strange bedfellows
As we have been discussing Intelligent Design, Creation and Evolution, this caught my eye on digg.com today.
“On February 20th, the infamously pro-intelligent design Discovery Institute released news that over 500 doctoral scientists had signed its statement “publicly expressing their skepticism about the contemporary theory of Darwinian evolution.”
A day earlier, a newly launched coalition of scientists, educators and clergy members called the Alliance for Science revealed a converse document at the annual meeting of the American Academy for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). The Clergy Letter Project snagged the signatures of 10,000 clerics on a document that in part states, “We believe that the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests.”
Read the full article here
April 29th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
I use to think that evolution made a lot of sense until I was saved and became a Christian.
The Bible says we humans are created in God’s image. That should settle the whole thing for everybody. The Bible is the Word of God and does not lie. It is a perfect book with no mistakes whatsoever in it. So whatever the Bible says is true.
Mr. Darwin got some idea that things evolved and kept on changing until man finaly came about. It doesn’t make any sense when we have the Bible to rely on. Do you think Darwin is right or God is right. You don’t have to be a rocket scientice to know the answer to that one.
I beleive the Bible, as God’s Word, says He created us in His image and I don’t think God is a monkey. If He is a monkey then we would be monkeys too.
So God said it, I believe it and that settles it.
Don’t be fooled by anyone who tries to tell you evolution is true. It is all lies and Satin is spreading his lies to try and fool people so they won’t ask Jesus to come into their heart.
Evolution is a big lie and is not true.
April 29th, 2006 at 3:29 pm
See the “Intelligunt Desine” merchandise at http://www.landoverbaptist.com
Landover Baptist Church “where the worthwhile worship” a source of Godly Bible doctrine. Warning: unsaved unwelcome.
April 29th, 2006 at 6:20 pm
Hello Caleb, the Word of God surely is the most wonderful life changing book ever. Nothing like it; nothing in its league. The Book of books. The Book! One of the truly wonderful things about the Lord is that He has made the essentials of salvation very clear. But He’s hidden a few things too; things that take some searching out.
Do you think Proverbs 25:2 sounds a bit like the approach being taken by the Intelligent Design people?
Thank you for your comments!
April 29th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
If you have excepted the Lord Jesus Christ into your heart and are truly saved, you are welcome to get answers to your questions from Landover Baptist.
All born-again Christians should use this resource.
Hallelujah and praise be!
April 29th, 2006 at 7:08 pm
Thanks Caleb… that website is hilarious!!!! Love it!!!!
A bit of light relief in this debate most welcome.
April 29th, 2006 at 7:33 pm
Ah Hamer, ewe court me! Not hard to do, mind
April 30th, 2006 at 8:03 am
Getting back to YECS, I would like to explore what I think is the silliest of all their silly claims… that it was God’s intent for all animals to have a physical eternal life, and this only changed because Adam sinnned. This I take it is inspired by the passage in Romans 5:
“12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned— 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.
18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. 19For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.”
But is Paul really talking about physical death, or spiritual death here? Compare with Ephesians chapter 2:
“1As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, 2in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. 3All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. 4But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. 6And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus”
Apart from the obvious fact Paul is only referring to the death of humans here… not of animals… it seems pretty clear that sin leads to spiritual death (separation from God) and the grace of Christ brings us spiritual life. I don’t think dead bodies were popping up alive in Ephesus or Rome when the gospel was preached. “being made alive in Christ” is first of all a spiritual phenomenon… we still die physically, but with resurrection hope.
As I’ve argued earlier, I think the Genesis account suggests the same thing… Adam was told he would die on the same day he ate the fruit… and it did indeed sever his relationship with God, but he didn’t drop dead physically that day.
Is there one verse anywhere that states ANIMALS only die because of the sin of Adam? Noooooooo.
Besides, this is a biological absurdity. Most small creatures have astonishing reproductive capacities, and produce thousands if not millions of eggs. Were all these offspring to have physical eternal life, the world would be rapidly swamped… unless God stopped them all from reproducing, somehow.
Consider an ecosystem like the ocean… the food chain is based almost entirely on microscopic algae called phytoplankton. These are consumed by zooplankton, then tiny multicellular organisms, then small creatures like krll, filter feeders etc., small fish, then bigger fish, then bigger fish, then bigger fish… sharks, seals, toothed whales and dolphins etc…. detritus feeders on the ocean floor to consume the dead remains.
How could any of this work if all these creatures had to be vegetarian, and none could die? Fish have sharp teeth for grabbing prey… not a filtration system for straining out single celled algae (and somehow missing all the single celled animals also floating in the water)… they don’t have grinding teeth for grazing on fixed algae (but these can only grow in shallow water so they have enough light to photosynthesize… a very limited food source)
What about baleen whales? They have an amazing filtration system for catching krill… these plates not nealy fine enough to catch unicellular algae however. How could they possibly survive without consuming smaller animals?
It seems to me you cannot argue “God must have created these creatures because they are so perfectly adapted for a particular lifestyle that this could not have happened by chance”…. and try to argue at the same time that God meant all creatures to be vegetarian and live forever until Adam stuffed everything up. You just can’t have it both ways.
