, cut and paste the first references you found in an internet search?

I'm thankful for CMI:

http://creation.com/the-flat-earth-myth-and-creationism

 

[OldRegular]

Right. The church as a whole, not one or two people.

If by that you mean Augustine, he did not argue against a spherical earth as I said. You're wrong.

Read more carefully. What did you do, cut and paste the first references you found in an internet search?

I'm thankful for CMI:

http://creation.com/the-flat-earth-myth-and-creationism

CMI does some good work as does the Institute for Creation Research and the Creation Research Society.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke,
I posted some insightful comments by Jason Lisle who is head of research at the Institute for Creation Research that address the OP. You don't agree with his position and make a statement that has no basis in fact, the first quote presented above. I present the chronology of posts that follow just to show that your remarks about Lisle are uninformed but based on your dislike of anyone who disagrees with you, resorting to calling Lisle a moron..

The University of Colorado obviously did not believe he was a moron or they would not have granted a doctors degree in Astrophysics. Just what qualifies you to make any of the successive insulting comments in the following posts?

You claim to be a pastor then behave like one!

Because, Oldregular, there are doctors with degrees who believe that the earth is the center of the galaxy and that the sun is moving and orbiting the earth.

But we laugh at their madness because they are one in a million... or maybe ten million.

I'll tell you what- name 25 astrophysicists who believe the universe is no more than 10,000 years old.

I doubt that there are any more who believe the earth is 10,0000 years old than there are that believe the Earth is the center of the galaxy.

25

 

[Luke2427]

Right. The church as a whole, not one or two people.

If by that you mean Augustine, he did not argue against a spherical earth as I said. You're wrong.

Read more carefully. What did you do, cut and paste the first references you found in an internet search?

I'm thankful for CMI:

http://creation.com/the-flat-earth-myth-and-creationism

I provided the quote from Augustine. You just lack the humility to eat crow.

That means you will never grow past where you are. You are incapable of eating crow- incapable of admitting you were dead wrong about something- no matter how glaringly obvious it is to every thinking person who sees it.

It's sad really.

And if you've been that way for very long, then you have not grown in many years. That would put you way behind a much younger man who has the character to eat crow.

Sad really. Really sad.

 

[Aaron]

I provided the quote from Augustine. You just lack the humility to eat crow.

That means you will never grow past where you are. You are incapable of eating crow- incapable of admitting you were dead wrong about something- no matter how glaringly obvious it is to every thinking person who sees it.

It's sad really.

And if you've been that way for very long, then you have not grown in many years. That would put you way behind a much younger man who has the character to eat crow.

Sad really. Really sad.

Which, being interpreted, meaneth:

I can't find anything other than these obscure references, one of which I'm mistaken, and overcome the superior scholarship of those to whom you've pointed me, so I'm just going to cast aspersions on your character. Fie! Fie!

:sleeping_2:

 

[Luke2427]

Which, being interpreted, meaneth:

I can't find anything other than these obscure references, one of which I'm mistaken, and overcome the superior scholarship of those to whom you've pointed me, so I'm just going to cast aspersions on your character. Fie! Fie!

:sleeping_2:

Which being interpreted is- "No, no matter the fact that I asked for references and you gave THE BEST of them, I still will not confess my error because I lack the capacity and humility to say I am wrong."

 

[Aaron]

Well, again, the BEST of them didn't argue for a flat earth in the quote you posted.

Gotta find another one. Good luck!

 

[Revmitchell]

I provided the quote from Augustine. You just lack the humility to eat crow.

Does anyone else see the irony in this statement.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Does anyone else see the irony in this statement.

Accusation of lack of humility from the perspective of great hubris? Yeah, got that.

 

[Luke2427]

Well, again, the BEST of them didn't argue for a flat earth in the quote you posted.

Gotta find another one. Good luck!

He did argue against a spherical earth.

You keep regurgitating this silly demand to prove the "church as a whole" believed this nonsense.

"The church as a whole" has never written anything. What is one supposed to do? Get a written statement from a hundred million Christians in the early church saying they think a spherical earth is an absurd idea?

Balderdash!

Augustine, without question the most respected spokesman the church had in her first 1000 years following the apostles,said in no uncertain terms that he denied the idea of a spherical earth.

But, since you lack the humility to say these three words, "I was wrong," let's just change the paradigm.

Do you deny that the Church at large once vociferously rejected heliocentricity on the grounds that no matter what scientists say, the Bible teaches that the planets and stars orbit the earth?

 

[Aaron]

He did argue against a spherical earth.

Not in the quote you posted. Not once.

 

[Luke2427]

Not in the quote you posted. Not once.

Do you deny that the Church at large once vociferously rejected heliocentricity on the grounds that no matter what scientists say, the Bible teaches that the planets and stars orbit the earth?

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Do you deny that the Church at large once vociferously rejected heliocentricity on the grounds that no matter what scientists say, the Bible teaches that the planets and stars orbit the earth?

The church has made the mistake of saying the Bible says a lot of things it does not say, and it does not say that. The authority we are debating here is the Bible, not the church.

 

[quantumfaith]

Do you deny that the Church at large once vociferously rejected heliocentricity on the grounds that no matter what scientists say, the Bible teaches that the planets and stars orbit the earth?

My guess is he will not concede that simple truth.

 

[Luke2427]

The church has made the mistake of saying the Bible says a lot of things it does not say, and it does not say that. The authority we are debating here is the Bible, not the church.

I think you're missing the point.

The point is that YeCers are like those who vociferously rejected Galileo saying the BIBLE.. THE BIBLE!!!... teaches that the sun revolves around the earth!!!

THE BIBLE!!!

THE BIBLE!!!

Science is EVIL!!!! Galileo is a compromiser who trusts science over the BIBLE!!

But eventually, those passages that they once thought were literal they came to understand were figurative.

Now, one day you will see that, too- or at least your children will.

But until then we have to endure the madness.

 

[Aaron]

Do you deny that the Church at large once vociferously rejected heliocentricity on the grounds that no matter what scientists say, the Bible teaches that the planets and stars orbit the earth?

Yes. I don't deny that the church officially interpreted certain passages as geocentric, but I do deny your characterization.

I deny that the Church said, "no matter what scientists say," because geocentrism was the science of the day—not because of the Bible, or the Church's influence, but because of the influence of Aristotle and Ptolemy. The church interpreted the Scriptures to agree with the institutions of science, just like you are doing now with the word day.

That geocentricity was the cosmology of the civilized and learned world is a fact. There never was a similar (or even remotely comparable) flat earth cosmology.

 

[Luke2427]

Yes. I don't deny that the church officially interpreted certain passages as geocentric, but I do deny your characterization.

I deny that the Church said, "no matter what scientists say," because geocentrism was the science of the day—not because of the Bible, or the Church's influence, but because of the influence of Aristotle and Ptolemy. The church interpreted the Scriptures to agree with the institutions of science, just like you are doing now with the word day.

That geocentricity was the cosmology of the civilized and learned world is a fact. There never was a similar (or even remotely comparable) flat earth cosmology.

No, the church interpreted those passages as teaching a geocentric galaxy before the Renaissance (rebirth of Greek philosophy).

It was an exegetical fallacy. Science advanced and many were unwilling, like you are now, to recheck their exegetical treatment of such passages in light of the advancement so they made all of the church look like fools.

You are clinging to outdated science (young earth) and outdated exegetical treatment of creation passages just like the church was clinging to outdated science and exegetical treatment of what appeared to be geocentric passages in Galileo's day.