Scholar Explains Why So Many Reject Genesis

[HankD]

I am a YEC, however the best thinker (and perhaps the "father") of Theistic Evolution is Enri Bergson and his concept of the elan vital.

The elan vital - A life force introduced into or perhaps even native to the material universe which would ultimately result in the universe becoming aware of itself (Presumably humankind).

HankD

 

[OldRegular]

I am a YEC, however the best thinker (and perhaps the "father") of Theistic Evolution is Enri Bergson and his concept of the elan vital.

The elan vital - A life force introduced into or perhaps even native to the material universe which would ultimately result in the universe becoming aware of itself (Presumably humankind).

HankD

That is about as good as the following:

Creation By and From the Self

In the beginning there was absolutely nothing, and what existed was covered by death and hunger. He thought, "Let me have a self", and he created the mind. As he moved about in worship, water was generated. Froth formed on the water, and the froth eventually solidifed to become earth. He rested on the earth, and from his luminence came fire. After resting, he divided himself in three parts, and one is fire, one is the sun, and one is the air.

Thus in the beginning the world was only his self, his being or essence, which then took the shape of a person. At first he was afraid, but realizing that he was alone and had nothing of which to be afraid, his fear ceased. However, he had no happiness because he was alone, and he longed for another. He grew as large as two persons embracing, and he caused his self to split into two matching parts, like two halves of a split pea, and from them arose husband and wife.

They mated, and from their union arose the human beings of the earth. The female reflected on having mated with someone of whom she was once a part, and she resolved that she should hide so that it would not happen again. She changed to a cow to disguise herself, but he changed to a bull and mated with her, and from their union cows arose. She changed to the form of a mare, but he changed to that of a stallion and mated with her, and from that union came horses. She changed to the form of a donkey, but he did likewise, and from them arose the single-hoofed animals. She became a ewe, but he became a ram, and from their union came the sheep and goats. It continued thus, with her changing form to elude him but he finding her and mating with her, until they had created all the animals that live in pairs, from humans and horses to ants.

After all this work, he reflected that he was indeed Creation personified, for he had created all this. Rubbing back and forth, he made Fire, the god of fire, from his hands, and from his semen he made Soma, the god of the moon. This was his highest creation because, although mortal himself, he had created immortal gods.​

From: http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/CS/CSSelf.html

 

[HankD]

That is about as good as the following:

Creation By and From the Self

In the beginning there was absolutely nothing, and what existed was covered by death and hunger. He thought, "Let me have a self", and he created the mind. As he moved about in worship, water was generated. Froth formed on the water, and the froth eventually solidifed to become earth. He rested on the earth, and from his luminence came fire. After resting, he divided himself in three parts, and one is fire, one is the sun, and one is the air.

Thus in the beginning the world was only his self, his being or essence, which then took the shape of a person. At first he was afraid, but realizing that he was alone and had nothing of which to be afraid, his fear ceased. However, he had no happiness because he was alone, and he longed for another. He grew as large as two persons embracing, and he caused his self to split into two matching parts, like two halves of a split pea, and from them arose husband and wife.

They mated, and from their union arose the human beings of the earth. The female reflected on having mated with someone of whom she was once a part, and she resolved that she should hide so that it would not happen again. She changed to a cow to disguise herself, but he changed to a bull and mated with her, and from their union cows arose. She changed to the form of a mare, but he changed to that of a stallion and mated with her, and from that union came horses. She changed to the form of a donkey, but he did likewise, and from them arose the single-hoofed animals. She became a ewe, but he became a ram, and from their union came the sheep and goats. It continued thus, with her changing form to elude him but he finding her and mating with her, until they had created all the animals that live in pairs, from humans and horses to ants.

After all this work, he reflected that he was indeed Creation personified, for he had created all this. Rubbing back and forth, he made Fire, the god of fire, from his hands, and from his semen he made Soma, the god of the moon. This was his highest creation because, although mortal himself, he had created immortal gods.
​

From: http://www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/CS/CSSelf.html

I suppose.

HankD

 

[nodak]

I'm old earth creationist myself.

But no, evolution does not say men came from apes.

What it says is that apes and men had a common ancestor.

I disagree with them, but for heaven's sake, intellectual honesty means you have to refute what they say, not what someone else says they say.

 

[Luke2427]

Here, here!!!

Amen!!!

we need to separate motive from action.

The motive, it seems, of the literal interpretation of genesis people is the idea that unless they defend it, god's word becomes a lie and to be disbelieved. At least, that is the motive they seem to ascribe to those not taking genesis as being written literally.

