Posted on 12/09/2008 12:32:05 AM PST by marthemaria
WASHINGTON (AFP) — US President George W. Bush said in an interview Monday that the Bible is "probably not" literally true and that a belief that God created the world is compatible with the theory of evolution.
"I think you can have both," Bush, who leaves office January 20, told ABC television, adding "You're getting me way out of my lane here. I'm just a simple president." But "evolution is an interesting subject. I happen to believe that evolution doesn't fully explain the mystery of life," said the president, an outspoken Christian who often invokes God in his speeches.
"I think that God created the Earth, created the world; I think the creation of the world is so mysterious it requires something as large as an almighty and I don't think it's incompatible with the scientific proof that there is evolution," he told ABC television. Asked whether the Bible was literally true, Bush replied:
"Probably not. No, I'm not a literalist, but I think you can learn a lot from it." "The important lesson is 'God sent a son,'" he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at google.com ...
There are no discrepancies in Scripture; it is only the limited, finite mind of man that cannot understand the Word of God without the help of the Holy Spirit which ignorantly believes that God made mistakes, or there are errors, or the Bible contradicts itself. It is only arrogant, puny, man who thinks that he has everything figured out and who has the arrogance to suggest that God messed up when He wrote Scripture who would seriously suggest that the Bible isn't true.
For the final time, Scripture can only be understood by those who have a personal relationship with Christ and therefore have access to the Holy Spirit, and therefore have Scripture interpreted and revealed to them by the One Whose job it is to do that.
If you can't see that after I've repeated it numerous times on this thread, then there is really nothing more I can say.
Hmm, isn’t this similar to the Catholic position?
(ie, not literal, requires interpretation, etc)
Perhaps I’m mistaken.
I think George W. Bush can be a committed, devout Christian and still be skeptical whether the Adam from Genesis actually lived 930 years.
The essence of your position is your foundational, unassailable faith.
Your faith is your truth.
1.2 billion Muslims don’t accept your doctrinal faith as absolute truth. Nor do billions of Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Sikhs etc. Nor do hundreds of millions of Catholics, Russian and Greek Orthodox, Mormons etc.
The most strident practitioners of those sects absolutely KNOW that their faith is universal truth, their scripture is God’s word, their rituals are sacred. You’re not going to persuade them otherwise.
You know that you are right. They know that they are right. So ... ?????
Faith is not measurable by empirical scientific methodology. It’s personal and private. You and I have no standing to judge the fidelity of George W. Bush’s Christian commitment and faith. Christ didn’t spend a lot of time in his ministry revisiting and verifying yarns from the Old Testament.
I consider George W. Bush a fine Christian from his words and deeds. That, more than anything, fueled the pathological hatred the leftists harbored for him these past seven years. When the soulless, secular nihilists of the international left heard him name “Jesus Christ” as the political philosopher he most admired he became their blood enemy forever more.
So, I’m sanguine that George W. Bush is on track with his spiritual journey and it has been a blessing to us all.
You either believe God when He said He wrote the Scriptures in 2 Timothy 3:16 or you do not. You either believe God, even when there are passages you read in Scripture that you find hard to believe because you know that there is a lot that you, as a limited human being, don't know or understand, even in the present time in which you live, or you do not.
You might believe God when He said that, in the early days of his creation of man He allowed man many hundreds of years on the earth, because, after studying the Scriptures, you find that God did what He did for the purpose of getting the earth populated. Then you feel glad that you believed God and you feel grateful that the Holy Spirit helped you to understand what you have read and then you begin to realize that the rest of the Bible is probably just like that - that there are probably many parts that you, as a limited human being can't grasp on your own, but with the help of the Holy Spirit, you can understand. And only with His help can you understand.
So it's almost impossible for me to believe that George Bush, who claims to be a Christian, has lived as long as he has as a Christian and still can actually believe that the Bible isn't literally true.
It just makes me very skeptical and I naturally have to question whether his claim to know Christ is literally true.
Yes sir. See, the Bible-deniers have the small problem of the fact that there are approximately 2500 prophecies in Scripture, 2000 of which have been fulfilled to the letter, with no errors. The other 500 are for a future time, and we see some of them being fulfilled in our time, the biggest one since the death and resurrection of Christ being the fact that Israel became a nation again in 1948 in fulfillment of prophecy in Ezekiel.
