Christian Forums

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 19:44:51
The resurrection is part of scripture.  So not "made up" like so many imagined creationist miracles.    But the key to this is that science doesn't deny the possibility of miracles. 

Science can't say anything about the resurrection.    But scientists can.

Once you figure out why, you're almost there.

So what you are saying is this:

It is a scientific impossibility that something came from nothing, but since it happened anyway it must have happened by naturalistic means...or perhaps guided by an external agent who is not bound by the laws of our universe.
This external agent, since He will not contradict the laws of nature (else He would be deceptive) used natural, scientifically explicable means to bring this universe into existence.

On the other hand, that same external agent did contradict the laws of nature and used scientifically inexplicable means to resurrect His Son from the death.
This however does not make Him deceptive.

Seems to me you are arbitrarily selective about which part of scripture you accept, even though both of them invoke a miraculous event...for one you insist on scientific evidence, whilst for the other you are prepared to completely reject scientific evidence that proves the contrary.

AVZ writes:

QuoteSo what you are saying is this:

Unless it's a direct quote the odds are very good that you got it wrong yet again.

QuoteIt is a scientific impossibility that something came from nothing,

I never said that.   Do you honestly believe that?

Quotebut since it happened anyway it must have happened by naturalistic means...or perhaps guided by an external agent who is not bound by the laws of our universe.

Pretty close, except that science can't say anything about the origin of the Universe, and of course, until nature existed, it makes no sense to suppose nature was used to make nature.   As C.S. Lewis put it, the witch knew the magic at the beginning, but did not know the deep magic just before the beginning.

QuoteThis external agent, since He will not contradict the laws of nature (else He would be deceptive) used natural, scientifically explicable means to bring this universe into existence.

Wrong again.    It makes no sense to say that nature was produced by natural means.   Science just can't say what there was just before the beginning.

QuoteOn the other hand, that same external agent did contradict the laws of nature and used scientifically inexplicable means to resurrect His Son from the death.
This however does not make Him dceptive.

Science can't address miracles, but does not deny that they can happen.   Actually Jesus, being God was the agent of His own resurrection, BTW.

It's one thing to recognize in scripture a miracle.   It's quite another to gin up your own imagined miracles to cover problems with your doctrines.    The key is, God doesn't have to do miracles to make things work.   He created the universe as He wanted it to be, and there's no tinkering neccessary.   He doesn't have to do miracles.    He does them to teach us something.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 22:09:21
AVZ writes:
Unless it's a direct quote the odds are very good that you got it wrong yet again.

I never said that.   Do you honestly believe that?

Pretty close, except that science can't say anything about the origin of the Universe, and of course, until nature existed, it makes no sense to suppose nature was used to make nature.   As C.S. Lewis put it, the witch knew the magic at the beginning, but did not know the deep magic just before the beginning.

Wrong again.    It makes no sense to say that nature was produced by natural means.   Science just can't say what there was just before the beginning.

Science can't address miracles, but does not deny that they can happen.   Actually Jesus, being God was the agent of His own resurrection, BTW.

It's one thing to recognize in scripture a miracle.   It's quite another to gin up your own imagined miracles to cover problems with your doctrines.    The key is, God doesn't have to do miracles to make things work.   He created the universe as He wanted it to be, and there's no tinkering neccessary.   He doesn't have to do miracles.    He does them to teach us something.

You are stuck in circular reasoning.

The whole reason why you deny a miraculous creation event of 7 literal days is because science proves you otherwise.
But science also proves that resurrection is impossible, yet you are prepared to ignore the scientific evidence in favor of something unscientific.

You claim to follow scientific evidence where it leads, but quite obviously you arbitrarily reject science if it suits you.
Whatever swing you give to it, as a theistic evolutionist you are appealing to a miracle at some point in time, and with that you must admit you are appealing to the inexplicable.
Yet with the same breath you insist that the inexplicable event must have followed an explicable pattern.

I am quite comfortable with believing in a literal 7 day creation. I don't insist science must come to my aid and help explain it to me, neither do I expect science to explain the resurrection to me. I know science can't.
First we had Darwinism which science already figured out was incorrect, so now we have neo-Darwinism which is presently losing ground rapidly with the discovery of DNA.
Since the proposition of evolution, scientists have done nothing else but tell the world something is true...and come back after a number of years telling the world it wasn't true after all but now we have something else which is true.

