Did God use his literal hands to do the forming and his literal nose or mouth to do the breathing?
According to you, apparently yes:
Jesus disagrees with you:
God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.
John 4:24
God is not corporeal.
ah yes that is a classic mistake. See here is the thing, God is a trinity (three indepenant persons in one being). We have The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit.
You say, God is spirit so he cannot physically touch, mould, etc. However that is a deeply flawed theory of God.
The reason your quote there is flawed is because Jesus created the heavens and the earth and he most definitely is not spirit:
The Supremacy of the Son
(Hebrews 1:1–14)Colossians 15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.
17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together. 18 And He is the head of the body, the church; He is the beginning and firstborn from among the dead, so that in all things He may have preeminence. 19 For God was pleased to have all His fullness dwell in Him, 20 and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through the blood of His cross.
21 Once you were alienated from God and were hostile in your minds, engaging in evil deeds. 22 But now He has reconciled you by Christ’s physical body through death to present you holy, unblemished, and blameless in His presence— 23 if indeed you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope of the gospel you heard, which has been proclaimed to every creaturee under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.
Some may attempt to claim that Jesus was not able to take on human form prior to His incarnation, however that is clearly false as Abraham was visited by the Lord (one of whom I believe as Jesus ):
1 Then the LORD appeared to Abraham by the Oaksa of Mamre in the heat of the day, while he was sitting at the entrance of his tent. 2 And Abraham looked up and saw three men standing nearby. When he saw them, he ran from the entrance of his tent to meet them and bowed low to the ground.
3 “My lord,” said Abraham, “if I have found favor in your sight, please do not pass your servant by. 4 Let a little water be brought, that you may wash your feet and rest yourselves under the tree. 5 And I will bring a bit of bread so that you may refresh yourselves. This is why you have passed your servant’s way. After that, you may continue on your way.”
We also have examples where heavenly spiritual beings have visited men on earth and physically touched them:
Genesis 19
1 Now the two angels arrived at Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gateway of the city. When Lot saw them, he got up to meet them, bowed facedown, 2 and said, “My lords, please turn aside into the house of your servant; wash your feet and spend the night. Then you can rise early and go on your way.”
9 “Get out of the way!” they replied. And they declared, “This one came here as a foreigner, and he is already acting like a judge! Now we will treat you worse than them.” And they pressed in on Lot and moved in to break down the door.10 But the men inside reached out, pulled Lot into the house with them, and shut the door. 11 And they struck the men at the entrance, young and old, with blindness, so that they wearied themselves trying to find the door.
Genesis 32
24 So Jacob was left all alone, and there a mand wrestled with him until daybreak. 25 When the man saw that he could not overpower Jacob, he struck the socket of Jacob’s hip and dislocated it as they wrestled. 26 Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.”
But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.”
27 “What is your name?” the man asked.
“Jacob,” he replied.
28 Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob,e but Israel,f because you have struggled with God and with men, and you have prevailed.”
29 And Jacob requested, “Please tell me your name.”
But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed Jacob there.
30 So Jacob named the place Peniel,g saying, “Indeed, I have seen God face to face, and yet my life was spared.”
Now if you wish to try to claim that the story of Sodom and Gomorah is not a literal account of what happened then i would need to see some very strong evidence in favour of your view on this…because I would argue you have almost the entire cohort of world wide religious scholarship in favour of it being an historical account of what actually happened. I think it would be extremely difficult to refute this however i am open to views to the contrary.
So you presume preincarnate manifestations of Jesus and that Adam named all of the animals in 24 hours (actually less if he had a deep sleep while Eve was created).
and yet theistic evolutionists go to great lengths to discount bible texts that DO very specifically provide information about the age of civilisation…for example, we take the age of the biblical world from geneologies. We have family trees outlined in the bible that go right back to Adam and Eve. We know exactly who was the son of Adam, who was the Son of Seth the Son of Adam…etc!
So when i read a theistic evolutionist claim that Adam is not a physical person…honestly, its an insult to my intelligence, and i am not that smart, so what does this say about the person who makes such a claim? The answer…that person has their head in the sand and a “lit firecracker” in their back pocket!
It is impossible to break apart the bible and not destroy its truths.
I know that theistic evolution claims to believe in Salvation. The problem is, how can you possibly claim a belief in salvation when you deny Sin?
It would be advisable not to make the claim that theistic evolution does not deny sin…that is a view that is completely incompatible with your own claim that death existed prior to the fall. It also contrasts the fact that the bible very specifically, and very clearly, states that through one man sin came into this world and through one man all have sinned. The bible also clearly states, for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Jesus physically came to this earth and physically died for our sins! You cannot explain this away. The new testament talks about enterring Gods rest…it parallels the entering of the land of Canaan by the Israelites…entering Gods rest is the physical action of entering into heaven! There is nothing spiritual about this! God even goes so far as to say, he will create a new heaven and a new earth!