There is no other "religion" which can claim that their "holy books" give us prophecy dating back thousands of years which has actually been fulfilled. Only the Scripture of Jehovah God can make that claim and can back it up.
So, I guess now the rubber hits the road: if we know that in Scripture, prophecy was given that has been actually fulfilled, which could only have been given and brought to fruition by a omnipotent, omniscient God, then it stands to reason that the rest of the Bible is entirely true, and factual, and even if, in our finite minds we cannot always understand it without the Holy Spirit and without studying it, it's all true and it is probably a real good idea to read it and find out what it says about the fallen condition of man, the consequences for that fall, and God's gift to man of a escape route out of those consequences.
After all, it's not about the here and now. It's about eternity.
“The important lesson is ‘God sent a son,’” he said.
May the Lord bless you true knowledge of His love and the simplicity of His Gospel.
“What is so disturbing about the idea that evolution might be the METHOD chosen by God to accomplish his will?
Evolution may, or may not, be how God decided to do it but right now it seems to be the best explanation.”
There is no “bee in my bonnet”. I understand your position and there are many who would agree with you.
Call me simple, or fundamental...it is ok.....but there is direct conflict with believing God “created”, but also that he ‘decided to use evolution as his method’ to make it happen. Integral to creation, the Bible says God spoke these things into being. “Let there be light...and there was light” among other things. And ‘man was made from the dust of the ground...on the 6th day’.
Unless you believe each creation day is longer than a 24 hour period, there is absolutely no validity to God using evolution as his method when in fact the Bible says he made man on the 6th day (if indeed it was a 24 hour period)!
This is fundamental. So you and others either believe each of the first 6 days are longer - much longer - than 24 hours for evolution to be included, or you really don’t believe God spoke these things into being to begin with, or you really don’t believe in creation.
What all this looks like to me is people reducing God to the level of THEIR comprehension rather than admitting we cannot comprehend that kind of power?! Why is there a need to have an ‘explanation’ such as evolution when God’s word tells us he spoke it into being - that he created it all?
To say one believes in creation, but also to say evolution explains the history of mankind (and more), immediately indicates one is taking bits and pieces - but not the whole.
So to say ‘God created us and the rest of the universe’, but then to turn right back around and say it is possible that God used evolution really does not fit at all with the 6th day - if you believe it was also a 24 hour period.
I do realize there is forever debate on the time span of each of the creation days. Also, I have this feeling we won’t have this subject at the forefront of our minds on the last day.
A bigger question may be, what are we doing with our faith?
Your first paragraph - I agree with you. I will just say that faith is required to believe in the creation, and faith is required to believe in chance, chaos and evolution.
Bone fragments found all over a region or ‘dig’ as it were - then for a specialized artist to put these fragments together along with an abundance of clay - to call these our ancestors is just humorous and I couldn’t care less how much latin, science and biology is thrown at it. But people eat it up.
As I told someone else, you can call me a simple guy....it is ok with me.
“Because the text in question (Genesis) was written by a pre-scientific people with no understanding of modern biology. They were trying to explain the world as best they could.”
Another fundamental difference between you and I. By stating “written by pre-scientific people”, you are, in my mind, including God since his word claims he gave those words to men to write to begin with. The faith I have in God says - God has a handle on science - BTW - he created it too!
“It will be very difficult to find any evidence that any being, humans included, has what you call a “soul”, no matter how hard I dig...given that there isn’t the slightest shred of scientific evidence that such a thing even exists.”
Ok ok - you are a see it touch it feel it evidence driven person (even though your faith is in chaos - an event...or chain of events you cannot prove).
You are correct -I cannot prove souls exist. I cannot see them or touch them, yet faith in God and his word tell me they most definately exist.
I say ‘most definately’ with the same amount of weight you place in chaos, evolution, etc.
We can cut to the chase at this point or call a truce in that there is NOTHING you are going to tell me that will provide PROOF or evidence that all things came from chance and/or chaos and/or nothing....and all for no reason whatsoever.
