-
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!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
How Do Thestic Evolutionist Chrsitians Account for man and species transformation?
- Thread starter Yeshua1
- Start date
Gonna say this....Creation occurred within six literal 24-hr. days.
God did not utilize any form of "evolution" in his creation of mankind.
The Earth is approximately (and the known Universe as well) 6,000 to 10,000years old.
"EVOLUTION"...and the empirically verifiable facts about it are indeed absolutely true.
"Evolution" does not prove that man came from monkeys...but, it does demonstrate, however, that pretty much all dogs came from a common ancestor in the canine family....
It doesn't demonstrate that reptiles miraculously evolved into birds....but it DOES demonstrate that the saltwater crocodile and the Florida Alligator have a common ancestor....
It makes the (absolutely problematic and horrifying) prospect that Bull-Sharks (who have now all but adapted perfectly to fresh water) are a truly "evolving" specie....and we have to account for them......and their ancestors were exclusively salt-water sharks, period.
There are certain facets of verifiable scientific fact, that help us to understand more fully the Scriptural teaching, and they are not to be ignored...but, don't read into the Scripture more than is there.
The Scriptures NEVER NEVER NEVER disagree with verifiable and provable "Science".....if they initially APPEAR to...then, either our understanding of Scripture, or our beliefs about the natural World are wrong, and need to be re-examined...
Phrases like: "The Bible is not a 'scientific' text"....are meaningless. superfluous and serve nothing but to obfuscate the real questions...That's a meaningless phrase. It is "historical" and it's also "scientific". It INSISTS that every statement it makes is to be taken as LITERALLY true....There's no such thing as "Theologically true, but Scientifically false" or, as some would have it on B.B...."Theologically meaningful, but not historically factual".
That's a load of meaningless crap.
For YEC's (like myself) we need to admit FULLY what facts of science serve to modify or alter our understanding of Biblical truth such that we more fully understand Scripture....But, is a "Young-Earth-Creationism" still a viable and intelligible option????.......Absolutetely it is............
But it ISN'T served by simply DENYING every scientific fact about the verifiable known Universe.
I am a Bible-Believing...Literalist...Young-Earth Creationist...who denies no KNOWN facts about "Science" that I am aware of...The Bible's account is to be taken literally...the days were 6 in toto...they were essentially 24 hrs. in duration, and EVERYTHING he stated that he created was done in that time-frame. The Bible squares PERFECTLY with "Science" neither is to be discarded. They are both (if properly understood) correct.
I also am intimately familiar with Hugh Ross's work...he also denies the Universality of the Noahcian flood...He's wrong. I like Ross, but he doesn't get it.
I do acknowledge there is an evolutionary processsGod created and used among species, Micro, but NOT macro !
And Dr Ross seems to ebvery smart, but is trying to keep the assumed "facts" to be intact, even if they are not supported by Bible!
Know the reasons/facts given, its goes back to either we take the bible in a literal intended fashion, or try to "squeeze it: into a framework to accomodate the so called facts!
Or we actually have some intelligence and realize that the Bible does not teach YEC any more than it teaches that the earth is flat or that it is the center of the universe.
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
Let me repeat that.
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
One more time:
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
For you to say it does when it doesn't is for you to abuse the Scriptures.
The problem with demanding that the earth is 10000 years old is that it makes Christians look like morons and intelligent people do not want to have anything to do with them.
So the Church, which constantly appeals only to stupider and stupider people, becomes so stupid that it eventually does not exist.
If we would just teach the BIBLE and stop pressing our traditions on it, the world would see that the most brilliant piece of literature in history is the Book of God. Then more intelligent people would fill the church.
But tradition, like YEC and flat-earth and geocentricity keep the church full of stupid people- not because all YEC people are stupid but because YEC is wrong and the more we cling to it while more and more info is coming out to the contrary of it- the stupider we look.
Now, fortunately, the church is not going to cling to YEC much longer. Just like the Church wised up and rejected geocentricity, the Church will wise up and reject YEC.
But its people who love tradition over the Scripture who make that a slow and painful process.
Last edited by a moderator:
Inspector Javert
Active Member
"real science" should not hold to theories like darwnism evoluion, or Big Bang !
There was a "Big-Bang".....it didn't come from nothingness.....(this is where we insert God)......but there ABSOLUTELY was a "Big-Bang"....You are embarrassing Biblical YEC literalists.
True...but, I doubt he's advocating for that.
NO, absolutely not....
The "facts" seem to be ill-understood by you...the Scriptures do not exist in DEFIANCE of REASON, SCIENCE, or known HISTORY....
