[Sybeck1]

according to Hank Hanegraaff:

Under the banner of "theistic evolution," a growing number of Christians maintain that God used evolution as His method for creation. This, in my estimation, is the worst of all possibilities.

It is one thing to believe in evolution, it is quite another to blame God for it. Not only is theistic evolution a contradiction in terms -- like the phrase flaming snowflakes -- but as we have seen, it is also the cruelest, most inefficient system for creation imaginable….

The most significant consequence, however, is that [evolution] undermines the very foundation of Christianity. If indeed evolution is reflective for the laws of science, then Genesis must be reflective of the flaws of Scripture. And if the foundation of Christianity is flawed, the superstructure is destined to fall.






Does God have to make millions of mistakes along the way to have fellowship with you and me?

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

Look, I'm not gonna get into a debate about God and evolution.

I'm merely pointing out that the same people who believe that every change in the environment is "destroying the delicate balance of nature" also believe in the evolution of life to adapt to changes in the environment. Yet, they want us to curtail our activities in such a way as to freeze that same environment in place. And just for fun, they set up Christians as a convenient strawman.

[atlaw]

Under the banner of "theistic evolution," a growing number of Christians maintain that God used evolution as His method for creation. This, in my estimation, is the worst of all possibilities.

It is one thing to believe in evolution, it is quite another to blame God for it. Not only is theistic evolution a contradiction in terms -- like the phrase flaming snowflakes -- but as we have seen, it is also the cruelest, most inefficient system for creation imaginable...

Does God have to make millions of mistakes along the way to have fellowship with you and me?

Well, that's certainly an odd take on the issue. You seem to be endorsing a view that God could not possibly have been responsible for an evolutionary process that resulted in the cruelty and inefficiency we actually observe in nature. Instead, God must have purposefully manipulated all of the minutia of organic matter into ... um ... the cruelty and inefficiency we actually observe in nature.

[The_Reader_David]

I suggest you might climb out of your preconceptions, conditioned by the common rationalism of Western secularism and Western Christianity for which Blessed Augustine became the Father of Fathers early on, by reading Alexander Kalomiros's The Six Dawns which can be read at http://www.zephyr.gr/stjohn/frread-a.htm. It explains, among other things, the understanding of Genesis among the Fathers of the Church--with particular emphasis on the Cappadocian Fathers and St. John Chrystostom--an understanding which is remarkably consonant with current science.

The only thing which modern science will collapse is the superstructure of rationalistic Western Christianity with its false assumptions arising from over emphasis on the speculations of Blessed Augustine. (Even protestants who don't know Augustine from Tertullian share them, too, because they are all-pervasive in Western Christian thought.)

I suggest others on the thread read it too.

[Condorman]

... [theistic evolution] is also the cruelest, most inefficient system for creation imaginable…

Reconcile this with the fact that places like MIT are copying the evolutionary process and using genetic algorithms as efficient problem solving strategies?