You in your obvious intelligence (no sarcasm), did not see chaos or chance or any instance of the process of evolution - yet you believe it. You cannot tell me where good and evil and morale came from - yet you know they exist. You have to tell me where the human ‘animal’ branched off and decided on its own to come up with good and evil. You are going to tell me it developed over time? Knowledge of good and evil did not develop from nothing. Convince me of the moment - or what occured to take an ape from being an animal with zero morals, to an ‘animal’ WITH morals. We both know you cannot take me there - yet you know they are present today and you believe in them to some degree.
“Since I’m not a Christian, what would be the point? Should I consider what the Koran says as well? Or for that matter the Book of Mormon, the Principia Discordia, the Vedas, Dianetics....?”
Read them all! Why not? Read them all 10 times! Then after that - read the historical documents on Joseph Smith and “Mohammed” and others before and during their early years - about the time they deemed themselves ‘prophets’. They all claim to be ‘prophets’ ‘just like Jesus’ or ‘in the line of Jesus’, yet none of them died for the church they established. None of theme claim to be the Son of God, none of them ‘rose from the dead’ and none of them claim that their blood took on all the sins of the entire world in order for us to have a direct relationship with God.
None of them even come close to these claims. Funny you’d mention the Koran and Book of Mormon.
You speak of these other books and sound as if you already KNOW there is a difference betweeen those books and the Bible!
Include ‘Lord of the Rings’ too! It contains a maze of morals, life struggles and priorities and what they all get us in the end! Study all the books you wish.
One stands alone. Don’t wait til then to find out which one it is....and I mean that in an fully nonthreatening way.
Again, humans are.....e)Unique! Final answer!
Great post.
Faith is not required to make the observation that the theory of evolution is the best explanation for the changes that have occurred in various species for the last few billion years.
Bone fragments found all over a region or ‘dig’ as it were - then for a specialized artist to put these fragments together along with an abundance of clay - to call these our ancestors is just humorous and I couldn’t care less how much latin, science and biology is thrown at it. But people eat it up. As I told someone else, you can call me a simple guy....it is ok with me.
While I have no idea whether or not you're a simple guy, you are oversimplifying and mischaracterizing the science of paleontology to an absurd degree.
Another fundamental difference between you and I. By stating “written by pre-scientific people”, you are, in my mind, including God since his word claims he gave those words to men to write to begin with. The faith I have in God says - God has a handle on science - BTW - he created it too!
I'm no more including God as an author of Genesis than I think He/She/It wrote any other scripture, Biblical or otherwise. As for God creating science, the development of the scientific method and the process of scientific inquiry is well documented. It was created by human beings...there's no need to invoke the supernatural.
Ok ok - you are a see it touch it feel it evidence driven person
Certainly, with the caveat that there are plenty of evidential methods of scientific investigation that don't involve the traditional five senses.
(even though your faith is in chaos - an event...or chain of events you cannot prove).
I assume you're speaking of the evolution of life on Earth. This being the case, there's no need for faith on my part since the evidence for it is overwhelming. It takes no more faith to conclude that evolution provides the best explanation for biological diversity than it does to conclude that nuclear fusion is taking place in the interior of star.
You are correct -I cannot prove souls exist. I cannot see them or touch them, yet faith in God and his word tell me they most definately exist. I say ‘most definately’ with the same amount of weight you place in chaos, evolution, etc.
The difference being, of course, that my worldview isn't based upon faith, but instead upon reason and science.
We can cut to the chase at this point or call a truce in that there is NOTHING you are going to tell me that will provide PROOF or evidence that all things came from chance and/or chaos and/or nothing....and all for no reason whatsoever.
Waitaminute..."all" things? We've been talking about the Theory of Evolution. That has nothing to do with cosmogony! What's more, I haven't the faintest idea why the universe itself exists...there's insufficient information (at this time) to draw a conclusion. While the Big Bang theory is the cosmological model that's best supported by scientific evidence and observation, it doesn't address what happened before the Planck Epoch (that is, everything that happened before 10^-43 seconds after the Big Bang).
To put it another way, when asked why the universe exists and who or what (if anything) created it, my best answer is "I don't know at this time".
