Theistic Evolution: The ONLY WAY!

This is another post on this subject, I feel this is important.

On behalf of Christian intellect everywhere worldwide, I implore you fellow Christians, educate yourselves on this interpretation, as I believe it is the ONLY view that a person can take and still be looked at as intellectual, intelligent individual by the science community at large.

Us Christians are constantly "battling" our secular society, but part of the reason is because many of our "troops" are stuck in medieval belief, so society at large cannot take our group seriously. I'm sorry folks, but I'm gonna say it now - the earth is NOT 6,000 years old, there was NO literal Adam and Eve. Call me heretical, I don't care, because I know Truth, I know God, and I know Jesus.

We MUST come up to speed with current scientific thought, and we MUST stop embracing ignorance! We MUST start DENYING IGNORANCE!!

Please educate yourselves folks! There are many great websites, but I am going to link you to my current favorites which explains this topic much more in depth: www.theisticevolution.org...

www.biologos.org... goes in depth on the subject as well,

www.solhaam.org... is another good one with explanations on individual verses and the entire genesis account

www.rationalchristianity.net... is the final one I want you to check out, and it links to a couple others as well

This is taken from the firstwebsite:

What's at Stake?
The credibility of Christianity is at risk due to the Creationism theories. With evangelism and missions at the heart of both Protestant and Catholic organizations, the potential damage to the intellectual reputation of Christianity cannot be ignored.

Conservative Christianity vs. Conservative Christianity
In a struggle to conserve the original meaning of the ancient sacred text, a clash with the effort to conserve a traditional interpretation of the same text is inevitable. Conservative Christians are forced to take sides against each other. Yet, the root of the issue maintains similarities to the age old free will vs. predestination battle between Conservative Christians.

The Aquinas Divine Designer Concept - An Ideal Before Its Time
A review of the odds of evolutionary success and how probability may point to a Necessary Being. The Big Bang model as explained by physicist theorists can be divided into stages within the first 13 minutes. The incredible odds of each stage completing successfully reflect a contingency of sorts--an unseen hand guiding the entire process. Thus, a Divine Designer is deemed necessary as part of the theory of Theistic Evolution.

Scholarly Method of Textual Criticism
Within Christianity the use of textual criticism--the method utilized by biblical scholars to dissect the Bible in an effort to uncover the original text--is avoided completely in two key areas:
1) Literal interpretation of 1st creation account in Genesis by Creationists
2) The King James Version only controversy - the claim that the KJV is the only English translation that should be used.
Some leading Creationists subscribe to both 1 and 2. This article illustrates the parallels between 1 and 2.


Now, as far as atheists/unbelievers/nonchristians go, this message is for you as well!

We are not believing with blind faith, we have all had PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS with Jesus Christ! I'm not saying we all talk directly to God, but we are all CONVICTED in our DEEP INNER BEING that He exists, we have felt Him in many ways, and been proven of His existence in many ways!

I also ask that you all look into biblical archaeology, and all the prophecies Jesus Christ filled out, and the legitamacy of the Textus Receptus, the official New Testament Koine Greek (original) version......

Here's a great website helping prove the NT and explaining many common misconceptions about Jesus the Christ: thedevineevidence.com...

Please keep and open mind, and when doing research, try to take an outsiders, unbiased and objective view to things.....please don't limit yourself to a "bubble" or "comfort zone", let all possibilities, be possible.....

Thank you and God bless you for listening to what I have to say....

Amen

I think the biggest paradigm shift that could happen short term would be teaching what Christ actually taught and taking it to heart. The views espoused by him were much more far east/indo centric than anything. He taught that god was within everything and that the path to enlightenment was through the self because we are in turn part of everything.

Such a view completely disperses the entire view of magical thinking that puts god in perspective rather than relying on the system where one has to suspend rational thought and disbelief as he exist entirely in a realm beyond rationality and returns to a much more naturalistic center. Such a view allows for lessons to be learned from life rather than simply attributing it to factors beyond our control.

reply to post by LaughingatHumanity


I can agree with that,

Anyone reading this, please check out this thread: www.abovetopsecret.com...


Amen

Interesting post and perspective!

I had followed Christianity in my late childhood, and still to this day, although I have distanced myself from the practice of Christianity, find the way Jesus treated others to be nothing short of an inspiration.