If creation was a miracle, and I believe it was, then science can tell me nothing. And I am not even unscientific about that because science itself promulgates it knows nothing about miracles.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteSo, you were taught and convinced, and so believe that men all are apes.
Comes down to evidence.

Barbarian said:

QuoteThe same genetic evidence that is used to determine paternity shows that we and chimpanzees share a common ancestor that was not an ancestor of other apes.

Michael said:

QuoteAnd so you were taught and convinced by the evidence presented to you and have seen.

Reality has the virtue of being true.   That's why evidence works.

The point is just that you were taught and convinced by the evidence presented to you and have seen.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteDo you believe in miracles? Do you believe in the miracles written in scriptures especially those which Jesus performed? In the days of Christ when he actually performed the miracles, which people have seen happened before their very eyes, if not, have overwhelming testimony of witnesses to these miraculous events, people still did not believe despite the evidence. I'm quite sure that you believe that these miracles happened and were performed by Jesus. Why do you believe? Is it because of the evidence or of your conviction? Scientists would say, according to science, these things were not possible and so are false. Are they correct about science in this or is the Bible lying?

Now, creation was a miracle, don't you think so? Would you think that the miracle of creation, things that scientist says are not possible and are false, and things that can't be proven by science, can now be explained and proven by great and brilliant scientist through science and even the wisdom of men? Has man and science 'evolved' into this? I don't have any such conviction? Do you? 

As St. Augustine said, even nature is a miracle.    But I don't believe in making up miracles to patch up problems in my beliefs.

I don't think you have addressed what I have posted. 

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteScientists would say, according to science, these things were not possible and so are false.

Nope.  Who told you that?   What a silly idea.   My first course in evolution as an undergraduate was taught by a devout Christian who was on the board of vestry for his local church.   Most people who think they hate science, have no idea what it is.

Let me say that again. Scientists would say that science have no explanation, and so cannot explain miracles. And so, such things, men, even with the wisdom in science, cannot know and explain miracles, miracles such as are spoken of in scriptures, which includes the miracle of creation.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteAre they correct about science in this or is the Bible lying?

Neither.  Someone lied to you about science.   Science can't say anything about the supernatural, so it doesn't in any way rule out miracles.

If you believe that creation is a miracle, and science can't say anything about the supernatural, then why do scientists, by science, keep trying to deal with creation, as coming up with various theories concerning the supernatural matter of creation and expect to explain the supernatural? Unless, they believe to the contrary that they can. Or they believe that creation is not a miracle.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteThough I would have to say I don't have the same conviction as you do. My conviction is that, men were not created by God by evolution, but were created as scriptures taught.

Barbarian said:

QuoteScriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth. That wasn't important to God.  What was important was that He directly gave us immortal souls.

It's not a salvation issue if you want to assume that this is a literal history instead of a parable.

Michael said:

QuoteAnd so we ought to leave the issue in that case, since in your view, scriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth.

As a religious doctrine, yes.   It's an open question as far as scriptures go.    However, the evidence does show us that humans evolved from other organisms.   Similarly, protons are not in evidence from scripture, but we can show that they exist.

If in your conviction, by the things that you take as evidence and have seen, and were presented to you through science, and believe that humans evolved from other organisms and take that as how God have created man from the ground, it does not follow that, that is how God actually did it. For even you admit that scriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth. Besides, you say that, that wasn't important to God. But it seems that is important to you.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteDoes that not give you the idea that God can create something which is initially to be of age, that which when science examines it, finds it to have been created at a time much earlier than when it was actually created?

Bartbarian said:

QuoteCan God be deceptive?   He could if He so chose.   But it is contrary to His nature.

Michael said:

QuoteWhy would God be deceptive by that?

Creating something with the appearance of age, when it was not aged, is deceptive.

Again, who then do you say God is deceiving by that? What does this deception result to?

Also, I'm not sure if you have read what I said in my post:

...if God did, and we know that God does not deceive, any thought of deception or if there is deception, it could only come from the father of it, the devil......