"Faith" is NOT most exemplified by one who insists on believing the palpably absurd...."Science" is a real discipline, ditto history, ditto Theology, ditto Philosophy.
In order to most accurately understand all revealed truths, we must incorporate the knowledge gained from ALL of those disciplines. We don't "pick and choose".
The Bible does not teach ANYTHING which is contrary to KNOWN Scientific fact....and any Scientific "fact"...must then be squared with Scripture....but they are not (and never were) in deference towards one another....
Embrace "Science".....just don't embrace the garbage Philosophies...that often super-impose themselves upon it....If you do that, you're fine. The clear Biblical teachings do NOT deny known Scientific fact...if they did...............................frankly, I wouldn't believe them, and I wouldn't be a Christian. It isn't "either-or" it's "both-and". Believing the provably and palpably absurd isn't "Faith", Yeshua...it's stupidity.
I am NOT advocating just do the Bible and faith, but that we can and should use science, but should not be accepting/assuming as "facts" things such as darwinism, or old age, or a non literal meaning to creation, or no0 world wide flood as "facts!"
think you and I are in agreement here, perhaps not expressing myself clearly enough!
Or we actually have some intelligence and realize that the Bible does not teach YEC any more than it teaches that the earth is flat or that it is the center of the universe.
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
Let me repeat that.
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
One more time:
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
For you to say it does when it doesn't is for you to abuse the Scriptures.
The problem with demanding that the earth is 10000 years old is that it makes Christians look like morons and intelligent people do not want to have anything to do with them.
So the Church, which constantly appeals only to stupider and stupider people, becomes so stupid that it eventually does not exist.
If we would just teach the BIBLE and stop pressing our traditions on it, the world would see that the most brilliant piece of literature in history is the Book of God. Then more intelligent people would fill the church.
But tradition, like YEC and flat-earth and geocentricity keep the church full of stupid people- not because all YEC people are stupid but because YEC is wrong and the more we cling to it while more and more info is coming out to the contrary of it- the stupider we look.
Now, fortunately, the church is not going to cling to YEC much longer. Just like the Church wised up and rejected geocentricity, the Church will wise up and reject YEC.
But its people who love tradition over the Scripture who make that a slow and painful process.
I do NOT say must be 6-10 thousand years old, just NOT millions, much less billions of age!
And the problem is that the exactly same evidence those against Ceationism/YEC use to refute them, in many cases, would actually better support YEC/creationism!
There was a "Big-Bang".....it didn't come from nothingness.....(this is where we insert God)......but there ABSOLUTELY was a "Big-Bang"....You are embarrassing Biblical YEC literalists.
The most recent 'scientific " facts oin Cosmology refures the big bang, but even if you hold to that, the matter/Energy that exploded outewardly HAD a prior creation, as yes, God created the universe form nothing!
I do NOT say must be 6-10 thousand years old, just NOT millions, much less billions of age!
And the problem is that the exactly same evidence those against Ceationism/YEC use to refute them, in many cases, would actually better support YEC/creationism!
Nope, on both accounts.
Inspector Javert
Active Member
NO..."species" don't evolve....family's or genus or "sorts" do...to create specie...but, "specie" don't evolve usually.I do acknowledge there is an evolutionary processsGod created and used among species
Dr. Ross is Brilliant, and a genius, and I love his work and his intentions....but, anyone who thinks that "fact" must be ignored in order to validate Scripture is wrong. Scripture DOES NOT teach that you should believe anything which is contrary to known "fact". "Faith" in something which is patently absurd is not "faith"....it's stupidity....And Dr Ross seems to ebvery smart, but is trying to keep the assumed "facts" to be intact, even if they are not supported by Bible
Your friend Luke who likes to demean the beliefs of those who hold to a less than 10,000 yr. old Universe, is not really speaking from a position of authority, he just THINKS he knows more than others........but, he's still wrong. The Scriptures clearly teach a less than 10,000 yr.-old Earth (and Universe by extension) and there are also no verifiable Scientific "facts" which prove that false.
He appears to be convinced there are, but there aren't. All "facts" of Science are true....what our beloved brother Luke may not get, is that anything which he thinks demonstrates otherwise is flawed, and doesn't "prove" what he thinks it does.
Inspector Javert
Active Member
The most recent 'scientific " facts oin Cosmology refures the big bang, but even if you hold to that, the matter/Energy that exploded outewardly HAD a prior creation, as yes, God created the universe form nothing!
There was a "Big-Bang"...........There was.......and it's perfectly Scriptural too.