In my studies, Jesus didn't judge or condemn people for their various differences - only for exploiting others, and that's what I took away from it. However, what the church has done in its efforts to consolidate the power afforded by the fear of its people is nothing short of exploitation.

It's very sad that admirable figures throughout humankind's history can't simply remain admired sources of inspiration. No, we must turn them into podiums from which we preach our superiority, cloaked in the diminishing remnants of salvation for our beloved brothers and sisters. Its sancimonious extremism may snuff out its own existence. They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and that is clearly illustrated here each day.

S&F for your efforts to merge intellect with spirit - we weren't meant to use one without the other!

SPAM removed by Admin

Now your just spamming.

Does the religious site that sends you all over here, pay you to do this?

I find it very interesting that so many who call themselves christians have taken to deciding for themselves what parts of the bible are true, and not true. Literal and analogous.

It's no wonder there are thousands of sects in the United States alone. And yet, each sect has the unexpurgated gospel truth. And what you have left is a religion divided against itself. Seems like Jesus said a word or two about division.

If you can hack the bible up into palatable pieces for yourself, and reinterpret it to suit you, then how do you know the whole thing isn't analogous at best, except for a bit of evidenced history among its pages?

We are not believing with blind faith, we have all had PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS with Jesus Christ! I'm not saying we all talk directly to God, but we are all CONVICTED in our DEEP INNER BEING that He exists, we have felt Him in many ways, and been proven of His existence in many ways!

I have spoken with Muslims and Moonies who say the very same thing. Are their personal experiences illegitimate?

ETA:

The credibility of Christianity is at risk due to the Creationism theories. With evangelism and missions at the heart of both Protestant and Catholic organizations, the potential damage to the intellectual reputation of Christianity cannot be ignored.

Credibility? What credibility?
Can you show me any scripture where God or Jesus were worried about their credibility? Seems to me he was much more concerned with what he deemed to be the truth, whether anyone thought it was credible or not. And many didn't, but that didn't change his message, did it?

reply to post by Iason321


Bravo! I whole heatedly agree with you sir! I was just thinking about this very same topic just yesterday!
I've known for a long time that Genesis described evolution process and have been wondering why more people don't see the connection. The subject is vast and this would just be one facet of it. I certainly welcome any insights on how to present the material to others who believe in a creator and in fact know Yeshua lead by example "The Way".

Originally posted by Iason321
Now, as far as atheists/unbelievers/nonchristians go, this message is for you as well!

We are not believing with blind faith, we have all had PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS with Jesus Christ! I'm not saying we all talk directly to God, but we are all CONVICTED in our DEEP INNER BEING that He exists, we have felt Him in many ways, and been proven of His existence in many ways!

You and I have must have a different idea for what a personal relationship is.

Well, since evolution is pretty much proven, it's silly to discount it. It's also silly to say it's impossible without a god driving the process. Any rational person can believe that god used evolution as a tool. Science is science. It's based on facts. Faith is faith. It's based on personal beliefs. Both can easily coexist, but that doesn't mean somebody is irrational for believing evolution but not god. That would be logical, since evidence of god does not exist. Theistic evolution is the only rational mindset for creationism. Otherwise you have to throw entire fields of science out the window. I know a lot of rational creations that believe evolution makes god great.

reply to post by Barcs


I am in full agreement and aligntment with this post.

Thank you,

Amen

Originally posted by Klassified
I find it very interesting that so many who call themselves christians have taken to deciding for themselves what parts of the bible are true, and not true. Literal and analogous.

It's no wonder there are thousands of sects in the United States alone. And yet, each sect has the unexpurgated gospel truth. And what you have left is a religion divided against itself. Seems like Jesus said a word or two about division.

If you can hack the bible up into palatable pieces for yourself, and reinterpret it to suit you, then how do you know the whole thing isn't analogous at best, except for a bit of evidenced history among its pages?

LOVE this.
I'm a Christian - wholeheartedly... and this is one of the things that drives me INSANE.
Whenever we introduce an element of "oh, this is allegorical", or "this isn't literal, he means that figuratively", you're introducing an element of human error. If Scripture isn't literal, then interpretation is anybody's field day.

Unless the text SPECIFICALLY DEMANDS that it it isn't literal, then you MUST logically read it as such.

