As you have correctly posted this in the religion forum, where it belongs, I will respect your faith and not critique the article (though the title is bothersome; I know the author is trying to be cute, but surely no one thinks Darwin created anything other than an idea.)
I would, however, like to point out to those who continue to post endless creationist tracts in the “news” forum should take a tip from OneVike and post them ALL here, in religion.
Thank you.
Just don’t have enough Faith to believe in Darwinism. Perhaps if after 150 yrs and all the kings men they found the missing link they might have some credibility. God is Great!
Pray for America and Our Troops
Arrogant people who have an agenda have a tendency to say "I'm right. You're wrong. Shut up. Get off the stage. I'm prepared to say anything at all as long as I "win" this argument. I'm prepared to be a slippery fish and change my argument as often as needed to throw you off. The important thing is that you lose and I win."
I associate the second style of thinking with Leftists, and with supporters of Evolution. These people will not compromise, but they count very heavily on the idea that their opponents are likely to compromise and thereby incrementally lose the whole argument.
Maybe he started with more but the Tyrannosaurs ate them.
God clearly says that He created man and animals from dust (the dust of the earth). If He had used evolutioin, He certainly didn't indicate that.
Gen 2:7 then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.
Gen 2:19 Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.
Jesus taught that Adam and Eve were created. He even quotes the Scripture in Genesis, verifying that it is true.
Mat 19:3-5 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"
"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh'?
Peter, which many see as the first pope, speaks of the Flood as a fact.
I Peter 3: 18-20 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
II Peter 2:5 ...if he did not spare the ancient world, but(L) preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
II Peter 3:5 For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished.
Peter also speaks on the inspiration of Scripture.
II Peter 1:21 For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
In order for evolution to occur and the Flood to not be true, Scripture has to be declared a lie.
The issue most creationists have with the evolutionists is just that. And it then does raise the legitimate question about whether one can really be a Christian and not believe God's Word.
“There was an article I posted from Answers Magazine that pointed out how conservative churches are losing their children to the ways of the world while they are still in Junior and Senior High school.”
While “the ways of the world” implies the secular world, This article seems to make no mention of obviously money-grubbing TV preachers, and other dubious groups masquerading as “religion” as also contributing to the demise of religion.
In my opinion, those providing “false” religion are more of a threat that those that are secular. “false” religion does more to turn people away than the secular does to lure people away from conservative religion - and having a pool of non-religious folks offers the promise of enlightenment that can and should drive the faithful.
While I am a Bible believer, I see nothing in scripture that proves there was not a gap between Gen. 1:2 and Gen. 1:3...Plus, there is scripture that does bolster that idea...
And, that 'idea' does not lead one away from God...On the contrary, it strengthens one's faith in that it resolves the problems, real or perceived, of the actual age of the earth while keeping with the rest of the creation story...
Regardless, the source of one questioning God's word and authority was Satan...Satan convinced Eve to question God's word and it stands to reason that everyone who questions God's word is being led by Satan...
To believe in the 6-day creation and the devolution of man attributes a failure in design by God. God is perfect. Why would he create the evil in the world.
You've walked onto thin ice here.
I have pointed out on previous threads that Young Earth Creationism implies that Yahweh acts like Loki the Trickster. That is, the overwhelming evidence of the earth's old age is either real, or God is misleading us.
Secondly, if God "doesn't do wasteful," then life can't begin at conception--since many millions of zygotes are created but discarded from the womb before the mother even knows a conception has occurred.
Hi OneVike,
I just moved to TX from CA this Sat so missed this thread until now. I’m also responding via iPhone so this is a short response.
I almost became an Astronomy major before I came to my senses and swiched to CompSci LOL. So I am (currently) an OEC. There is just too much evidence that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old. I’ve also really enjoyed Dr. Hugh Ross’ work of squaring Gen with scientific data.
