Two potential creation scenarios

Creationism, Evolution, and other science issues

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Volbrigade
Banned
Banned
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:54 pm

Post #141

Post by Volbrigade »

FarWanderer wrote:
Volbrigade wrote: [Replying to post 136 by FarWanderer]
If so, are you not treating the bible as a higher authority than your own cognition?
Of course.

Do you not treat a college biology book as a "higher authority" than "your own cognition"?

To borrow from C. S. Lewis -- a map of the coast of Japan as a "higher authority" than your experience of standing on the beach?
I do not treat anything as a higher authority than my cognition. I grant authority by the final authority of my cognition.
I'll let you take that up with Danmark ;) :

"the man on the beach may be dreaming, mentally addled, perceptually disabled, a liar, or just plain inaccurate for a variety of reasons."


Volbrigade wrote:
And if not, why should we treat ideas like evolution etc. any different?
We shouldn't.

We should weigh the merits of whether or not microbes were formed by chance in a universe that has no cause, and then proceeded to morph into men over time, by mindless, accidental processes.
How about if microbes formed by design in a universe that has a cause, and proceded to morph into men over time, by guided, intentional processes?

Any problems with that?
[/quote]

The problem, it seems to me, is that if that's the case, we're dealing with more of an omniscient, diabolical fiend, than a loving God. One who would purposely design a world in which millions of years of disease, death, carnivory, butchery, savagery, etc., took place BEFORE He brought forth the creature (Man) whom He would "ensoul" (as Long-Age compromisers maintain).

These factors would also apply to "pseudo-human" hominids, that were the penultimate steps before a fictional, poetic "Adam" emerged, in which God could put "the Divine spark".

The Biblical account that I accept as revealed, propositional truth from the Creator Himself (more below) says that sin and death entered the world through one man's -- Adam's -- disobedience (in concert with the deception of Eve), and spread, genetically, throughout the entire human race. That is necessary so that Redemption could likewise take place through the office of one Man, Jesus Christ.

The fault of organized, denominational Christianity for the last 200 years or so, has been its attempt to make the Biblical narrative fit the ever-changing popular "scientific" notions of the day.

We now realize more and more that God says what He means, and means what He says: and a straighforward reading of the Scriptures is moving perfectly in concert with our understanding of the world, in all areas (including the unique gravity situation during the first three days of creation, which would account for distant celestial objects to be removed by distance; but not time, in our mundane use of the term (i.e., the amount of time needed for light to travel from there to here, at its current measurable rate, as measured by clocks on earth).

"Sometimes Science seems to be in conflict with the Bible. But just give Science time -- it'll catch up."
Volbrigade wrote:One can learn a great deal more about God by actually inviting Him in to your life, as the indwelling Holy Spirit.
Who are we to "invite", exactly? The God of the bible?
[/quote]
Exactly.
Volbrigade wrote:But the fullest understanding possible in this world is by a combination of all three; by putting the Sovereign God foremost in all things.
What's more likely to accurately reflect God's will? The universe God created, or books written by humans in his name? There can be no falsehoods, no misdirection, no distorting of the truth in creation itself- that I'm sure we can agree on. However, presupposing intention does not necessitate the bible being reflective of that intention, so how does the bible become the "word of God" in your mind? Reason? Presupposition? Which is it?
[/quote]

Reason.

I accept the Bible to be the revealed "word of God" -- "propositional truth" -- for a number of reasons, which taken together constitute a circumstantial case that is "beyond a reasonable doubt."

It starts with the fact that the 66 books, written by 40 (or more) authors, over a period of 1,700 years (or so), constitute an integrated message system that is thematically, idiomatically, and symbolically consistent (as alluded to in an earler post). That's enough to get one's attention.

It continues with the fact that its historical narrative is continually being verified as accurate, from an archeological perspective.

It also contains scientific insights that were far beyond the level of understanding of the non-Hebrew pagans, at the time of its writing (e.g., the hygienic practices of Levitical Law; the realization that Earth is a "circle" (properly, "sphere") that hangs upon "nothing"; Paul's allusion to our 4D space-time continuum in Eph. 3:18; many more). That there is nothing in scripture that conflicts with our scientific or historical understanding of the world; though in many cases it supersedes it, by introducing the interactions of the spiritual "metacosm" upon our finite "cosmos", by what we call "miracle").

There is its remarkable quality of describing a consistent, coherent story of Redemption, with the narrative beginning in the third chapter of its opening book, and continuing through to the last sentence of its last one (Revelation -- which cannot be properly understood without a thorough grounding in the Old Testament texts to which it makes dozens -- hundreds? (I'd have to check) -- of allusions.