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteAnd I am thinking, if God can create like so, how can we be certain that God did not create creation like so?

Bartbarian said:
Because it's neither scriptural nor is it supported by evidence.

So are you now implying that you are certain that God created creation by what you now teach and believe, that is, of an initial creation of light, then went through the process of evolution, and imply that this is both scriptural and is supported by evidence? And that even while you believe and say that Scriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth. So, why go beyond what is written? And why keep insisting you know how God created things and living things when it is said, and let me cite the verse you cited in one of your post here, as written in scriptures which concerns the work of God, which includes God's work of creation:

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end. 

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteWith regards your conviction, what can you say of Jesus? I assume that you believe that he is a human.

Barbarian said:

QuoteHe humbled himself, becoming fully human, subject to His parents.    So yes.   Like us.  Fully human, and yet fully God.   

Michael said:

QuoteWas he an ape, since he was a human and since humans are apes?

Barbarian said:

QuoteWhy should you be ashamed of being an ape?   We are creatures, evolved from other apes, and Jesus took that nature in becoming man.   We are not our bodies, we are souls who have bodies.   Do you honestly think there's a physical difference of any consequence to God between a human body and a chimp body?   Do you not see that it is the living soul that matters, not our physical bodies?

You're having an emotional difficulty with having a body that evolved from other primates.   "Ape" has such a negative connotation to many people that they respond with disgust to it.   There's no need for that.   We aren't our bodies.   We have a body.   We are souls.

Michael said:

QuoteSo you say and affirm that Jesus is an ape.

Jesus is God.   He is also fully human, a soul in the body of an evolved primate.   Like us.   He became fully human.

You can just say "Yes, Jesus is an ape, since he is a human and humans are apes, like all man are".

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteNow, there is no other issue here but that if Jesus is an ape or not.

If you actually think humans are no more than apes, then that would be the issue.  But for a Christian, it would be like saying a human is no more than an animal.   Is that what you want to believe?

What I think of humans? They are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category. That is what I believe, for that is what God, not some man, tells me of man in scriptures.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Tue Aug 15, 2017 - 11:20:04
Michael said:

QuoteThere is no issue whatsoever with regards emotions or shame here.

It's at the heart of what's holding you away from accepting His creation as it is.   You don't want to accept that your body is the result of evolution from other primates.    Set your pride aside and accept it His way.

Comes down to evidence.    The same genetic evidence that is used to determine paternity shows that we and chimpanzees share a common ancestor that was not an ancestor of other apes.

You may see it that way, but it's not. I accept what God says in scriptures about His miraculous creation work, not what man says concerning it. And that is not pride at all. It'll be pride if I take and accept what man says about God's work of creation, and believe that man knows how God did the miracle. 

Quote from: Michael2012 on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 07:27:29What I think of humans? They are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category. That is what I believe, for that is what God, not some man, tells me of man in scriptures.

Do you even know what distinguishes humans and [the rest of the] animals as God created them? 

QuoteSo are you now implying that you are certain that God created creation by what you now teach and believe, that is, of an initial creation of light,

He said so.   I believe Him.   You should, too.

Quotethen went through the process of evolution

Many, many things went on before living things appeared.   And only after He created organisms with the ability to vary over time, did evolution begin.

Quoteand imply that this is both scriptural and is supported by evidence?

He says that the Earth was quite different at the initial creation, and changed over time.   You should believe that, too.

QuoteAnd that even while you believe and say that Scriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth. So, why go beyond what is written?

I'll leave that to creationists.   

QuoteAnd why keep insisting you know how God created things and living things

He has shown us in His creation, which as you know, He says is reliable.

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.

So as you see, He says that his creation is ongoing in time.    We will never understand all of it, but He made us so we would understand much of it.

QuoteYou can just say "Yes, Jesus is an ape, since he is a human and humans are apes, like all man are".

I prefer to regard Jesus and man as more than merely primates, He is God, and we have a living soul that distinguishes us from other animals.   Why do you dwell on our animal nature, when it's only a house for our soul?


Barbarian asks:
If you actually think humans are no more than apes, then that would be the issue.  But for a Christian, it would be like saying a human is no more than an animal.   Is that what you want to believe?

