PDA

View Full Version : Flaws and More


Jack777
May 19th 2005, 06:50 PM
The case cannot be made that God evolved animals and people from the passages below. I understand the arguments made based on the work of Messenger (1932) and his predecessor.1 Needless to say that the Church Fathers that they cite as reasons to bring the Theory of Evolution into accord with the Bible struggled with questions similar to the ones considered by Christians today. I understand how Messenger might find accord with them and the Theory of Evolution. I still disagree. With few exceptions the First Verse of the Bible is misunderstood. There are less than one hundred authors (including early Church Fathers) that caught onto what flows from the First Verse of Genesis throughout Scripture. My point is not to explain that. Simply the Creation Story starts at Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 1:1. In Genesis 1:1 is found the Trinity. Jesus is named specifically. The composition of the universe is found there as well. Genesis 1:1 can be understood as it is intended sufficiently without resorting to any special knowledge of language. It is helpful to understand the Bible though. I do not mean to say that the Bible has to be understood exhaustively because this is impossible for one person in one lifetime to do.

The Bible is understood only by Faith. I know that this is distressing to some to read these words, but if you know that the just shall live by Faith, that should be a big hint. I will point out that this does not equate with leaving reason and all of the faculties God has given us on the porch before going inside to study the Bible. The prerequisite to understanding the Bible is to be a believer. Next step is to know that the Holy Spirit is our Tutor and He comes alongside us and helps us to learn as we are ready to learn things. If someone does not think the Bible is the inerrant and inspired Word of God, not very much will be learned. Then the first thing to do is to read the Bible after becoming a believer. It is difficult to know things that one does not know. For me, my progress has been slow and I am naturally slow to learn in some areas. This and the fact that I am stubborn has kept me at a slower pace than maybe someone else might learn. People that tell me the Bible is not true are not where I look for knowledge that has a very good chance of matching up with the Revelation of the Bible. More often than not, it seems as though there is a slice of knowledge missing in such cases. In fact, I cannot think of anytime I have not seen that to be true. If you think the Bible is partially composed of truth-telling myths you may as well forget learning some things. For one thing you will not believe them even when made obvious to you.

What you are about to read is part of a description of the restoration of the earth after a major planet-wide disaster. Scofield thought along these lines as did Custance. So do I. Some people call it the Gap Theory, although I do not agree with what Gap Theorists think in much if any detail.

In other words Theistic Evolution as I understand it, is flawed. That does not preclude change over time, it just means that evolution as understood commonly is not completely true. There are places where it says too much in its description of reality, however true in specific cases the data is. Please do not think for one minute I believe all or even the majority of scientists would fudge data, although it is becoming more common. The models that people base the evolution of mankind on depend on Mousterian guy and his buddies. Read Jack Cuozzo's book Buried Alive, before objecting to that statement. There is enough evidence now to state that the evolutionary models for people are bogus. Even so, when the creation of Adam and Eve is covered later in the Bible hyperbole and making the verses fit evolution is too heavy-handed to do.

And God said,

Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

And God created

great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that good.

And God said,

Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

And God made

the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that good.

And God said,

Let us make man in our

image,

after our

likeness:

and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

1 Messenger, Ernest C., Evolution and Theology, NY, NY: Macmillan Company, Copyright © 1932 The Macmillan Company, January, 1932.

rogero
May 20th 2005, 06:07 PM
The case cannot be made that God evolved animals and people from the passages below. I understand the arguments made based on the work of Messenger (1932) and his predecessor.1 Needless to say that the Church Fathers that they cite as reasons to bring the Theory of Evolution into accord with the Bible struggled with questions similar to the ones considered by Christians today. I understand how Messenger might find accord with them and the Theory of Evolution. I still disagree. With few exceptions the First Verse of the Bible is misunderstood. There are less than one hundred authors (including early Church Fathers) that caught onto what flows from the First Verse of Genesis throughout Scripture. My point is not to explain that. Simply the Creation Story starts at Genesis 1:1 and ends at Genesis 1:1. In Genesis 1:1 is found the Trinity. Jesus is named specifically. The composition of the universe is found there as well. Genesis 1:1 can be understood as it is intended sufficiently without resorting to any special knowledge of language. It is helpful to understand the Bible though. I do not mean to say that the Bible has to be understood exhaustively because this is impossible for one person in one lifetime to do.

The Bible is understood only by Faith. I know that this is distressing to some to read these words, but if you know that the just shall live by Faith, that should be a big hint. I will point out that this does not equate with leaving reason and all of the faculties God has given us on the porch before going inside to study the Bible. The prerequisite to understanding the Bible is to be a believer. Next step is to know that the Holy Spirit is our Tutor and He comes alongside us and helps us to learn as we are ready to learn things. If someone does not think the Bible is the inerrant and inspired Word of God, not very much will be learned. Then the first thing to do is to read the Bible after becoming a believer. It is difficult to know things that one does not know. For me, my progress has been slow and I am naturally slow to learn in some areas. This and the fact that I am stubborn has kept me at a slower pace than maybe someone else might learn. People that tell me the Bible is not true are not where I look for knowledge that has a very good chance of matching up with the Revelation of the Bible. More often than not, it seems as though there is a slice of knowledge missing in such cases. In fact, I cannot think of anytime I have not seen that to be true. If you think the Bible is partially composed of truth-telling myths you may as well forget learning some things. For one thing you will not believe them even when made obvious to you.

What you are about to read is part of a description of the restoration of the earth after a major planet-wide disaster. Scofield thought along these lines as did Custance. So do I. Some people call it the Gap Theory, although I do not agree with what Gap Theorists think in much if any detail.

In other words Theistic Evolution as I understand it, is flawed. That does not preclude change over time, it just means that evolution as understood commonly is not completely true. There are places where it says too much in its description of reality, however true in specific cases the data is. Please do not think for one minute I believe all or even the majority of scientists would fudge data, although it is becoming more common. The models that people base the evolution of mankind on depend on Mousterian guy and his buddies. Read Jack Cuozzo's book Buried Alive, before objecting to that statement. There is enough evidence now to state that the evolutionary models for people are bogus. Even so, when the creation of Adam and Eve is covered later in the Bible hyperbole and making the verses fit evolution is too heavy-handed to do.

And God said,

Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

And God created

great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that good.

And God said,

Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

And God made

the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that good.

And God said,

Let us make man in our

image,

after our

likeness:

and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

1 Messenger, Ernest C., Evolution and Theology, NY, NY: Macmillan Company, Copyright © 1932 The Macmillan Company, January, 1932.

'splain to us how "God creates" and "God evolves" are categorically different concepts? This is very confusing, yet is expected from your prolific and mostly-contentless yammerings.

When you're done doing this, how's 'bout coming over to the Ga+ continuous biosphere (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?t=47758) thread and explain how all this biospheric history could happen without biological evolution --- even over a billion+ years and several mass extinctions?

R

Jack777
May 21st 2005, 12:35 PM
I do not think you have made a cogent reply to the thread. Most of your replies are simply insults and entertainment, but I think it adds a much needed edge to things. I think what I wrote stands.