Of course, many of us literally believe what genesis literally says, which isn't at all what the yec literalists tell us it says.

Do some evolutionists veer off into eugenics, abortion, etc? Absolutely and that is misusing it. But others make your annual flu vaccine. Should we abstain from taking it because it was based on genetic study (aka evolution?)

i get so tired of the antievolutionist telling me darwin says we came from monkeys (he did not), that all evolutionists deny genesis (not all do), or any of this other silly rhetoric.

A fourth grader today knows what the odds are of getting a wrinkled pea if you breed a wrinkled pea with a smooth pea. Now, taking that genetic study and continuing it down the line many generations is what evolution is.

So i am left with asking what is the motive of both groups?

For some of the evolutionists, i would say the motive is some is simply to find the truth. For others it is a doomed attempt to refute the bible.

And for the anti crowd? Some are trying to preserve the word (albeit imho doing a bad job of it). Some seem to be terribly afraid that if evolution proves true, then jesus and the miracles are not real. And some just plain seem afraid of modern life, modern science, and modern reality.

So here is my stand: Please stop saying that if i do not hold with yec i "deny genesis." i don't. Let me repeat: I do not. I simply deny your particular interpretation of it.

I am sick of watching the circle get continually smaller as the more rabid fundamentalists keep redefining the faith once delivered to the saints. I'm sick of watching young people who really are saved being convinced they are unbelievers because they just cannot accept the false science of the yec crowd. I'm sick of us making buffoons out of ourselves fighting battles that do not need to be fought and wasting time, energy and manpower that should be used to win the lost to christ.

There is no conflict between god's truth as recorded in the word and god's truth as recorded in the world. None. Zip. God is not a liar. He has no need to make a young world appear old just to test our trust in him. That would make him guilty of deceiving us.

No, we need to understand god gave us a marvelous universe and marvelous brains to understand it.

Sometimes we misunderstand his word. Sometimes we misunderstand his world.

But he never, ever, in either record lies to us. So while our pea brains may not yet see it, they agree.

There is no argument between true science and true faith.

 

[Allan]

I'm old earth creationist myself.

But no, evolution does not say men came from apes.

What it says is that apes and men had a common ancestor.

I disagree with them, but for heaven's sake, intellectual honesty means you have to refute what they say, not what someone else says they say.

Yep.. basically - rocks.

And intellectual honesty understands that man 'had' to come from the apes line in order to have a common ancestor because evolution declares we come from their branch on the evolutionary chain, and not as a split off from it the common ancestor.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Yep.. basically - rocks.

And intellectual honesty understands that man 'had' to come from the apes line in order to have a common ancestor because evolution declares we come from their branch on the evolutionary chain, nor as a split off from it the common ancestor.

Amen. None of which matches up with "Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." (Genesis 2:7)

 

[quantumfaith]

Amen. None of which matches up with "Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being." (Genesis 2:7)

this number.....I completely agree with you, but how does this completely dismantle the possibility that God used and engineered evolution to accomplish just this. I don't think it does. (Respectfully)

 

[Yeshua1]

Why do so many Evangelicals reject the plain meaning?

However, so many evangelical churches have abandoned the text-based understanding, contrary to the traditional Church. Dr Zuiddam named three factors:

Augustine believed that the earth was only a few thousand years old. He wrote a chapter in his most famous book, The City of God, to show the scholars of his day that their idea of a very old earth was wrong.

First, “pragmatism and individualism have taken over. Evangelical churches have become utilitarian institutions with a corporate business approach. It is no longer Jesus’ ministry but ours, ‘for Him’ of course. ‘Our’ ministry becomes a goal in itself. Success is equated with blessing. Then more capable Christians are treated as threats to the business rather than fellow workers for the Lord. And on the other side, they crave respectability from society, so pleasing men is more important than to please God.”

Second, “a secular view has permeated Western society. Everything in life is explained without God. It is the same everywhere, at school, university, on radio, television and in the newspapers. God is only reckoned with as a personal religious preference of people, a theory some people believe in, but only relevant in term of beliefs.” That is, God as such has no relevance to the real world.

Third, “there is widespread lack of biblical knowledge, as the Apostle Paul predicted, ‘For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine’ (2 Timothy 4:3–5). Look at the best-selling books in Christian book stores, and you will realize what I am talking about.”
​

http://creation.com/benno-zuiddam-interview-church-history

many have rejected the truth of verbal inerrancy/infallibility, and many also have assumed Evolutionary "truths" are real!

 

[OldRegular]

many have rejected the truth of verbal inerrancy/infallibility, and many also have assumed Evolutionary "truths" are real!

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: