Divine associations with evolution

[DeaconKenNY (Kenneth David Swenson)]

This is one of those issues that is hard to define, and hard to nail down any kind of specifics. Without God as a physical presence, or without any supporting document or text; you really can’t answer that question “Yes” or “no”.

All of our suppositions and presuppositions; are based on what we can exegetically glean from any text.

It’s is a question that involves a ton of biblical scholarship to even come up with a possibility.

So, when the Creationists speak with absolute certainty, it begs one to ask how you can firmly come up with their answers to questions.

[RichardG (Richard Gillett)]

@DeaconKenNY

It’s is a question that involves a ton of biblical scholarship to even come up with a possibility.

So, when the Creationists speak with absolute certainty, it begs one to ask how you can firmly come up with their answers to questions.

Not really. Trying to impose Scripture onto any reality, be it science or depravity, is doomed to failure. Scripture was not meant for such things.

Richard

[mitchellmckain (Scientist and Christian)]

@St.Roymond

and it does not fit the context at all since that is a point that was already made.

On the contrary repetition is the persistent pattern of the Biblical text – saying the same thing in different words.

@St.Roymond

It isn’t pantheistic in any way at all!

Obviously I disagree. I don’t see any functional difference. It is exactly like the relationship between dream and the dreamer.

[St.Roymond]

@mitchellmckain

On the contrary repetition is the persistent pattern of the Biblical text – saying the same thing in different words.

Not in Paul – in the OT, yes, but Paul rarely uses Hebraisms, and there’s no parallelism here to suggest one.

@mitchellmckain

It is exactly like the relationship between dream and the dreamer.

Not even remotely. “Sustains” is not even close to “imagines”.

[adamjedgar (adam james edgar)]

@RichardG

@adamjedgar

Conversely, to say God is directly involved also presents problems because that then aligns with the literal reading of the Genesis creation account which is untenable in TEism.

The problem is a black & white mentality. All or nothing? Why can’t there be a middle ground where science and Genesis can meet?

The fact that science cannot “see” God does not eliminate the probablitlity that He is there. However the idea to dismiss science altogether would seem to be a bit like a Hegehog curling up in a road and not expecting to get run over because he cannot see them coming.Sceince exists. Like it or lump it

1. you last statement “like it or lump it” is binary…that debuncts you question “why cant there be middle ground between science and Genesis meet”
   This is where i will insert Revelation 3

14"And to the angel of the church in Laodicea write: ‘The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God 's creation.

15"‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! 16So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth. 17For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing, not realizing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. 18I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see.

Being lukewarm is, i think, trying use human morality to explain why God…

Kind Saul used that same method and was condemned by the Prophet Samuel for it (google “King Saul, to obey is better than to sacrifice”)

[mitchellmckain (Scientist and Christian)]

@St.Roymond

Not in Paul – in the OT, yes, but Paul rarely uses Hebraisms, and there’s no parallelism here to suggest one.

Yes in Paul. Paul FREQUENTLY uses parallelism. This is natural since that is the literary tradition which He long studied.

@St.Roymond

Not even remotely. “Sustains” is not even close to “imagines”.

I quite agree there is no basis for understanding the text or the word “sustain” to mean the relationship between dream and dreamer, where the dream has no independent existence but only exists because the will of the dreamer continually makes it so. The the word “sustain” means “strengthen or support physically or mentally” (from Oxford languages) just as we do when we take care of a plant, a flock of sheep, or a child.

God is a true creator, making things which have their own existence apart from Himself and not a sham creator who simply hold the appearance of an existence like an illusion which vanishes the moment He turns His attention elsewhere.