So here is the dilemma for theistic evolution…if God only created the science that was evolution, after fire and brimstone erases sin from this earth, you are also claiming that the resettling of the earth after the final judgement has been dished out onto the wicked, it must take billions of years for all the plant and animal life on the earth to evolve again! (or is god going to fast forward everything…and if so, why didnt he do that the first time round…considering there are other universes and planets that have been inhabited…there must be because evolution is a universal science!)
What happens if during that time, mankind evolves before we get back here? This is a ridiculous position…there is no possible way to support such an idea from the bible narrative that we already have!
To be honest, i think the only possible way for theistic evolution to be supported is to include it into mormonism. It is only in that sense this theology is possible to reconcile…remembering that the Book of Mormon is not even close to the bible in its theology.
Are you sure of that?
With ages that are always a multiple of five, or a multiple of seven plus a multiple of five, and aren’t the same in the different versions that we have, hence maybe not the best for giving exact answers.
Does the bible consider animal death to be evil? It would appear not, given that there are no universal prohibitions against eating them.
I know of no one who claims the former. And who are we to say why God did things the way he did, in regard to the latter?
Details about how the new heaven and new earth unfold is an opaque mystery for everybody - so no … it isn’t some uniquely “theistic evolution” problem.
You spend a lot of powder and shot telling “theistic evolutionists” what they can and cannot possibly believe. Much of it partial truth or even just flat out wrong. If you spend as much time reading articles around here as you apparently do rehearsing talking points from young-earth sites, you might get a better handle on how those think who attend to truth and reality. Those who force reality to take a back seat to their ideology, well, … many here have emerged from just that sort of thinking - many - but not all - some have left the faith entirely when they discovered that truth quickly becomes in short supply when ideology (tragically disguised as faith) is in the driver seat instead. In either case though, people aren’t going back into falsehood that can’t survive inspection when brought out into the light - the light of scriptures or of what God’s created order reveals to the attentive.
And those family trees are serving to make a theological point, not a scientific one.
what i find really interesting about people with poor doctrine…they ignore the point of the response and focus on non important semantics…stuff like that.
the reason people do this is so they do not have to think and be challenged by what they read. This is typical of blind doctrine that is not based on a genuine understanding of the bible…like someone who places evolution BEFORE the bible!
Did you answer the actual part of my post that makes the point or not? (it appears here that you did not).
I would suggest you actually concentrate on the point I made.
and yes, i absolutely do believe the narrative of Sodom and Gomorah is literal. The reason for this is very obvious, if as you say, the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorah is not a literal story, then I can deduce using your own reasoning, that Abraham is not a literal person and his son in law Lot is not a literal person either. If Abraham is not a literal person, then the nation of Israel that exists today and all of its history, INCLUDING the birth, life, death, and resurrection of the Messiah (our saviour) Jesus is a fable!
So now i have proven “irrefutably i might add” using your own logic, that the bible is a fake and that God does not exist in the Christian model, its time for you and I to now try Mormonism, perhaps God is found there?
This is like asking somebody if they think Washington really chopped down a cherry tree, and then upon learning they have doubts about that story, insisting …
“well then, I can deduce that you don’t even believe there ever was such a person as Washington and … on and on.”
Insisting that there can be no apocrophal stories surrounding real people is simply false. It would be like insisting that if one doubts that a real army of dry bones literally came to life under Ezekiel’s prophecy, that therefore they must deny there must be any Ezekiel and must reject everything taught in that book.
[edited] …
You do not uniquely possess the only faithful way to understand scriptures.
Pretty sure this violates the guidelines for gracious dialogue.
You have ten posts in this thread. Care to point to which one you are referring?
Edit to add:
You may not believe it, but it is not that I place evolution before the Bible. The evidence in God’s creation clearly points to a Earth much older than 6,000 years. This tells me to take Genesis 1-11 in a non-literal way. Evolution just explains the diversity of life on Earth.
Wow, you are arrogant. The only people who think the story Sodom and Gomorrah is literally true are YECs. That’s hardly world-wide scholarship.
Not absolutely true. I am anything but YEC and I believe Dr. Collins has identified the remains of Sodom. If he is correct, it was destroyed by a natural event, but would that change the point of the story?
You are talking about that recent news item?
Dr. Collins wrote the popular book on this back in 2013. I don’t agree with everything in the recent news item (if it is the same one that was discussed recently).
Hi Adam,
It sounds like you’re passionate about seeing God’s Word upheld faithfully. That is something to be commended. I just thought I’d throw in something that the Bible says for you to consider.