That the entire story, front to back, tells the story of Jesus Christ; with countless allusions to His coming (in the Prophets, Psalms, and elsewhere); God Himself, in the form of a man, to undertake to undo the cosmic catastrophe of Adam's sin, and bring salvation from it to men.

That it records history in advance; including the precise day that Jesus would announce Himself to the Jews as their racial King.

That it records the history of, and promises to, a distinct ethnic group (the Jews) that God would "set apart" for the purposes of imparting His Law, and bringing forth Jesus by direct divine intervention (the Virgin Birth); that those people, and the record of that Law, are with us to this day, in an uninterrupted line, despite numerous attempts throughout history to eradicate them; and that the promise of their return to their ancestral homeland has been fulfilled in our time, setting the stage for the fulfillment of other promises which have not yet come to pass.

And, very intriguing to me -- and most controversial; I don't "hang my hat on it", but do find it edifying -- the fact that "God's fingerprints" are all over the the Biblical texts, in their original languages. That in addition to the "macrocodes" that it is replete with (e.g., the Flood being a portrait of salvation); it contains (perhaps unlimited, as yet undetected) "microcodes", utilizing the properties of gamatria in the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, as well as heptatic structures that are beyond any possibility of accidental occurrence.

These are some of the reasons that the Bible is "the word of God", in my opinion.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 7855
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 38 times

Post #142

Post by Clownboat »

The Biblical account that I accept as revealed, propositional truth from the Creator Himself...
The fault of organized, denominational Christianity for the last 200 years or so, has been its attempt to make the Biblical narrative fit the ever-changing popular "scientific" notions of the day.
and a straighforward reading of the Scriptures
But the fullest understanding possible in this world is by a combination of all three; by putting the Sovereign God foremost in all things.
I accept the Bible to be the revealed "word of God" -- "propositional truth"
It starts with the fact that the 66 books, written by 40 (or more) authors, over a period of 1,700 years (or so), constitute an integrated message system that is thematically, idiomatically, and symbolically consistent...

That there is nothing in scripture that conflicts with our scientific or historical understanding of the world; though in many cases it supersedes it...

(Revelation -- which cannot be properly understood without a thorough grounding in the Old Testament texts...
the fact that "God's fingerprints" are all over the the Biblical texts
He who begins by loving Christianity more than Truth, will proceed by loving his sect or church better than Christianity, and end in loving himself better than all. - Samuel Taylor Coleridge

What happens with the Biblical literalist is that he makes an idol of the Bible and his own literal interpretation of it which he clings to as if it is himself, thus putting his own narrow view in opposition to the wider principle of love and acceptance that Jesus taught. These folks will become increasingly marginalized as they put the worst face possible on Christianity. They will fight among themselves as well because what they are really doing is self promotion, each of them seeking to claim to speak for God. - Danmark circa 2014
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle

Post #143

Post by Danmark »

Clownboat wrote: He who begins by loving Christianity more than Truth, will proceed by loving his sect or church better than Christianity, and end in loving himself better than all. - Samuel Taylor Coleridge

What happens with the Biblical literalist is that he makes an idol of the Bible and his own literal interpretation of it which he clings to as if it is himself, thus putting his own narrow view in opposition to the wider principle of love and acceptance that Jesus taught. These folks will become increasingly marginalized as they put the worst face possible on Christianity. They will fight among themselves as well because what they are really doing is self promotion, each of them seeking to claim to speak for God. - Danmark circa 2014
:D I was going to say, 'What a well written post!' Then I saw the attribution. :D Speaking of biblical literalism, here's my current issue of the tract I hand out in exchange for the ones I receive from the door to door folks:

Let me see if I understand what you want me to believe. 6000 years ago there was no universe, so god made the Sun, the moon, the stars, and the Earth in six days. This God is unchanging and reliable… except he does seem to change his mind a lot, especially about whether or not he made a mistake. First he creates man and pronounces him 'good.' Then he calls him evil and corrupt and says he will wipe man out altogether. Then he repents and drowns only 99.999% of mankind along with nearly all the animals.

Then he promises never to do that again, but he repeatedly sends out his favorite tribe to massacre other tribes so they can have their 'promised land.' You have to be mentally challenged not to see this is a made up god, designed by man to serve man's purposes against other men.