QuoteWhat I think of humans? They are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category.

Man was brought forth from the Earth as the other animals.   That is not what makes us precious to God.

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 07:53:56
Do you even know what distinguishes humans and [the rest of the] animals as God created them?

According to scriptures, as I said, humankind are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category.

So, for one, the distinction is clear there, one is man, and the other is animal. Second, man was created in the image of God, while the animals were not. 

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

QuoteSo are you now implying that you are certain that God created creation by what you now teach and believe, that is, of an initial creation of light,

He said so.   I believe Him.   You should, too.

Where did God said that? If in scriptures, please cite it.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

Quote...then went through the process of evolution

Many, many things went on before living things appeared.   And only after He created organisms with the ability to vary over time, did evolution begin.

What many many things went on happened before living things appeared?

What organisms with the ability to vary over time did God create? When did he create such and how?

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

Quote....and imply that this is both scriptural and is supported by evidence?

He says that the Earth was quite different at the initial creation, and changed over time.   You should believe that, too.

Where in scriptures did God said that? Please cite.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

QuoteAnd that even while you believe and say that Scriptures don't tell you exactly how we were produced from the earth. So, why go beyond what is written?

I'll leave that to creationists.

Why is that?

And I ask again, why go beyond what is written?

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

QuoteAnd why keep insisting you know how God created things and living things

He has shown us in His creation, which as you know, He says is reliable.

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.

So as you see, He says that his creation is ongoing in time.    We will never understand all of it, but He made us so we would understand much of it.

Not what the verse is saying.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Michael said:

QuoteYou can just say "Yes, Jesus is an ape, since he is a human and humans are apes, like all man are".

I prefer to regard Jesus and man as more than merely primates, He is God, and we have a living soul that distinguishes us from other animals.   Why do you dwell on our animal nature, when it's only a house for our soul?

But it is not the matter of preference as to what you regard of Jesus. I was simply making the point that in your belief, Jesus is an ape like all mankind. That's just it.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 08:21:38
Barbarian said:
If you actually think humans are no more than apes, then that would be the issue.  But for a Christian, it would be like saying a human is no more than an animal.   Is that what you want to believe?

Michael said:

QuoteWhat I think of humans? They are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category.

Man was brought forth from the Earth as the other animals.   That is not what makes us precious to God.

The issue is not what makes man precious to God. The issue is whether man is a creature in the same category as the animals, in the light of scriptures.   

Quote from: Michael2012 on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 10:50:22
According to scriptures, as I said, humankind are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category.

So, for one, the distinction is clear there, one is man, and the other is animal. Second, man was created in the image of God, while the animals were not.

So man looks like God, but the animals don't.  Is that the distinction that you have in mind?  Is that the real difference you see between the animals and man?

QuoteThe issue is not what makes man precious to God. The issue is whether man is a creature in the same category as the animals, in the light of scriptures.

How does the category of man differ from the category of the animals?

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 11:39:12
Michael said:

QuoteAccording to scriptures, as I said, humankind are the kind of what God created in Adam, whom God called man. God did not call him to be an animal, but man ~ Adam. God created the animals, and man is not included in this category.

So, for one, the distinction is clear there, one is man, and the other is animal. Second, man was created in the image of God, while the animals were not.

So man looks like God, but the animals don't.  Is that the distinction that you have in mind?  Is that the real difference you see between the animals and man?

No. God created man as a living soul, but not the animals.

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 11:39:12
Michael said:

QuoteThe issue is not what makes man precious to God. The issue is whether man is a creature in the same category as the animals, in the light of scriptures.

How does the category of man differ from the category of the animals?

I've already told you the distinction according to scriptures.

God made the animals, and Adam was not one of them.

God created Adam. God said that Adam was a man. God did not say Adam was an animal, nor a special animal at that which He called man. Now, scientist, through scientific study comes out saying and rationalizing that man is an animal because of so and so. Though my brain tells me the words of the scientist is reasonable, my heart tells me the words of God is the truth. And though I may be to men, unreasonable, fool, stupid, in denial, etc..., as long as I am to God, faithful to His word and the truth, not going beyond what truth He revealed in scriptures, so be it, for the glory of God.     