I didn't say matter came forth from nothingness......nor time, nor space.......
but they had an origin, and it was the "Big-Bang". The "Big-Bang" Yeshua, is the point at which God (who exists above all and beyond all) said...."Let there be"...that's a "Big-Bang".
Time, Matter, Space....all in one Cosmological moment.....doesn't matter if you are an Atheist or a Baptist, every sane man knows about the "Big-Bang".
NO..."species" don't evolve....family's or genus or "sorts" do...to create specie...but, "specie" don't evolve usually.
Dr. Ross is Brilliant, and a genius, and I love his work and his intentions....but, anyone who thinks that "fact" must be ignored in order to validate Scripture is wrong. Scripture DOES NOT teach that you should believe anything which is contrary to known "fact". "Faith" in something which is patently absurd is not "faith"....it's stupidity....
Your friend Luke who likes to demean the beliefs of those who hold to a less than 10,000 yr. old Universe, is not really speaking from a position of authority, he just THINKS he knows more than others........but, he's still wrong. The Scriptures clearly teach a less than 10,000 yr.-old Earth (and Universe by extension) and there are also no verifiable Scientific "facts" which prove that false.
He appears to be convinced there are, but there aren't. All "facts" of Science are true....what our beloved brother Luke may not get, is that anything which he thinks demonstrates otherwise is flawed, and doesn't "prove" what he thinks it does.
again, NOT saying we turn a blind eye to science, nor be just "my bible and nothing else", but that those like a DR Ross and Luke seem to have a preconceived notion/filter that earth/universe MUST be Billions of yeras old, and that God uased evolutionary process, so will "see" the facts thru that lense, so can misintepreteit to fit their framework!
for example, I see evoultionwithin a species, but they would see that as also provong trasistion process does occur, or I see the Grand canyon as evidemce of a universal Flood happening, as well as it affect fossil record, but they see it proving millions of years of geological process happened!
Last edited by a moderator:
NO..."species" don't evolve....family's or genus or "sorts" do...to create specie...but, "specie" don't evolve usually.
Dr. Ross is Brilliant, and a genius, and I love his work and his intentions....but, anyone who thinks that "fact" must be ignored in order to validate Scripture is wrong. Scripture DOES NOT teach that you should believe anything which is contrary to known "fact". "Faith" in something which is patently absurd is not "faith"....it's stupidity....
Your friend Luke who likes to demean the beliefs of those who hold to a less than 10,000 yr. old Universe, is not really speaking from a position of authority, he just THINKS he knows more than others........but, he's still wrong. The Scriptures clearly teach a less than 10,000 yr.-old Earth (and Universe by extension) and there are also no verifiable Scientific "facts" which prove that false.
He appears to be convinced there are, but there aren't. All "facts" of Science are true....what our beloved brother Luke may not get, is that anything which he thinks demonstrates otherwise is flawed, and doesn't "prove" what he thinks it does.
I was not demeaning anybody who believes the earth is 10,000 years old or less.
I even said in no uncertain terms that not all young earth creationists are stupid.
Many are very intelligent but are stuck in a traditional paradigm that prevents them from being able to see the truth.
The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not teach that the earth is 10,000 years old or less. It simply says that nowhere.
I was not demeaning anybody who believes the earth is 10,000 years old or less.
I even said in no uncertain terms that not all young earth creationists are stupid.
Many are very intelligent but are stuck in a traditional paradigm that prevents them from being able to see the truth.
The fact of the matter is that the Bible does not teach that the earth is 10,000 years old or less. It simply says that nowhere.
Agreed, buit the best scientific evidence available does NOT support old age theory, but the yEC, but problem is that thsoe seeing the need to have extreme age/evolutionary processes etc will many time mis interprete the evidence!
I'm old earth myself, and creationist.
That said, the Bible is absolutely scientifically accurate in telling us man is made from the dust of the ground. We ARE composed of the elements just as the dust is.
Right. It is interesting that scientists now tell us that the vast majority of dust in our homes is "us". Dust on the mantle consists of dead skin cells.
We are dust. We are made of dust. Not just us. God formed every living creature from out of the ground.
The Bible is PERFECTLY scientifically accurate.
Right. It is interesting that scientists now tell us that the vast majority of dust in our homes is "us". Dust on the mantle consists of dead skin cells.
We are dust. We are made of dust. Not just us. God formed every living creature from out of the ground.
The Bible is PERFECTLY scientifically accurate.
So theistic evolutions do see mankind as beginning as Adam, as there were NO pre adamic sub humon species he evolved from?
He was created in one day?
