Could God Have Used Evolution?

[Thinkingstuff]

I have no clue how you arrived at that question from my post...

Re-read it.

You meant generally. I was thinking in the context of this thread.

 

[lbaker]

Since those who don't even believe in God are saying dariwinianism cannot be true, the methodology should be a no brainer, IMO. God's creation does not include darwinianism.

On the other hand, the atheist former Darwinians may now just be wrong on both counts.

BTW, belief in the possibility of evolution doesn't necessarily = Darwinian. Actually, if I remember right, Darwin had no idea how the changes occured since he knew nothing of genes, chromosones, etc.

 

[webdog]

On the other hand, the atheist former Darwinians may now just be wrong on both counts.

BTW, belief in the possibility of evolution doesn't necessarily = Darwinian. Actually, if I remember right, Darwin had no idea how the changes occured since he knew nothing of genes, chromosones, etc.

Since intellignce requires intelligence...Darwin's theory starts with a false presupposition. Today's science is pointing away from micro evolution, not to it. Macro evolution is a fact, though. 100 years ago my favorite dog the pug used to be 100 lbs. Today they are 10 - 12 lbs. Belief that God used evolution to create the world is contrary to His own Word.

 

[annsni]

Since intellignce requires intelligence...Darwin's theory starts with a false presupposition. Today's science is pointing away from micro evolution, not to it. Macro evolution is a fact, though. 100 years ago my favorite dog the pug used to be 100 lbs. Today they are 10 - 12 lbs. Belief that God used evolution to create the world is contrary to His own Word.

I think you have the macro/micro mixed up.

 

[webdog]

I think you have the macro/micro mixed up.

:laugh: You're right...that should teach me to do more than one thing at once

 

[Marcia]

This is the point. Song of Songs is a type of literature and by that nature we can expect certain things from it and not expect certain things from it.

It is still the word of God, not matter what kind of literature it is.

The creation account is also literature in this way not to be taken apart from what it is. It's making a point about God and Creation. Not a scientific journal.

It's not just making a point! It is relating a series of events as factual events. God is not like an occult writer who write things down one way and then you have to "dig" the meaning out through esoteric techniques or games. When the people read this at the time they would take it as a straightforward narrative. And what about God reiterating the 6 days of creation in Ex. 20??

Both camps would say they are God's word but the camp I'm defending states that God doesn't want you to take it the way you're presenting it.

Where is the evidence in the Gen. account that we are not to take it that way? Where is the evidence - not just for us but for the original readers of this -- that this is not a factual account?

We differ on what inspired means I think. There was an ancient belief that the HS kindof possesses the writer of scripture and that the man writes under this possession. I don't believe that is inspiration. God uses men with their abilities and in their fashions (which includes poetry, history, alegory, etc...) so it is jointly exactly what God wants to say and exactly what the writer of the scripture wants to say with all their idiosyncracies.

Well, then, you are denying what God says about the inspiration of the Bible. And what we think inspire means does not matter -- as Allan pointed out, it's not meaning what many mean by it today. It means "God-breathed" words. The very breath of God - his words. These are not words men got by thinking about God or coming to conclusions on their own. These are God's words. Do you not believe that? If so, then the Bible is just another historical document on par with everything else.

 

[Marcia]

I personally was never on the side of evolution. However, chose it here because not many would and it wouldn't be fair.

Actually, you might be surprised. I think quite a few here might be theistic evolutionists. A couple of years ago, there were several of them and this issue came up several few times.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

No I haven't denied that scriptures is God breathed or inspired. I have said I don't think God highjacks the man who is writing and is not cognisceant of what he is writing like some of the ancients believed but they work in concert with God orchestrating. Big diff.

 

[Marcia]

I know, just making a joke.

Personally, I would prefer it (evolution) not to be true and nothing would please me more than for genuine scientists to suddenly say "Eureka, er, we seem to have miscalculated. The Earth is only 6,000 years old!"

But, things being as they are, I think we as christians should deal with the world as it is, or at least as it appears to be. One of my concerns is for kids that go off to school thinking evolution is just pure fantasy and then hear that is does make sense and lose their faith because they have no alternative way of viewing scripture other than literally, in the most traditional sense.

Haven't you noticed that scientists are always changing their views on evolution? That they all don't agree? I recall things learned in school that now have been changed or invalidated (by science). They couldn't find missing links so they came up with "cambrian explosions" or something like that (I think Gould came up with that - I heard him speak here in DC when my son was in school and had to attend to get extra credit).

Rather than let my son get brainwashed by the schools here (the ones he attended are extremely liberal - way more more liberal than most of the country), I got info for him and equipped him with responses and refutation. So he was always raising his hand in science class to challenge various things on evolution. It got to where the teacher would not call on him anymore (which I think was a good sign and made me proud). My son thought this was funny.

In 8th grade, my son's English class had the students debate various topics. My son chose "con" on evolution and one of his good friends was on the "pro" side. They debated and the class voted on who gave the most convincing arguments for their view - my son won by a landside! This was incredible in a school that frowns on Chrisitanity and where evolution is a religious principle of faith. He then presented his points in a Sunday School class later that had heard about this debate.