If I be wrong in the interpretation of scriptures, as long as it's out of my faithfulness to scriptures and not because of going beyond and out from what is in scriptures and believe the works and wisdom of men, God still remains to be my judge. I leave it to God and rest upon His mercy, love, and grace. 

In Genesis, the first creation was light.   God said "let there be light."

Many, many things went on before living things appeared.   And only after He created organisms with the ability to vary over time, did evolution begin.

QuoteWhat many many things went on happened before living things appeared?

Matter formed and some of it condensed into stars and galaxies.  Some stars were so large that they burned out quickly, and exploded.   The shockwave collapsed clouds of gas and formed new stars, one of which was our sun.   And from that collapse, the world formed.

QuoteWhat organisms with the ability to vary over time did God create? When did he create such and how?

All of them.   He says that the earth brought forth living things, so we know it was done by nature, as He intended.


Barbarian observes:
He says that the Earth was quite different at the initial creation, and changed over time.   You should believe that, too.

QuoteWhere in scriptures did God said that?

Genesis 1.    First light, then earth and water, then living things, and so on.

QuoteAnd I ask again, why go beyond what is written?

I suppose it's because creationists aren't satisfied with it as it's written.

Barbarian observes:
He has shown us in His creation, which as you know, He says is reliable.

     Ecclesiastes 3:11 He has made everything beautiful in its time. Also He has put eternity in their hearts, except that no one can find out the work that God does from beginning to end.

    So as you see, He says that his creation is ongoing in time.    We will never understand all of it, but He made us so we would understand much of it.

QuoteNot what the verse is saying.

That's what it says.  Things are not made all at once, but in their time.   Although we can learn much about His creation, He says will never know all of it.   I find that very satisfying.

Barbarian observes:
If we were only our bodies, we would be merely apes.   But we aren't our bodies.   We are living souls who have bodies.    If God could become a human like us, who are we to be embarrassed about being apes?


Barbarian observes:
    If you actually think humans are no more than apes, then that would be the issue.  But for a Christian, it would be like saying a human is no more than an animal.   Is that what you want to believe?

Man's body is like other animals.   But that's not what we are.

 

Quote from: 4WD on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 11:39:12
How does the category of man differ from the category of the animals?

This question is irrelevant.

Barbarian claims that man and chimps have a common evolutionary ancestor, so at some point in history there was a life form that was shared by both chimps and man.
This ancestor developed through an evolutionary process into a primate on one hand, and man on the other.
By definition evolution claims that this process was unguided, based on elements like chance, natural selection and survival.
This excludes the involvement of God, because if God was involved then this process would no longer be unguided.

So then, at some point this common ancestor evolved into pre-human life forms, until it reached the point where God looked at it and decided that it had reached a stage where He could "jump in" and add humanity to the life form. So Adam had a father and mother who both were considered apes, and Adam was the son that was made human by God.
According to the logic of the evolution theory, where guidance is excluded, Eve therefore also had a set of parents that were apes. She then was made human by God as well.

Now some people claim that God could have used evolution to reach His goal, but this raises the following questions:

- If God made evolution reach his goal, then evolution could not have been an unguided process based on chance, natural selection and survival.
- If God would have been subject to the undetermined variables that determine the path of evolution, then the creation of man could not have been pre-determined from before creation.
- The evolution of Eve is in direct contradiction with scripture.
- It is a logical contradiction to make the claim that a Creator can use an unguided process to reach a predetermined result. An unguided process by definition cannot be directed and without direction a result cannot be predetermined.
- Gods predetermined plans could therefore not be predetermined. His plans would have evolved gradually and subject to the evolution of life on earth.

Nothing is unguided with God, He knows full well the natural sequence of events prior to them coming to be. 

Quote from: Alan on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 07:52:12
Nothing is unguided with God, He knows full well the natural sequence of events prior to them coming to be.

Absolutely ! !

Unfortunately we have a whole cadre of misinformed Christians who think that God can know in advance only those things that He specifically causes.  It is a major factor of so much misguided theology.

Quote from: Alan on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 07:52:12
Nothing is unguided with God, He knows full well the natural sequence of events prior to them coming to be.