Originally posted by Barcs
Well, since evolution is pretty much proven, it's silly to discount it. It's also silly to say it's impossible without a god driving the process. Any rational person can believe that god used evolution as a tool. Science is science. It's based on facts. Faith is faith. It's based on personal beliefs. Both can easily coexist, but that doesn't mean somebody is irrational for believing evolution but not god. That would be logical, since evidence of god does not exist. Theistic evolution is the only rational mindset for creationism. Otherwise you have to throw entire fields of science out the window. I know a lot of rational creations that believe evolution makes god great.

edit on 19-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)

...to say that evolution is "pretty much proven" is misleading, unless you define your terms.
In fact, in terms of the Scientific Method, it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove a theory. You can only DISPROVE theories, you can't go the other way. Stating that something is fact because it has not yet been disproven doesn't make it so.

With that said...

I think it fairly safe to say that the theory of evolution has gained significant credence in terms of its validity.
HOWEVER...
this does NOT mean that abiogenesis is a valid explanation for the origin of life, nor does it, by necessity, demand the introduction of long ages, or theistic abiogenesis.

What do I mean by that? Evolution is a given. Let me quality that, though. Parts of the theory are, at this point, undisputed. Obviously, mutations happen. Survival of the Fittest is a valid observation. However, nothing in all of science indicates that organisms have the potential or the ability to increase in complexity through mutation. This simply doesn't happen. Organisms can go from more complex to less complex, but they cannot go the other way around. Mutations never, ever create NEW information. They can create MORE information, but never NEW information. This is a quantitative, rather than qualitative, change, and means that the "frog to a prince" form of evolution simply does not and cannot occur.

Second, abiogenesis (the teaching that life can have its origins in nonliving matter, given the right conditions) not only hasn't ever been proven to be possible, but CAN'T be proven to be possible... since the very experiment that would seek to prove it would require human involvement (a higher form of intelligence than the components themselves) and manipulation.

Those who teach theistic evolution do so because of pure cowardice.
That's a pretty strong statement, so let me quality that, too. You have no reason to fear beliving in a literal Bible text. Nothing in all of Scripture stands in opposition to the Truth. Theistic evolution is an attempt at reconciling Truth with falsehood... an attempt at melding an Inerrant God with an errant world that seeks to justify its own existence apart from Him. Your fear that Genesis 1-6 could be wrong leads you to unjustifiably seek reconciliation with the theories of men, placing Scripture beneath "science" in your own mind.

...but in the end, only one will be justified, only one will be shown to be true. My bets are on God. After all... He's the One who created the laws of the universe. God has a monopoly on science, not the other way around.

reply to post by Awen24


You raise some valid points,

But as someone has stated earlier, and I have stated in the past -

To discredit evolution, is to discredit science as a whole - not just evolutionary biology, but biology in general, also, psychology, cosmology, geography, oceanography, archaeology, paleontology, modern medicine, virology, and a plethora of other fields I'm sure i'm missing......

Not believing in the current scientific model for evolution is akin to not believing that earth isn't flat or gravity doesn't exist....it's absurd, frankly.

Mine and other intellectual Christians attempts to reconcile the Genesis account with modern science is not disproving truth, it's only proving Truth, if you realize Genesis describes evolution, and not a single literal adam and eve. you have to understand Hebrew terms and the meanings they held, you also have to have a grip on Allegory and Metaphors and the fact that God prefers to reveal Himself in mysterious ways and in riddles,

He is the Divine Conductor, the driving force behind Evolution and Life as we know it,

Science and Truth (the Holy Bible, Jesus the Christ) do not contradict each other, they compliment each other.

Originally posted by Awen24
...to say that evolution is "pretty much proven" is misleading, unless you define your terms.
In fact, in terms of the Scientific Method, it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove a theory. You can only DISPROVE theories, you can't go the other way. Stating that something is fact because it has not yet been disproven doesn't make it so.

That's why I said pretty much. I was referring to the process itself(genetic mutations sorted by natural selection, leading to changes in organisms over time). That part is proven, and is the meat and potatoes of evolution. In the THEORY of evolution, there are hypotheses that have not yet been proven, as well as tons upon tons of facts.