But let me clear: I do not believe in evolution, and neither do any of the OEC folks that I know. Neither does Dr. Ross or any other OEC person I know personally. I do not appreciate being lumped in with the evo crowd.
Thanks for the ping.
I am pretty much in full agreement with your position. The Bible is a wonderful document, and explains many mysteries of life and this world for those who are open to its truth. However, the Bible doesn’t explain every detail of creation, and there are many matters the Lord has left for us to ponder ourselves. On some points though, I feel that the Bible is exceedingly clear, and to ignore the plain statements therein, in favor of the “wisdom” of the world is to turn one’s heart away from the truth the Lord has graced us with.
Once one starts down the path of attempting to ignore or explain away the historical narratives of the Bible in favor of man’s imperfect accounts, you will soon arrive at a quandary. If some of these passages, which are written in the particular style of Biblical history, may be rendered as parables or non-historical traditions, then how does one determine which, or indeed if any, of the other historical passages are to be taken as literal fact or not? If Genesis is not to be taken literally, then who can say that Exodus is historical? Likewise, if Exodus is not historical, then perhaps the stories of Judges are simply parables as well.
Even for Biblical events where we have extra-Biblical writings, or archaelogical evidence for corroboration, it seems universal that the Bible explains these events in much greater detail than any other source. To toss out the validity of the Bible as a historical document therefore effectively leaves us in the dark about nearly all of the events recorded therein, including, most significantly, the life and work of the Saviour. The enemies of truth know this well, and they have used it to their advantage, especially in recent history, as they have attempted to gradually undermine faith in the accuracy of the Word even amongst believers.
The prominence of these beliefs on evolution amongst the faithful, I believe, are only one example of the fruit their work has borne. Amongst other claims, you will now find it fairly commonplace for those claiming to be Christian to believe that the Bible was simply an oral tradition for centuries or millenia before being written down. Knowing our modern civilization’s inherent distrust of “myths” and “legends”, what better way to cast the shadow of doubt on the Lord’s Word, than to convince people that instead of the most ancient example of literature, the Bible is just a collection of tribal stories, collated and edited at a much later date?
Likewise, how many Christians have been seduced by those who, under the guise of science, attempt to pick apart the Bible with subjective “literary analysis”? Their claims to be able to divine a diverse body of human authors, not only contradict the Bible’s own attributions, but by inference cast doubts on the very notion of divine inspiration itself.
Surely, we should all agree that matters of faith in our Lord Jesus and his redemptive accomplishment are the most important facts for Christians to agree on. There are many other points of contention amongst believers that we should not let overshadow that principle which unites us. Notwithtanding, I believe that in light of my observations above, every Christian should consider that the work of the enemy is not divided, but unified in their attempt to destroy the fundamental faith in the Word. Their work is doomed to failure of course, but that does not excuse us from being vigilant to speak out against the erroneous doctrines that they teach.
Permit me to make a simplistic argument (that avoids a lot of complicated discussion): You either believe in God, or not.
Compromise? Obviously the universe came into being somehow. Only one position (at most) can be true. If God did use a long-term evolutionary process, then that would not be a "compromise" position, it would be the correct one, and all other positions (godless chance, YEC, etc.) would be false.
Now back to my reasons for disagreeing with theistic evolutionists. I find it sad that any Christian who would claim to hold to the truths of the Scriptures, could then turn around and say that they question the most basic and foundational truths revealed in the Scriptures such as: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1.
Lame. Neither Darwinism nor theistic evolution have anything to do with creation of the universe.
Furthermore, to deny God created everything through Christ in a normal 6-day period is to question the very character and nature of God. It attributes to Him the evil, wasteful, chaotic, random, purposeless, death-filled processes of evolutionary "creation", that would make Him (God) the very Author and Sustainer of all that the theory of evolution demands.
Ridiculous. If God were directing it, it would not be random or purposeless, and to call the acts of God "evil" is blasphemous. This is pretty much where I quit reading.