¹³Do not have two differing weights in your bag — one heavy, one light. ¹⁴Do not have two differing measures in your house — one large, one small. ¹⁵You must have accurate and honest weights and measures, so that you may live long in the land the Lᴏʀᴅ your God is giving you. ¹⁶For the Lᴏʀᴅ your God detests anyone who does these things, anyone who deals dishonestly. – Deuteronomy 25:13-16.
Any creation model, any interpretation of Genesis 1-11, any challenge to the scientific consensus on the age of the Earth or evolution, must obey that Scripture. It must get its facts straight. It must have accurate and honest weights and measurements. And it must apply the same level of rigour and quality control that we see in commercial science laboratories in the way that it accounts for the evidence that we see in nature. (In other words, it must not cut corners or get sloppy.) Any form of creationism that does not meet these standards is not scientific, is not Biblical, and is not honest.
If you want some of the specifics of what this means, start here:
I can go over it in more detail after the weekend if you like. In the meantime, have a blessed Christmas and may the peace of Christ dwell in you richly as you celebrate His birth.
The bible does not argue, as far as I am aware, that animals have the capacity of reasoning…or a conscience! If we consider that, the bible states that the law of God (his commandments) are written on our hearts and in our minds (the new covenant).
I have to ask, do theistic evolutionists believe an animal can knowingly sin?
Are you saying that animals have a conscience and the power of reason?
I do not argue that theistic evolutionists are wrong…the bible argues that point because you are attempting to deny self evident texts in support of your theology. You do that by suddenly claiming these self evident texts are not literal and are therefore “just stories”…in some instances linking them with some kind of spiritual application to explain away the self evident text (such as the early chapters of Genesis)
What you fail to recognise is that in almost every self evident biblical theological doctrine, there are parallels between the physical and the spiritual…that is also very self evident and is also consistent with the opposing Christian view to your own. However, this does not mean the spiritual is not a reality.
I offer an example (there are many many more)…consider the captivity of the Israelites around 500 B.C:
During the captivity in Babylon, where the institution of the leadership of Israel was no longer a self governing authority and the temple services had stopped, we have the visions of Daniel 2, 7, 8 etc. These visions very specifically describe the future (the writers of Daniel consistently say that) …they all describe the timeline for the return of the Israelites out of captivity to the promised land they once inherited through the leadership of Moses. However, the prophecies in Daniel (and this is scholarly fact not my own interpretation) also have a dual meaning/link/application with the end time prophecies in the book of Revelation…which are mostly calling Christians (spiritual Israelites) out of Babylon and into the promised land (heaven).
The proof of this end times “type and antitype” dual prophecy link between visions of Daniel and Revelation is obviously the stone that is cut without hands that smashes into the feet of the statue in Daniel Chapter 2 and crushes it into dust. The stone (Jesus) then fills the whole earth. That is very clearly the second coming and the subsequent cleansing of the earth from all sin.
Additionally, we have further evidence that the links are both physical and spiritual in their application…the term spiritual Israel in the Bible is used to help Gentile Christian of the New Testament times understand they are also Gods chosen people…it is not just for the Jews…the gospel has been introduced by the apostle Paul to the Gentiles who accept Christ…the Gentile Christians have become spiritual Israel! This does not mean there is no physical application of the visions in Daniel (the spiritual is only half the story…the temptation and fall of man in Genesis was both spiritual and physical in nature . That is also a scholarly fact…not my own interpretation. We can easily can pull up multiple denominational theologies dating back centuries to support this truth.
Jesus predecessor (John the Baptist) goes so far to say, I use water, however, there is one coming after me who is greater than i who will baptise with the Holy Spirit and Fire. /the point of John the baptist statement is not that we move from a literal world into a spiritual existence…what he is in fact saying is that:
The disciples in the upper room (as described in Acts 2) on the day of pentecost had all repented. It was then that they received the holy spirit and went out to preach the gospel…that is the point of john the baptists statement in Matthew chapter 3!
Your denominational theology about spiritual in order to support the idea that very obvious historical passages in the bible are not real is fundamentally in error (and that is not my interpretation…its the view of almost every scholar outside of your theology worldwide…even the vast majority of evolutionists themselves disagree with your theology!)
You are trying to claim that a bridge must be formed in order to allow evolutionists to come to God and be saved. The fundamental problem with that idea is that God does not compromise his law in order to accommodate sin. So how do you reconcile the idea that a theology that denies the personal creator (the God who bent down, formed Adam out of the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils) can be saved by Him?