I think it fairly safe to say that the theory of evolution has gained significant credence in terms of its validity.
HOWEVER...
this does NOT mean that abiogenesis is a valid explanation for the origin of life, nor does it, by necessity, demand the introduction of long ages, or theistic abiogenesis.

Abiogenesis is gaining momentum, but still has a far way to go before being accepted. It's also not part of evolution.

What do I mean by that? Evolution is a given. Let me quality that, though. Parts of the theory are, at this point, undisputed. Obviously, mutations happen. Survival of the Fittest is a valid observation. However, nothing in all of science indicates that organisms have the potential or the ability to increase in complexity through mutation. This simply doesn't happen. Organisms can go from more complex to less complex, but they cannot go the other way around. Mutations never, ever create NEW information. They can create MORE information, but never NEW information. This is a quantitative, rather than qualitative, change, and means that the "frog to a prince" form of evolution simply does not and cannot occur.

I don't agree with this at all. There is no law of evolution that states a creature must get more or less complex. It adapts to its environment or dies out. We've seen single celled organisms become multi-celluar in a lab. This is an example of becoming more complex. We can measure mutation rates in humans and other primates. I think the part that you are not seeing is that quite often genetic mutations go unnoticed for generations until it combines with other mutations and eventually changes the creature in a way that helps it reproduce better or survive. It's not really about creating new information, it's about changing what's there, but obviously during that process new traits slowly emerge.

Second, abiogenesis (the teaching that life can have its origins in nonliving matter, given the right conditions) not only hasn't ever been proven to be possible, but CAN'T be proven to be possible... since the very experiment that would seek to prove it would require human involvement (a higher form of intelligence than the components themselves) and manipulation.

If they simulate conditions on a primitive earth, and it happens in a lab, it proves that it CAN happen in the world under those same conditions. If non life is ever shown to become life, whether in a lab or not, it debunks the entire premise that life can only come from life. Right now it's still up in the air, although they have been able to form ribonucleotides from non living matter, which is a vital part of RNA.

Those who teach theistic evolution do so because of pure cowardice.
That's a pretty strong statement, so let me quality that, too. You have no reason to fear beliving in a literal Bible text.

It always boils down to fear with fundies. It's not fear, it's just the bible has been heavily manipulated by man. Do you trust man or trust god? Using logic and reasoning to make decisions, is not cowardice. They have no REASON to take the bible literally. It's rational. It is a compilation book from thousands of years ago written by dozens of separate authors. To assert something like that is absolute truth 100% from cover to cover is a bit over the edge. That doesn't mean the bible is wrong, you just have to read it and see what it personally means to you, IMO.

reply to post by Awen24

LOVE this. I'm a Christian - wholeheartedly... and this is one of the things that drives me INSANE. Whenever we introduce an element of "oh, this is allegorical", or "this isn't literal, he means that figuratively", you're introducing an element of human error. If Scripture isn't literal, then interpretation is anybody's field day.

Unless the text SPECIFICALLY DEMANDS that it it isn't literal, then you MUST logically read it as such.

Indeed.

And thank you for unknowingly calling my attention to the blatant errors sticking out in my post. Wow! What a brainfart I must have had earlier when I was typing this. I can't believe I typed analogous instead of Allegorical.

Anyone have a facepalm picture handy?

reply to post by Iason321

good post,

I really don't agree with the (conspiracy) following the titling of this section...

because there is no conspiracy!

we were created and that's that... Evolution can not present any facts or evidence of how we got here but those folks of old tell it like it is.

pretty hardcore considering how ancient the text are imo.

The chance of any higher power actually starting the kickoff then letting nature run its course is just as possible as insta-creationism. I mean, none of us really know for sure. That's why religion is all about faith. Once again though, I am put off by your whole 'my way is the only way' mentality.

I think it's just as possible for a more advanced being to have originally started off evolution as it is to say it just happened or insta-creationism is the answer. There are nothing but possibilities in this world.

I do not believe that there is any one only way. Everyone has their own path. Every man is a star.

reply to post by Iason321


First, Micro-evolution is the only valid scientific form, and does not contradict the bible in any way.

Macro evolution is irrelevant to science, and no one needs to embrace it because the secular world does. In fact, if you read your bible you would have the opposite opinion.