Btw, my son read "Evolution: A Theory In Crisis" by Michael Denton (who is not a Christain - I think he is an agnostic or atheist) to prepare for this debate. Maybe you should get that book for your son!

 

[Marcia]

No I haven't denied that scriptures is God breathed or inspired. I have said I don't think God highjacks the man who is writing and is not cognisceant of what he is writing like some of the ancients believed but they work in concert with God orchestrating. Big diff.

I don't think that is what God did, either. Nevertheless, they are God's words. I think God used the styles and personalities of the men but the words are from God. We do not know excactly how He did this, but He did.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I don't think that is what God did, either. Nevertheless, they are God's words. I think God used the styles and personalities of the men but the words are from God. We do not know excactly how He did this, but He did.

Exactly!!!!! God used man's communication method to communicate the principles of creation to people who didn't understand molecules, DNA, etc...

I knew you would come around. :laugh:

 

[Marcia]

Exactly!!!!! God used man's communication method to communicate the principles of creation to people who didn't understand molecules, DNA, etc...

I knew you would come around. :laugh:

Well, you were okay until the the words "principles of creation." God didn't give us the principles of creation but the narrative of what He created and the time - 6 days.

And it's not just that he used men but he gave them His words through the Holy Spirit. The words of the Bible are God's words.

 

[Aaron]

I prefer the terms "Darwinism," "Darwinist," and "Darwinian."

Though the terms "Darwinianism" and "Darwinianist" might be in common usage among some, they sound too much like Bush-isms.

The former terms were first coined and are more economical. :type:

 

[annsni]

Exactly!!!!! God used man's communication method to communicate the principles of creation to people who didn't understand molecules, DNA, etc...

I knew you would come around. :laugh:

And we see knowledge of creation beyond human understanding in the Scriptures. We know that the One who breathed out the words to be written fully understands molecules, DNA, etc.

 

[joyce]

Could God have used Evolution

The difference is one is evolution, the other is creation. I believe in creation. I don't believe there was nothing and then bang, there was something, science laws back my idea up. I believe a Supreme Being created the world and everything in it, the Word says so also. Also, we are not a million years old either, the Word shows us that is fallacy too. I really don' t think there is a middle ground here and it appears that is what you are looking for?
Although, if you notice in Revelation where it talks about the creatures that come out of the pit, now that's evolution there, part man part beast? Maybe God has plans for the Darwinians afterall? LOL
YSIC
Joyce

 

[Thinkingstuff]

The difference is one is evolution, the other is creation. I believe in creation. I don't believe there was nothing and then bang, there was something, science laws back my idea up. I believe a Supreme Being created the world and everything in it, the Word says so also. Also, we are not a million years old either, the Word shows us that is fallacy too. I really don' t think there is a middle ground here and it appears that is what you are looking for?
Although, if you notice in Revelation where it talks about the creatures that come out of the pit, now that's evolution there, part man part beast? Maybe God has plans for the Darwinians afterall? LOL
YSIC
Joyce

Does it? My position on this (for the purpose of this debate) is not a literal translation of 6 days but an outline indicating that God created everything and it has a specified order originating in God therefore God created everything and told it in a common method used to pass information in the ancient world. The Genesis account is not about methodoligy as principle. Scientific discovery shows the inadiquacy of the literal view. That is the Evolutionist principle. Just the fact that the stars in far away galaxies take billions of years for their light to even reach our planet proves this.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

WASHINGTON -- NASA's Swift satellite has found the most distant gamma-ray burst ever detected. The blast, designated GRB 080913, arose from an exploding star 12.8 billion light-years away.

"This is the most amazing burst Swift has seen," said the mission's lead scientist Neil Gehrels at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md. "It's coming to us from near the edge of the visible universe."

Because light moves at finite speed, looking farther into the universe means looking back in time. GRB 080913's "lookback time" reveals that the burst occurred less than 825 million years after the universe began.

See my point?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

See my point?

http://www.answersingenesis.org/PublicStore/product/Starlight-and-Time,4455,224.aspx

 

[Thinkingstuff]

I'm sorry I can't take seriously someone who built a museum in Kentucky with these credentials (from Wiki)

Ham was born in Queensland, Australia but moved to the United States of America in 1987. He has a bachelor's degree in applied science (with an emphasis on environmental biology) from the Queensland Institute of Technology and also holds a Diploma of Education from the University of Queensland.[3] He is married to Marilyn ("Mally"), whom he describes as a "very, very submissive, supportive wife" who has "always supported me five million percent."[4] The couple have five children: Two are married, two live with them in Cincinnati, and he has four grandchildren

especially When I consider the education of Carl Sagan and others.

 

[annsni]

I'm sorry I can't take seriously someone who built a museum in Kentucky with these credentials (from Wiki)



especially When I consider the education of Carl Sagan and others.

Yeah - and there are others who are just as educated as Carl Sagan yet dismiss Darwinian evolution.

Then again, I am raising and educating 4 human beings - with no formal education other than 12th grade and some college. Maybe I should quit.