That statement is completely unintelligible.
If God had to look what an unguided process would do in order to be informed, then God is guided by natural processes.
So God is subject to His own creation???

You have two options:
A) God looked ahead what an unguided process would do, and if a feasible result would be achieved God would base His plan on that development.
B) God had a plan and assured that the unguided process would follow a pattern that would produce the required result

Now option B logically is a guided process so can be excluded as being evolution.

Option A is more tricky. Not only would this make God's plan subject to evolution...it is also self contradictory.
Imagine God would look ahead at a number of unguided processes and select the one that produced the required result, then the moment God selected that process it would no longer have the possibility to bring forth any other result but the one God foresaw. Hence the process in effect became void of chance, and it can therefore no longer be evolution.

Being a theistic evolutionist does not make sense. You either believe in an unguided process of chance and natural selection and leave God out of it, or you believe in a guided process which then no longer is evolution.

It is unintelligible to propose an unguided process with a certain result.
Either the process is no longer unguided, or the result is not certain.

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 21:50:59
In Genesis, the first creation was light.   God said "let there be light."

Many, many things went on before living things appeared.   And only after He created organisms with the ability to vary over time, did evolution begin.

If the first creation was light, what can you say of darkness?

So, you are saying that God created light at first. And many many things went on regarding light, forming into many many things and until organisms with the ability to vary over time formed? And then evolution begun? Quite a story you have there. How do you know that light formed many many things or formed into many many things? What do you say are these many many things that have formed from light? And what are these many many things that went on until living organisms with the ability to vary over time were formed by these many many things that went on? 

Quote from: The Barbarian on Wed Aug 16, 2017 - 21:50:59
Michael said:

QuoteWhat many many things went on happened before living things appeared?

Matter formed and some of it condensed into stars and galaxies.  Some stars were so large that they burned out quickly, and exploded.   The shockwave collapsed clouds of gas and formed new stars, one of which was our sun.   And from that collapse, the world formed.

So, after many many things, which you apparently have said nothing about yet, went on of light, matter was formed, some condensing into stars and galaxies, and there was some explosions of stars, and so the story goes, until the sun was formed and so too is the world formed. Again, some story you have there.

Quote from: AVZ on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 10:23:59

B) God had a plan and assured that the unguided process would follow a pattern that would produce the required result

I accept that premise.

Quote from: AVZ

Now option B logically is a guided process so can be excluded as being evolution.

If evolution was God's plan, why must it be excluded? Evolution is an observation at our end, it is simply the path of creation for God.

Quote from: AVZ

Being a theistic evolutionist does not make sense. You either believe in an unguided process of chance and natural selection and leave God out of it, or you believe in a guided process which then no longer is evolution.It is unintelligible to propose an unguided process with a certain result.Either the process is no longer unguided, or the result is not certain.

God said "I want it this way" and it was so. Why is that so difficult to accept? You continually attempt to say you "know" how God does things and it is only by your own reasoning that you refuse any other belief. I reject your philosophy and it's subsequent theology.

#

Quote from: Alan on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 12:08:05

If evolution was God's plan, why must it be excluded? Evolution is an observation at our end, it is simply the path of creation for God.

If it is a planned path, then it is a guided process.

If you plan to drive to the supermarket, but you don't guide your car, then you will never arrive at the supermarket.

Quote from: Michael2012 on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 11:47:07
Matter formed and some of it condensed into stars and galaxies.  Some stars were so large that they burned out quickly, and exploded.   The shockwave collapsed clouds of gas and formed new stars, one of which was our sun.   And from that collapse, the world formed.


So, after many many things, which you apparently have said nothing about yet, went on of light, matter was formed, some condensing into stars and galaxies, and there was some explosions of stars, and so the story goes, until the sun was formed and so too is the world formed. Again, some story you have there.

Yes it is.  The magnitude of it and the glory to God of it all is overwhelming to any who would bother to consider just how much evidence there is to support it.

Was Adam a literal person?

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 13:20:24Was Adam a literal person?

Was there a first human being?  Yes, how could there not be?  Even with the view of evolution, there was a first hominid to whom God gave him his spirit.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 13:50:56
Was there a first human being?  Yes, how could there not be?  Even with the view of evolution, there was a first hominid to whom God gave him his spirit.