Then we have this Christian offshoot with it's own problems and differences, including sending his son, who is also himself and is perfect, but he has him killed, but he rises from the dead. This single god becomes 3, but not 3; 3 = 1 somehow. And this massacre of logic was codified 300 years later by a group of men who wanted to be sure everyone was in agreement. This is a god who in some ways IS consistent. He consistently likes massacres, whether the victim is loins or logic.

And if we do not believe this, he will send us to Hell.
But, he loves us.

Volbrigade
Banned
Banned
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:54 pm

Post #144

Post by Volbrigade »

[Replying to post 142 by Danmark]
But, he loves us.
Indeed He does.

What's missing from your sophomoric account is any depth of understanding -- or any depth at all.

God is Love. Perfect Love.

That perfect love was expressed in the society of the Trinity, "before the foundations of the world". There has never been a time when it did not exist. There was no "time" until it, and matter, were created.

God produced a universe in order to produce many "Sons". The concept of "many-ness" is impossible without space and time for it to exist in. God created matter for the purpose of spiritualizing it (and for His glory).

He created man so that he could freely return God's love. He endowed him with free will, knowing that man would choose badly: and knowing what the result of that choice would require of Him.

You can, if you wish, conceive of infinite power. Dimly, perhaps -- but you can entertain some concept of power without limit.

You can conceive of infinite knowledge. Of an entity which knows all there is. Again -- dimly, perhaps -- but you can at least have a grasp of such a thing.

You cannot conceive of infinite love.

We will spend an eternity -- those of us who have accepted God's payment, in redemption of our sins; who have allowed Him to "pay the bar tab" we couldn't; who have "settled out of court" with a Holy and Just God --

we will spend an eternity in praise of Him, for the limitless richness of His love.

User avatar
dianaiad
Site Supporter
Posts: 10220
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 12:30 pm
Location: Southern California

Post #145

Post by dianaiad »

[quote="Volbrigade"]
......

What's missing from your sophomoric account is any depth of understanding -- or any depth at all.

.....
:warning: Moderator Warning


Negative comments such as this one are specifically against the rules of this forum. Address the content of the post, not the character of the poster.

This post also violates the guidelines on guidelines on preaching.


Please review our Rules.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 7855
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 38 times

Post #146

Post by Clownboat »

Volbrigade wrote:What's missing from your sophomoric account is any depth of understanding -- or any depth at all.

God is Love. Perfect Love.
This is only a sophomoric account, so we will probably need your senoric account in order to understand the true message that a god meant to reveal.

You claim that the god of the Bible is "Love". The Bible seems to agree...
1st John 4:8 Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.
1st John 4:16 And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them.

Revelations 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books.
1st Corinthians 13: 4 - 5 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

As we can see, Love does not keep a record of wrongs, and the god of the Bible is said to be Love (perfect Love according to you whatever that even means). Yet, here we have god/perfect love keeping records of wrongs in the Book of Life when love should not be doing such a thing.

Should we believe you, or the Bible? Perhaps blame us for not understanding correctly?
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

User avatar
Danmark
Site Supporter
Posts: 12697
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:58 am
Location: Seattle

Post #147

Post by Danmark »

Part of my concern about placing personal or biblical 'revelation' ahead of science as a way of understanding reality is reflected in a post I wrote at http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... p?p=696253 'Christian reasons for respecting gay rights'

This is an excellent example of the false conclusions one can arrive at when he starts with false assumptions. In this case the false assumption is "intelligent design," when the reality is the natural force of evolution. Those who understand and believe in what we actually observe in nature are not surprised by the variation we find in it. Filled with wonder of course, but not shocked when each individual of a species does not perfectly fit the expectation of one who sees people formed from some specific design as if they were formed by a cosmic cookie cutter.

When one believes in the literal truth of the Bible, including creationism, one works under a terrific handicap when analyzing the reality of the world. Gender is a great example of nature's diversity. Forcing everything to fit into religiously derived categories is blinding.
For some help in seeing the reality of gender one could read:

http://web.uvic.ca/~ahdevor/HowMany/HowMany.html

There's also a good article here with a very helpful Venn diagram:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androphilia_and_gynephilia

Belief in 'intelligent design' makes it very difficult to actually observe objectively or come to objective conclusions. Birth defects are seen as examples of 'the fall,' tho' how that works has never been explained. Why God would 'design' half to 3/4 of a million different species of beetles [+THE Beatles :D] is unanswerable for the person blinded by creationist thinking. [unless "That's the way he wanted it" be considered an answer] Over and over we see believers being forced into accepting increasingly odd opinions and contradictions when they feel the need to explain things as part of an overall design.