Inspector Javert
Active Member
Then maybe I misunderstood you...I saw this:
Now...I'm a dumb "YEC" and what-not....but if (as you say) "intelligent" people want nothing to do with "them" (that would be YEC'S)....then forgive me for not seeing how that isn't simply an insult to the intelligence of all YEC's.
"Stupider" isn't usually used as a word. I suppose it could be, but, not often.
Meh....I think you're calling us "dumb" dude, sorry. Forgive me for seeing that in your post; but, I think insisting that the "more intelligent" crowd would disagree is nominally the same as calling the opposition (not "dumb")......just "dumber" than anyone who would disagree with them.
Which isn't you "calling" YEC's stupid........per se...it's until you say this:The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
Let me repeat that.
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
One more time:
The Bible does not SAY the earth is 10,000 years old.
For you to say it does when it doesn't is for you to abuse the Scriptures.
.The problem with demanding that the earth is 10000 years old is that it makes Christians look like morons and intelligent people do not want to have anything to do with them
Now...I'm a dumb "YEC" and what-not....but if (as you say) "intelligent" people want nothing to do with "them" (that would be YEC'S)....then forgive me for not seeing how that isn't simply an insult to the intelligence of all YEC's.
The "stupider" people <--- (that's YEC's or anyone who believes them) are what the Church is appealing to?. Ahh...objectively, I would submit that you are (if unintentionally) somewhat simply impugning the intelligence of anyone who maintains a Young Earth Theology.So the Church, which constantly appeals only to stupider and stupider people, becomes so stupid that it eventually does not exist
"Stupider" isn't usually used as a word. I suppose it could be, but, not often.
...................Then more intelligent people would fill the Church........If we would just teach the BIBLE and stop pressing our traditions on it, the world would see that the most brilliant piece of literature in history is the Book of God. Then more intelligent people would fill the church.
Meh....I think you're calling us "dumb" dude, sorry. Forgive me for seeing that in your post; but, I think insisting that the "more intelligent" crowd would disagree is nominally the same as calling the opposition (not "dumb")......just "dumber" than anyone who would disagree with them.
So theistic evolutions do see mankind as beginning as Adam, as there were NO pre adamic sub humon species he evolved from?
He was created in one day?
Theistic evolutionists are not a monolithic movement.
People like Hugh Ross and Michael Horton believe that God made Adam special, different from other creatures which evolved over time.
That there were hominids before Adam is almost surely the case. but Adam was the first of his kind and all human beings descended from him.
quantumfaith
Active Member
The most recent 'scientific " facts oin Cosmology refures the big bang, but even if you hold to that, the matter/Energy that exploded outewardly HAD a prior creation, as yes, God created the universe form nothing!
What recent facts refute the concept of the Big Bang? In fact, the "idea of the Big Bang" did a great deal to bolster and support the theism that you and I cherish.
thisnumbersdisconnected
New Member
The word is the Hebrew cakak and means to "hedge, fence about, shut in." In short, it means to close off from view. The old KJV translation is a bad translation. The NASB is barely better, making it "wove" but the word does not mean putting anything together, it means shutting it away out of sight. Either way, you're bordering on very dangerous denial of Scripture. If He spoke everything else into existence, why can't He simply speak life into existence in the womb, and superintend it's growth? You're going far out of bounds to deny God's truth, probably without even intending to do so.Then by your reasoning, when God "knit us together" in our mother's wombs He had to make Himself very tiny, and come there with some tiny little needles and yarn.
There is nothing "silly" about the reading Genesis account literally, and that too borders on denial of biblical truth.This is where the silliness of reading our beliefs INTO the Scripture instead of letting them speak to us leads us.
quantumfaith
Active Member
Then maybe I misunderstood you...I saw this:
Which isn't you "calling" YEC's stupid........per se...it's until you say this:
.
Now...I'm a dumb "YEC" and what-not....but if (as you say) "intelligent" people want nothing to do with "them" (that would be YEC'S)....then forgive me for not seeing how that isn't simply an insult to the intelligence of all YEC's.
The "stupider" people <--- (that's YEC's or anyone who believes them) are what the Church is appealing to?. Ahh...objectively, I would submit that you are (if unintentionally) somewhat simply impugning the intelligence of anyone who maintains a Young Earth Theology.
"Stupider" isn't usually used as a word. I suppose it could be, but, not often.
...................Then more intelligent people would fill the Church........
Meh....I think you're calling us "dumb" dude, sorry. Forgive me for seeing that in your post; but, I think insisting that the "more intelligent" crowd would disagree is nominally the same as calling the opposition (not "dumb")......just "dumber" than anyone who would disagree with them.
IJ,
I do not consider those of YEC to be dummies,.....Not at all. Just so you know.