So scripture is in error then? 

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 17:53:25So scripture is in error then?

No of course not.  Why would you think that?  You asked if Adam was a literal person.  I assume that you meant person as human being.  Any hominids, if such existed before Adam, would not have been given the spirit of a human being and would simply be a specie of animal.

Quote from: Texas Conservative on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 13:20:24
Was Adam a literal person?

What do you think? If not, what do you think was he?

How about Jesus, was he a literal person?

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 13:50:56
Was there a first human being?  Yes, how could there not be?  Even with the view of evolution, there was a first hominid to whom God gave him his spirit.

So what came first?

- The hominid through evolution which subsequently was given a spirit by God, or
- The hominoid through evolution, which subsequently became hominid because God gave him a spirit

And how did Eve came to be?

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 18:17:42
No of course not.  Why would you think that?  You asked if Adam was a literal person.  I assume that you meant person as human being.  Any hominids, if such existed before Adam, would not have been given the spirit of a human being and would simply be a specie of animal.

God's Word in Genesis said God formed Adam from the dust of the ground, not given a spirit to a species of hominid.

Quote from: 4WD on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 18:17:42
No of course not.  Why would you think that?  You asked if Adam was a literal person.  I assume that you meant person as human being.  Any hominids, if such existed before Adam, would not have been given the spirit of a human being and would simply be a specie of animal.

Who told you that man is an animal? God or the scientist?

Gen. 2:7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

What do you say is the breath of life? Did God, to the animal, gave the breath of life?

Consider Eve.

Gen. 2:23 And Adam said:

"This is now bone of my bones
And flesh of my flesh;
She shall be called Woman,
Because she was taken out of Man."

Does this verse even suggest of Eve as to have evolved from Adam or have been produced in man? That, the male human being produced the female human being or in the male human being, the female evolved or what?

There's nothing in evolutionary theory that denies that we are all descended from two individuals.    Nor is there anything in scripture that denies humans living today evolved from other species of primate.   

Quote from: The Barbarian on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 21:50:45
There's nothing in evolutionary theory that denies that we are all descended from two individuals.    Nor is there anything in scripture that denies humans living today evolved from other species of primate.

The argument of absence.
If scripture does not deny the perpetual virginity of Mary, I therefore conclude that Mary was a perpetual virgin.
And where scripture sheds doubt on such a notion, I just declare it to be allegorical.

Quote from: Michael2012 on Thu Aug 17, 2017 - 19:54:40Who told you that man is an animal? God or the scientist?

The problem here is that you and so many others have decided that the written word, God's special revelation, is the only revelation we have from God.  That is simply not true.  We have the general revelation revealed in His creation.  Your assumption is that something is true only if it is explicitly stated in the written word.  And that is false.

Psa 19:1  For the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament proclaims his handiwork.

Rom 1:18  For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19  because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Rom 1:20  For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

So in answer to your question.  Yes, God and science.  Physically man is an animal, spiritually he is not.

For those that buy evolution and believe at least some of the creation account to be allegory:

Is God powerful enough to have literally done what Genesis says He did?

Quote from: 4WD on Fri Aug 18, 2017 - 06:17:05
Michael said:

QuoteWho told you that man is an animal? God or the scientist?

The problem here is that you and so many others have decided that the written word, God's special revelation, is the only revelation we have from God.  That is simply not true.  We have the general revelation revealed in His creation.  Your assumption is that something is true only if it is explicitly stated in the written word.  And that is false.

Psa 19:1  For the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament proclaims his handiwork.

Rom 1:18  For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
Rom 1:19  because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Rom 1:20  For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

So in answer to your question.  Yes, God and science.  Physically man is an animal, spiritually he is not.

So God told you that man is an animal. And the scientists also told you that.

Of course what God said of man is not that man is an animal nor a special animal.

For sure it is the scientist who told you that man is an animal.

Yes God is revealed in His creation. And how does that answer the question. Did God, by revelation in creation, tell you that man is an animal? Besides, the things about God that is revealed in creation is His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, such as are plain to us, and does not require one to be a scientist to see.

So, the scientist told you and that is where your belief that man is an animal is coming from.