This argument is such poor theology and such absurd science that I find it staggering the YECS camp promote it at all.
April 30th, 2006 at 11:12 am
Careful Janet, are u implying that zooplanckton do NOT have eternal life??? In your words, noooooo. Let me add; who then can be saved?
I remember while at UNE (Armidale NSW) in 1981 (a science undergrad) attempting to engage Ken Ham (he’s been around that long) in dialog - he utterly refused to consider any interpretation of facts other than his own. (I was, and remain, happy to commend YECS for all their sound scientific investigation, much of which points to a young creation (of life as we know it at least)). However, as you have pointed out, there are numerous “facts” that just don’t fit their model; LOL animals with eternal life :). And what about super novas? Did these really occur millions of years before they were created.
I understand and even respect the position of the atheists who “force” facts to fit their evolutionary models. If there is no God, then evolution must surely be the only reasonable explanation for life. At least that seems consistent with their stated belief systems - no God … no absolute moral standard either! So it may be reasonable if they were to lie and cheat and bend the rules a bit. But what excuse do we, as professers of faith in the Eternal Creator - a God in whom there is no shadow of turning, have for lying and cheating and fabricating evidence and ignoring facts and most notably, as pointed out by Janet, shutting others out of the kingdom of God because they refuse to adopt our extreme dogmatism.
Angers me too!
April 30th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
In the end, isn’t it a lack of open-mindedness… an overly narrow focus in one area… being poorly educated in the broader sense of having some appreciation of philosophy and religion and science and literature… that gets us into so much trouble? People get sucked into Hillsong or Joyce Meyer or YECS or whoever because they develop an exclusive “diet” of one type of teaching and fail to even try to understand the opinions of other Christians and of other thinkers. They abandon critical thinking, really, because they don’t engage with other opinions for a point of comparison.
I guess this is one of the advantages of blogging… one does get to engage with a lot of different viewpoints!
May 1st, 2006 at 5:01 pm
brilliant posts janet…
did you say you were only 20yrs or so…?? get out! your talking like youve been at this for years!
May 1st, 2006 at 5:11 pm
Gosh no, I’m an old bag. (43) Thanks for the affirmation… I’m enjoying your posts too.
May 1st, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Also… are you corresponding with Donald Duck? Strangely enough, I’m kinda missing him!
May 1st, 2006 at 10:03 pm
Another anecdote from the past. I remember Peter Sparrow (of Creation Bus fame) from the early 80’s when he built a small extension on my parent’s house in Adelaide, while I was still at Uni. I think he had not long completed his own science degree (at Flinders). The only memory I have of him is that he drank beer - unusual for Christians from my parents background of Baptist/Open Bretheren.
Here’s a Peter Sparrow quote from http://www.creationontheweb.com (they’ve separated from answersingenesis which is now US/UK based):
“The church cannot have revival without firstly accepting the word of Jesus Christ - as recorded in the Bible - who is our Creator God. It doesn’t make sense to be granted salvation through the Last Adam, unless there was a literal first Adam through whom sin entered the world.”
Now if there was a literal first Adam, does that leave no room at all for evolution?
May 1st, 2006 at 10:49 pm
Welcome back! I had a sneaking suspicion you had some religious baggage… Bretheren are very sincere people, but you’d be hard pressed to squeeze God into a narrower box. God bless them.
I’m afraid I’ve read too widely on this subject to want to give a short straight answer. There are some people of the “Day-age” camp who think that the “days” in Genesis 1 refer to ages / periods of God’s creative activity (the word translated as day, yom, can mean a literal day or a period of time… the “morning and evening” is seen as a repetitive metaphor for the end and dawn of an era) This theological camp point out that the stages described in Genesis do roughly correspond to what you might see as an observer on earth, as God created (yes, through guided evolution across aeons of time) life as we know it. And some in this theological camp accept the idea of a literal Adam in Genesis 2. Some think Adam a unique creation, distinct from other evolved creatures… others that he was the first human to experience self consciousness.
It is a more common view in scholarly theological circles that the early chapters of Genesis are ancient stories of the people of Israel… their mythic accounts of origins. That the account of Adam is highly symbolic, and that the tree of life, the flaming sword, the talking serpent etc. is a potent myth that tells us about the nature of humans and the nature of God. It is a myth about the loss of innocence, of self consciousness and guilt and shame and blame shifting and avoiding responsibility for actions.
Then of course, there’s the YECS crowd who have an instinct to take everything in the bible literally, regardless of literary genre etc.
Anyway… the short answer is… yes, some Christians accept both a literal Adam and a “old earth” in which evolution of life occured.
May 2nd, 2006 at 8:56 am
i think my opinion is that we have no idea… thats why i like ID… there must be a designer…
43 eh! that explains a lot (not that its that old mind you) i was thinking ’sheesh’ how do you write like that at that age??
no i have not corresponded with DD… he asked me to but time has been short lately and i didn’t really know what i was supposed to write to him about that couldnt go on this blog… i think the blog is the best place cause others can jump in
Janet - if you like Lee Strobels books you will love ‘total truth’ by Nancy Pearcy…. you will find a lot of where i am comming from …