I was a 3.9 student and aced all my biology courses, I even corrected several professors and text books and introduced current research they were unaware of. I am unconvinced that macro evolution has taken place, the evidence is not there. I'm sorry you feel people need to believe it, I didn't.

On a side note, the only question I scored wrong on in one of my biology classes was in determining whether the use of mouthwash is evolution.

The populations of various bacteria change with the introduction of mouthwash to the environment, however after some time has passed the populations returned to pre-mouthwash levels. I argued evolution is change over time (citing the exact definition we were given), and while there was a temporary shift there was no change over time.

My professor said I was wrong, and there was a change, and it was evolution. I then created a scenario. I asked my professor if on an island there were 50 white people and 50 black people when a catastrophe killed 20 white people changing the populations to 30 and 50 respectively, but within 50 years the populations returned to 50 white people and 50 black people, is that evolution? My professor said yes that was evolution. At this point I gave up, knowing no amount of logic would win me back my lost points.

Tell me how the fanaticism for evolution is any different than that for religion?

Originally posted by Iason321
This is another post on this subject, I feel this is important.

On behalf of Christian intellect everywhere worldwide, I implore you fellow Christians, educate yourselves on this interpretation, as I believe it is the ONLY view that a person can take and still be looked at as intellectual, intelligent individual by the science community at large.

Us Christians are constantly "battling" our secular society, but part of the reason is because many of our "troops" are stuck in medieval belief, so society at large cannot take our group seriously.  I'm sorry folks, but I'm gonna say it now - the earth is NOT 6,000 years old, there was NO literal Adam and Eve.  Call me heretical, I don't care, because I know Truth, I know God, and I know Jesus.

We MUST come up to speed with current scientific thought, and we MUST stop embracing ignorance!  We MUST start DENYING IGNORANCE!!

SNIP

Amen

edit on 4/19/2012 by Iason321 because: (no reason given)

edit on 4/19/2012 by Iason321 because: edited some links

edit on 4/19/2012 by Iason321 because: (no reason given)

You are pleading with a mind from the beast. The beast tells our society that you MUST believe this or that because if you don't, your are ignorant, bigoted or unintelligent. The beast is the one who works on the mind alienated from God by insisting that swimming downstream is a more logical choice. The beast works through peer pressure. Christ Jesus did not need those tactics, why not? "He has no hold on me,"

"And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother." Did Jesus teach you to call me ignorant for believing in the existence of Adam? Is calling someone ignorant love? Why is it so important for you to get 'respect' from a community that is not your own?

Do you really think that Jesus came to preach your message of reconciliation with the world's thoughts, which are driven by and derived from the beast? Absolutely not, in fact He came bringing a sword, the word of God, to separate us out from this world. Your tactics of appealing to how we are seen by the world is in direct opposition to the gospel. Did Jesus not warn us that "you will be hated by all nations because of me."? You are pleading with Christian's to FIT IN with the world's beliefs and to accept a theistic evolution that denies Adam and Eve so that we will not be seen as "ignorant". Someone who strives to one day have their mind in tune with God would say "who cares what people think of me" - the only one that matters is what God thinks of me. 

Does it never occur to you that the 6 days of Genesis creation tell us the six days between Adam and Jesus? 
"THIS IS THE BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM"

Day One
"3And God said, “Let there be light,”
* When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God."
* "God is light"

Day Two
" Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water.” 7So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8God called the expanse “sky.” 
* "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons
of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. ..."
* "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

Day Three
" “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.”
* Noah's flood

Day Four
"16God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night....and to separate light from darkness."
* Jesus answered, "Are there not twelve hours of daylight? A man who walks by day will not stumble, for he sees by this world's light."

Day Five
"Let the water teem with living creatures"
* "Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation."

Day Six
you get the picture...

Day Seven
Millennium 

"THIS IS THE BOOK OF THE GENERATIONS OF ADAM"

-"Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God. Exodus 20:10.

- "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing." Ex21:2

-  "And six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof; but the seventh year thou shalt let it rest and lie still..." Ex23:11. 

- "Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest. Ex31:15,17. "...for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed." 


I have absolutely no problem with an old Earth because scripture tells us that the Earth had become void and science validated an old Earth- I have no problems accepting that Cain obviously got a wife from somewhere..,that scripture tells us that trees are people