Volbrigade
Banned
Banned
Posts: 689
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 6:54 pm

Post #148

Post by Volbrigade »

[Replying to post 145 by Clownboat]

I congratulate you on your diligent exegesis, clownboat!

Here's what you're missing.

God is Perfect in Love (in addition to being infinite in Knowledge and Power).

He is also perfect in Justice.

We must conclude that when He undertook to create creatures with free will, so that they too could express Love (which demands the quality of choice), in a bounded 4D reality: that He (being omniscient) KNEW that we would misuse their free will by choosing badly.

And what that choice would cost Him -- which is literally unimaginable.

And yet, He obviously decided it was worth the cost. Because here we are.

Now: the product of our free will -- "sin", literally "missing the mark"; "falling short of the glory of God" -- renders us unable to exist in the eternal presence of a Holy and Just God.

But by His finished work on the Cross, we are able to acquire His holiness and perfection. The punishment due to us, has been exercised on the only One who could pay the price; and we have inherited the innocence and righteousness that is His alone.

Pretty good deal, I'd say.

God's perfect Justice is fulfilled, by the office of His perfect Love, as a freely-given gift.

But if you choose not to accept the gift -- well, it's "justice" for you.

Remember -- GRACE.

God's Riches At Christ's Expense.

"Justice is getting what we deserve. Mercy is not getting what we deserve. Grace is getting what we DON'T deserve."

I'll leave off. I'm already in hot water, and don't want to be charged with "preaching". I am, in reality, merely responding to objections.

Dan -- the reason there are so many beetles (sadly, 2 fewer than when there were 4 Beatles :( ), is because there are so many global (micro)environments. And God engineered the originally created ones with the genetic diversity to adapt to them, by selective processes (not by acquiring "new information").

That process continues to this day. New speciation occurs, in response to environmental pressure. Evolution is real -- it just didn't turn microbes into men.

Btw -- insects were not included on the Ark.

Bust Nak
Savant
Posts: 8847
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2012 6:03 am
Location: Planet Earth
Has thanked: 15 times
Been thanked: 17 times

Post #149

Post by Bust Nak »

Volbrigade wrote: the reason there are so many beetles, is because there are so many global (micro)environments. And God engineered the originally created ones with the genetic diversity to adapt to them, by selective processes (not by acquiring "new information").
Then you are still left with an "omniscient, diabolical fiend" who would purposely design a world in which thousands of years of disease, death, carnivory, butchery, savagery, etc., took place before he brought forth the current batch of beetles.

User avatar
Clownboat
Savant
Posts: 7855
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
Has thanked: 29 times
Been thanked: 38 times

Post #150

Post by Clownboat »

Volbrigade wrote: [Replying to post 145 by Clownboat]
I congratulate you on your diligent exegesis, clownboat!

Here's what you're missing.
Well, call me a prophet...
Clownboat wrote:Perhaps blame us for not understanding correctly?
God is Perfect in Love (in addition to being infinite in Knowledge and Power).

He is also perfect in Justice.
Infinite punishment for finite crimes is not justice, much less perfect justice. Would you punish your children for an eternity for playing in the street one time?

Either way, before you attempt to muddy the waters, will you deal with the question posed to you? Why is love keeping a record of wrongs when the Bible says love does not do such a thing?

Please answer that before assigning other qualities (muddying the waters) to said god in an attempt to make sense of the Bible.

Is he love or not?
Does love keep a record of wrongs or not?
Is the Book of Life a lie?
We must conclude that when He undertook to create creatures with free will, so that they too could express Love (which demands the quality of choice), in a bounded 4D reality: that He (being omniscient) KNEW that we would misuse their free will by choosing badly.

And what that choice would cost Him -- which is literally unimaginable.
You can conclude all you want, I care not. What should I conclude about a person that is OK with sacrificing a human to a god concept in order to feel forgiven for being born a sinner because a couple people that they didn't know were deceived by a talking snake according to the legends of a tribal people passed down via oral tradition?

What evils should I conclude said person has done that makes them literally OK with humans sacrifice to appease a god?
I say this because there is nothing I have done in my life that would make me be OK with human sacrifices to any of the proposed god ideas.
Pretty good deal, I'd say.

God's perfect Justice is fulfilled, by the office of His perfect Love, as a freely-given gift.

But if you choose not to accept the gift -- well, it's "justice" for you.
Perhaps you should start a thread where you attempt to argue for sacrificing a human or humans to a god? :blink:

For now I'm trying to get a clear picture on your claims of a god being (perfect) love, therefore not keeping records of wrong, while keeping records of wrong.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.

I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU

It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco

If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb

Post Reply