Tuesday, February 4, 2014

tough issue #3 followup .. an article

the link is to an article that describes the basics of approaching the ' creation ' text in Genesis, allowing for evolution ..

12 comments:

  1. A fascinating read and had some very good and interesting points. I still will stand by my original belief, though. One thing to point out is the significance of the creation of the world does not impact our eternal security in Jesus' death (I am aware that you know this, Owen, but I wanted to clarify for a by-standing reader). While I do believe in the metaphorical reading of the scripture, I am also quite grounded in the creation being a seven day event in which evolution does not occur. This basis comes from the fact that there has been no evidence of a change in "kinds" within the creation as we know it. Also, the flood was mentioned as possibly being local. If it were a localized flood, could God not have sent Noah to another location? Why build a boat? But let's say he did. Why rescue these animals? Are they not alive elsewhere and could they not migrate in again? But I hate to cut short on that... I need to get off the nets and get some rest at home. I do look forward to further discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. thank you for the comments.. i'm looking for discussion on the matter as i try to wrap my head around the issues .. i will say the major issue seems to be that the scientific community now recognizes evolution as a fact; christianity is again being ridiculed for being anti-scientific/anti-factual, and may be unnecessarily turning off people because of it; of course, christianity is not led by science, but we have to take the real world into account and not be seen as blind to reality; that's why i said ' unnecessarily ' turn people off; ps. i have no problem with people being offended at christians because of the cross, as per Paul in Corinthians; but our goal is to love as Jesus loves - everything hangs on that; so that to hurt the cause for no good reason (if that's what is is) is unnecessary and damaging .. i'm thinking this through as i go, and i'm not in a hurry ..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly how do you approach not "offending people" for "the cause"? Do you not discuss it for fear of "offending," or do you agree with the other side so not to "offend," or something else? I am trying to understand if you keep quiet or mollify.

      Delete
    2. ginger, thanks for tour comments .. i was trying to say that IF creationism is in fact not as i have known it (literal 7-day, recent) then we are unnecessarily placing a stumbling block in the path of people who might otherwise listen to christianity.. a parallel was recently drawn to copernicus and his scientific statement that the sun doesn't revolve around the earth - the church took serious issue with it on theological grounds; that issue is referenced to this day, people using it to position the church as being anti-scientific, and irrelevant.. Jesus was utterly relevant .. . if at the end if the day i am unconvinced by evolution, i, as i have done all my life, will position myself on creationism .. the point here is to discuss it for the good of the Kingdom, Jesus always in view ..

      Delete
    3. I have thoroughly enjoyed Mr. kauffman's remarks. He said something I had never considered: why couldn't God have created an aged creation? Why do humans want to limit His ability? It seems to me there is a faction who want to bend over backwards to accept science, thus, dissing God in the process. When they do that, He and His power are diminished/limited. We need to tred very carefully if we set a buffet.

      Delete
    4. thanks for that, ginger; i've enjoyed the conversation so far. matthew's comments reflect my think all my life. . i read Ham and Morris (think i already said that); God could have done whatever he wanted.,. issue is that the is fossil evidence apparently suggests millions of years for human development at the various stages; while i believe God could have created things in a mature state, that doesn't account for that evidence..

      Delete
  3. by the way, i believe in the miracles as per scripture ..

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with you about how the Christian community has been ridiculed for the seven day creation stance. I still hold to it because after sitting through many lectures on evolution, watching many debates, observing many experimentation, and also keeping in mind the assumptions on both side, I see no reason to denounce the possibility. I have seen evolutionary models that claim to debunk 7 day creation, and I've seen them answered with data to support the opposite. I do believe, however, that it should be observed and thought and prayed over as Christians. It may not save or condemn a man, but it does create a very different world view. I have not yet watched the Ken Ham and Bill Nye debate, but am looking forward to watching the replay, if you haven't, I would encourage you to take a gander at that.

    ReplyDelete
  5. thanks for that comment; i basically am where you are; i too have watched the issue and followed Ham and Morris and others, and i accepted their responses to evolution, mainly due to my literalistic approach to scripture; i am reconsidering that approach, particularly from the viewpoint of the unscientific understanding of the peoples in the time of Moses; there are several types of genre used in scripture, and it's generally accepted by theologians that the creation story is poetic - that does not (to me) mean it's not factual, by the way; poetry is simply a beautiful artistic way of portraying something, whether fact or not. but it bears talking-out.. i intend to watch the debate .. ir you read the article linked above you will have noticed that evolution in the christian sense involves God in an intentional manner, directing the course of evolution from time to time to bring about his humanity ..

    ReplyDelete
  6. the blog posts are called ' tough issue' for a reason ...

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is a tough issue! And perhaps it won't be answered during our lifetime... I enjoyed the discussion and appreciate the opportunity to see a new viewpoint. It's always good when you can have a discussion such as this in a non-demeaning manner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. agreed.. hence these posts.. it's not helpful to be dogmatic on non-core issues, it is helpful to discuss them around the family table, in peace and love.. i'm journeying; thanks for sharing your perspective ..

      Delete