You in your obvious intelligence (no sarcasm), did not see chaos or chance or any instance of the process of evolution - yet you believe it.
I observe that evolution has occurred. No "belief" required.
You cannot tell me where good and evil and morale came from - yet you know they exist.
I can certainly tell you where good and evil and morality came from. Humans invented them, just as we invented all philosophical concepts.
You have to tell me where the human ‘animal’ branched off and decided on its own to come up with good and evil. You are going to tell me it developed over time? Knowledge of good and evil did not develop from nothing. Convince me of the moment - or what occured to take an ape from being an animal with zero morals, to an ‘animal’ WITH morals. We both know you cannot take me there - yet you know they are present today and you believe in them to some degree.
Apes of the genus Homo are the only animals (so far) to have developed sufficient intelligence to understand and invent the concept of morality, so why should it surprise you that no other animals have morals? It would be analogous to saying that the science of geology must divinely inspired because chimpanzees can't understand plate tectonics.
Should I consider what the Koran says as well? Or for that matter the Book of Mormon, the Principia Discordia, the Vedas, Dianetics....?”
Read them all! Why not?
Because my reading time is finite, and I find religious texts boring beyond words.
Read them all 10 times!
You know, there is a clause in the Constitution about cruel and unusual punishment.
Then after that - read the historical documents on Joseph Smith and “Mohammed” and others before and during their early years - about the time they deemed themselves ‘prophets’. They all claim to be ‘prophets’ ‘just like Jesus’ or ‘in the line of Jesus’, yet none of them died for the church they established. None of theme claim to be the Son of God, none of them ‘rose from the dead’ and none of them claim that their blood took on all the sins of the entire world in order for us to have a direct relationship with God.
I see no reason to believe in any of the purported claims and supernatural abilities of the people you mention above.
None of them even come close to these claims. Funny you’d mention the Koran and Book of Mormon.
The most popular religious affiliations in the United States, by rank (not including "none" or "unaffiliated"):
1) Protestant
2) Roman Catholic
3) Mormon
4) Jewish
5) Buddhist
6) Muslim
Given that, why in the world would it be odd that I'd mention the Koran and the Book of Mormon after discussing the Bible?
As for Principia Discordia, you're not cleared for that information. Fnord.
You speak of these other books and sound as if you already KNOW there is a difference betweeen those books and the Bible!
Sure there's a difference. They're newer and not nearly as popular.
Include ‘Lord of the Rings’ too! It contains a maze of morals, life struggles and priorities and what they all get us in the end!
Now that one I've read (more than once!). One of the most impressive examples of worldbuilding in fantasy literature, far superior to the overrated Narnia series by C. S. Lewis. Please note that I'm not agreeing with Phillip Pullman that Narnia is evil...far from it...but it simply doesn't compare to Tolkien.
Study all the books you wish.
I certainly do...at least those I find engaging and entertaining.
One stands alone. Don’t wait til then to find out which one it is....and I mean that in an fully nonthreatening way.
While I've never slogged my way through the Old Testament, I did read the New Testament for a course in comparative religions 30 years ago
Again, humans are.....e)Unique! Final answer!
Again, the you're being coy and evasive and refusing to answer the question because you think that answering it would either make you look foolish or undermine your argument. If it will help, I'll reduce it to a single question: Do you deny that humans are mammals?
Yes or No.
Really, it's not that hard.
Sorry for the delay in replying to you.
I apologize if you think this is a ‘pissing contest’.
You say you believe “God created our world in 6 days”.
And you say you believe in evolution to some degree.
Without writing books right here, may I urge you to study more on the differences between evolution and its demands....and what adaptation of any species to an environment is, please.
They are not in any way linked, intertwined or related.
Ok - I get your broad brush statement - but it is also important to be aware that some terms do not belong in the same bag. They have their own bags and do not mix!
There are numerous sources on the subject of adaptation of species available.
I’ll only touch on this too - that IF you also believe humans evolved as part of God’s plan (as others do), then you must decide when evolution would have occured if those 6 days were each only 24 hours long.
Remember God made man on the 6th day. This leaves no time for evolution of man in a 24 hour period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.