Too often, evangelical Christians use bad science to defend their faith. This needs to stop.
This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-venema-letters-to-the-duchess/adam-eve-apologetics-and-christian-witness
1 Like
hi prof venema. i dont think that the evolution is so soild science like many peoples think. any soild science need predictions to test its claim. the evolution dont have any of those predictions- so its not a valid scientific theory. from the other hand- the id model have a strong predictions that donfirmed again and again. for example: id predict that the geologic time will not be enough to produce the complexity we see in nature. and this is indeed what we found. the id model predict that some genes will be find in a far species but not in the species between them (from phylogeny prespective). and indeed this is what we found and so onâŚ
Thank you, Dr. Venema.
I thought your example of the translation of Scripture was a powerful and helpful one.
For this layperson who is seeking to know more about this subject, I was actually looking for a concrete example of how that is true with regard to a poor argument from professed creationists that can be easily refuted. Certainly giving your friend at least a brief description of what the inspiration of Scripture means and how translation is done could easily explain the fault in the argument.
Do you have a similar example you can share regarding an evangelical creationist argument and how it is refuted by evolutionary biology? Youâve referred to arguments that are âbreathtakingly badâ, and I am eager to be enlightened by one. This would be most helpful.
Thank you for your kind consideration.
Mark Twombly
Somerset, NJ
1 Like
There are many⌠here are a few:
The 2nd law of thermodynamics refutes evolution.
Mutations are almost always deleterious.
The human and chimpanzee genomes are less than 90% identical.
Functional pseudogenes mean common descent isnât real.
⌠as well as the arguments Iâve addressed in this series itself.
3 Likes
Many thanks, happy to read more.
âŚevery bus driver or druggist thinks he knows theology as well as a Princeton professor.
Ahhh⌠are there echoes of aristocracy in there? It seems Iâve been hearing echoes of this from all around lately. A friend recently confided to me casually that if he were in power he would institute a test before people could vote (I donât think the phrase âJim Crowâ was in his mind as he said it, but âŚyou never know I guess). Apparently Churchill once said that the most powerful argument against democracy was to spend five minutes in conversation with the average voter. I doubt he ever seriously proposed dismantling democracy, so if he found that argument powerful, then his other reasons for adhering to it must have been all the more powerful indeed! We still have an electoral college over here precisely for these very concerns --a fact which is often quite annoying to the average voter. The reformation really was quite a can of worms. The question is whether or not they all really are so evil, or is there some (any?) productive composting going on? In my own tradition (and others too I suspect) education became quite important for the laity even if only because it is important to be able to read the Bible. I strongly suspect the average man on the street today really does know quite a bit more theology than his counterpart from centuries ago. To know more is to get yourself into more trouble, to be sure, but would we really wish all that away?
âa ârenegadeâ Anabaptist from the priesthood of believers
2 Likes
Dennis, 2 words: Right on!
1 Like
âŚand one more tag-on to my original post above ⌠One of my favorite things I heard from John Green (I think from somewhere in one of his many crash course history videos) was something to this effect:
I am glad to pay taxes for public education â even if I had no children or grandchildren anywhere in the system. You know why? Because I donât like the prospect of living in a society of stupid people!
Now I do know, Eddie â you probably donât disagree with any of this, and it isnât to say that bus drivers do know as much as theology professors. They donât, to be sure â I entirely agree. But what they do know is nevertheless significant and important, and perhaps no less so even in contrast to the professor, who touches lives in his/her own way. But the bus driver touches lives in an entirely different way that could end up being just as (or more) significant than the ivory tower influence (and maybe in some cases, in better directions even!)
Americans do not defer to expert opinion on how to vote, so they are even less inclined to accept the opinions of theologians on where and how to worship. This attitude caused America to reject the League of Nations, which many historians believe led to WWII, but freedom comes with the possibility of making decisions that history may show to be wrong. The prevailing attitude at the time of the American Revolution was that ordinary people could not govern themselves, but we are still in decent shape after almost two and a half centuries, in spite of a few wrong turns.
I am intrigued by this discussion!
Yes, human history is messy, and our tendency to wander is demonstrated daily, even in this discussion! I have learned over time not to be vexed by this, but to embrace it, as it demonstrates our weakness and Godâs strength, our folly and His wisdom. Consider:
âLet all the earth fear the LORD; Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast. The LORD nullifies the counsel of the nations; He frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the LORD stands forever, The plans of His heart from generation to generation.â (Psalms 33:8-11, NASB)
âFor since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.â (1 Corinthians 1:21-25, NASB)
Why do I submit these verses for your consideration?
It is so that we are reminded of the primary goal of all of this - which is to worship, enjoy, and promote God and not ourselves. Godspeed to all as we do this in our various endeavors.
Mark Twombly
Somerset, NJ
And yet, Eddie, since the rise of Protestantism, the âpriesthood of the common manâ has been a constantly visited theme. In the 1600âs, there was the wave of âMechanick Preachersâ - - who provoked the excitement of the common believers. Today we still have snake handlers and poison drinkers.
BioLogos doesnât have to VET every point of theology. There are multiple theological configurations compatible with the BioLogos position of God-Directed Evolution.
Regarding WHICH theological point would you FALL ON YOUR SWORD, @Eddie ?
George
This topic was automatically closed 4 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.