-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Darwin Then and Now
- Thread starter Aaron
- Start date
quantumfaith
Active Member
Here is a link to a multitude of gems. Sure to keep you busy, if in fact you give intellectually honest attention.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
quantumfaith
Active Member
Isn't that YOUR argument? I refrain from calling someone that unless I more deeply know them on a personal level.
I think they are driven often by their biases and look for small seams to exploit and unfortunately either ignore or even refuse to look at data. Is that YOU too?
Darwin evolution has ZERO scientific facts and evidence to support it though!
quantumfaith
Active Member
Which KH talking point is that?
quantumfaith
Active Member
Which has absolutely zero to do with Darwin....and I am not even a blind follower of Neo-Darwinism. I suspect you know even less than I do about it.
Consider the distinction between teleological vs. dysteleological. The following is a link (and it would be critical in the end) of my perspective, but it sure is written well.
https://evolutionarytheology.wordpress.com/2009/11/16/what-does-genesis-really-say/
Last edited by a moderator:
OldRegular
Well-Known Member
A gem is in the eye of the beholder!
Having said that is the opinion of the evolutionist more intellectually honest than the opinion of the creationist?
No one except God was there when He did it!
Last edited by a moderator:
"Hath God REALLY said -------?"
Where have we heard that before??? :BangHead::BangHead:
quantumfaith
Active Member
1. True
2. That depends...on the person holding an evolutionary position and the person holding a creationist view ***
3. True
**** Make sure the terms are understood, do you mean by "evolutionist" one who holds an "anti-theist" and dysteleological view, or do you include those who hold a teleological theistic view but still think an evolutionary model is supported?
Being intellectually honest means that one can go beyond the "talking points" of either view and examine both the scriptural record and the evidence of the natural world and still be comforted and confident without casting dispersions.
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems to me that common sense dictates that there is only life on earth. If one believes Scripture, then one knows the full of Creation was infected with the entrance of sin. Not just here on earth do things wear out. Everything decays and has an end. If there was life elsewhere, then it would also be subject to a fallen state. Since Christ died for mankind, what provision would there be for other "alien" beings? It makes no sense. The only conclusion one can reach is God created the heavens and the earth in six days like the Bible says.
quantumfaith
Active Member
Perhaps he did....I do not know. But I do not think Darwin ever theorized about life outside of earth. The search for such life and in particular the conditions which support life as we know it continues. For myself, it will not be a great surprise and personally no threat to my faith in God.
And if they did find life, do you agree it would in fact be in a fallen state? And if it is a fallen state, what provision is there for a remedy?
quantumfaith
Active Member
I cannot answer that question, other than to say if there was intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, I trust that the same God who is infinite, omnipotent and sovereign is certainly able to deal with those in His wisdom. Whether or not our experience with the revelation of scripture that we have has any bearing on them is more theological conjecture than I am capable of.
To say that there is a possibility of intelligent life somewhere else is as much conjecture than anything else.
quantumfaith
Active Member
MANY things were conjecture before they became real, known and understood.
Many more things were conjecture before they were shown to be completely idiotic.