If we consider the Pericope Adulterae, Jesus said 2 things to the women,
He did not simply let her off with any theology where she could continue in her life of sin. In Romans 6:23, Paul states very clearly, for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
If death is not related to sin (as you say), then how do you reconcile that when the new heavens and the new earth are created (after fire and brimstone has rained down on this earth cleansing it of all sin), there will be no more death? Are you trying to present the theology (and i think you are) that the plan of salvation is for us to “evolve from a sinful state to a sinless state and therefore overcome death via the processes of natural selection?” I do not see any room there for God!
Revelation 21 states…
They will be His people, and God Himself will be with them as their God. 4‘ He will wipe away every tear from their eyes,’ and there will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the former things have passed away.” 5And the One seated on the throne said, “Behold, I make all things new.”
Are you saying you do not believe Revelation is to be taken in a way that describes the end of time…the second coming of Christ, and Eternal life?
How do you explain away Revelation 21 exactly?
For example, consider the following links to Rev 21…(i could post at least a dozen more references like the ones below)
Isaiah 25:8
Matthew 24:35
Psalm 144:4
Isaiah 60:20
Isaiah 60:20
Jeremiah 31:12
Isaiah 60:20
My answer here is not a “TE” answer, but just an ordinary answer as would be given by many a believer who has read and reflected on his Bible. I think sin is a human problem. Non-human animals cannot sin. Our theology of sin does not extend to them, but only to humans (and not even all of them, if one allows for an “age of accountability” as alluded to in scripture).
I don’t intend to get into everything you raise because much of it seems quite beside the main points to me. But …
What do you know about my “denominational theology”? Do you even know what denominational tradition I’m a part of? And no - there is no such thing as a “Theistic Evolutionist” denomination. That’s just a moniker for the many thinking Christians over many denominations who have no problem understanding that God can make use of evolutionary processes if God chooses to do so.
No, nobody is claiming that. Defining what that is neither humans’, nor spiritual beings’ actions is morally wrong is rather difficult, as you stated. Thus, death on the part of non-humans is not necessarily evil. It may be, but it would seem as if that would make eating or sacrificing animals evil.
the denomination statement you made later in the above quote, has no bearing at all on your retort “how do you know what i believe”.
It seems to me that theistic evolutionists go to great lengths to illustrate their views (which are beliefs btw) in exactly the same way other world views do.
If i was to say to you in answer to well known theological positions…“how do you know what i believe”, what credibility do i present exactly? Is that even a credible statement? I think its a circular self defeating statement in that both of us are simply throwing the claim “you are an agnostic” as our supporting evidence ignorant of the fact that the very theology we follow openly publishes its views on the internet…add to this, how many statements of faith (to liberally use the term) are made by followers on these forums that very clearly outline the finer points of said statement of faith? Are you denying these individuals make such statements?
I have quite consistently used bible texts in support of my theology…i have not in any way attempted to “explain away” sself evident theology from those texts. I have literally taken the bible at face value first and foremost in everything i have said.
I have not once said, I believe, then attempted to twist the bible into following my belief. In Genesis 1:1 it says In the Beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth.
In Exodus 20 1 "And God spake all these words, saying, 2 I am the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
In Matthew Chapter 1 we have 1 “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”
In Revelation 14:6 “…Fear God, and give him glory; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters.”
I take all of the verses seriously and literally. I do not see any reconciliation of ones theology in a manner that is entitled to salvation through the acceptance of the Gospel that does not also take them literally. Gods plan of salvation is not a fable…it has very real consequences! Man physcially sinned (by eating forbidden fruit), he was physically punished (gradual decline in statue and lifespan), the world experienced physical suffering because of mans disobedience (such as weeds and tares in gardens etc)…our messiah suffered a physical death at the hands of men in order to save men from the wages of sin (which is also death)…and yet theistic evolution still makes the claim that the wages of sin is not a literal death…its a spiritual one. The problem there is you only consider half the story…there has always been a spiritual and a literal existence…there is no claim to the contrary made by Christian theology as we are all baptised with water (repentance) AND of the Spirit (conversion)! I believe we require both as the consequences are very literal/physical (ie eternal life or eternal death…these are literally concerned with the very existence of your person…you suffer eternal death, you cease to exist. There is no coming back from that!)
This is not mormonism…we do not, through our works elevate ourselves to a higher being eventually becoming the God of our own world…there is no room in Christianity for works of this nature. The sinful form…in fact all forms other than the creator, are incapable of elevation of self to immortality. We cannot evolve into sinless beings, we cannot evolve into eternal life! That is not the Christian model we follow…it is not biblical.
So, if i were to follow your tradition…my arguments would center around procreation of humanity and of the animal kingdom…not attempting to explain away bible texts in terms of literal or spiritual. I dont think its a particularly strong argument to make, however, that is where i would start. Trying to theologically dismantle bible theology with thousands of years of history and apologetics behind it will never survive the stink test!
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.