Is it dangerous to teach evolutionary theory to children?

@Celticroots, your ability to answer the question at hand is putting us all to shame! :joy:

1 Like

Then AMWolfe quoted from Grog:

I have not read the 9 lines of reasoning. I am sure that many brilliant creationist have and have refuted much or shown that there is a difference between evolution within a kind vs a kind developing into another.

I too am absolutely astounded at the admission from grog/Greg that: I have not read the 9 lines of reasoning.

I try to just let that sink in. Greg doesn’t even think it worth his time to read (much less to put effort into fully comprehending) why the entire science academy and the Christians on this thread find the evidence for the Theory of Evolution overwhelming.

I’m impressed with Greg’s honesty in admitting that he’s never bothered to grapple with that evidence. That sure beats those who tell me that they’ve weighed all of the evidence but their comments betray a total unfamiliarity with the science.

Yes, this has been a very valuable thread. I’m very glad grog/Greg posted his opinions.

I am, however, disappointed that Greg didn’t engage the topic of how he came to have a special inside track to the mind of God on every difficult concept in the scriptures. I want to know how he achieved that status. And I still have my list of difficult scriptures which I have a very hard time translating and interpreting.

3 Likes

I know right? But saying the earth is 6,000 years old, dinosaurs aren’t millions of years old. “That’s a-ok because we’re defending the Bible!” Says the creationist. Just one problem. The Bible clearly states God is against lying. Guess they ignored that part.

That’s just sad.

2 Likes

Reading your comment, it occurs to me that Santa Claus teaches kids an incredibly important life lesson: not everything everyone tells you is true, and it’s important to be able to recognize this without concluding that the people passing on untruths to you are bad people. Not an easy lesson, to be sure, but whoever told you life was supposed to be easy?

He no doubt came about it by reading the “plain meaning” of John 16:13 – However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth… Not really sure why God felt the need to appoint teachers in the church (1 Cor 12:28), since even a child can grasp the plain meaning with the guidance of the Holy Spirit …

So, Greg, who are the unbelievers that Paul says not to yoke ourselves with in 2 Cor. 6:14-7:1? What’s your plain reading of the Scripture here?

As long as we’re on the ‘plain reading’ topic, I’m still curious what the plain reading is here: did the earth bring forth life at God’s command? Or did God directly ‘poof’ the animals into existence?

How could both be true?

1 Like

I’ve had people tell me “all truth” means ALL truth----“and that is why I know that God has given me the truth about the Theory of Evolution being wrong and being evil!”

Even so, when I ask them if “ALL truth” means that God filled their brain with physics knowledge so that they could teach a graduate level physics course at a university, they tell me, “Of course not! That’s different.”

When I ask them to explain why they are given sufficient truth to debunk evolution but not to learn and understand advanced physics, they usually get angry and leave that forum. So I don’t really understand their reasoning.

I’ve always been disgusted by the traditional mantra “All means all and that’s all that all means!” I had a seminary professor friend who was much loved by his students—and many years later they would still quote him approvingly by reciting that mantra.

Meanwhile, I was really hoping Greg would answer our questions. His views are probably very common ones and so it would have been helpful to understand how he was able to avoid thinking about the logic issues we were poking holes through.

2 Likes

@Jay313

What’s the point of saying he uses the plain meaning, when he picks and chooses When he uses the plain meaning?

Except that he started by claiming that there is:

You don’t see a mighty big contradiction there, SF? Doesn’t one have to grapple with the evidence to credibly make such a claim?

3 Likes

Well… he did mention that he ignored the eleven lines of evidence because he simply took for granted that somebody who shared his beliefs had already examined them and dismissed them. So it was “surrogate grappling.”

I once preached at an IFCA church which practiced “first-degree separation.” The pastor told me that that made them a liberal IFCA church. You see, an appropriately conservative fundamentalist IFCA church is made up solely of True Christians™ because they always practice second-degree separation.

Likewise, a TRUE Science-Denialist doesn’t grapple with the evidence. That would be first degree denialism. True Science-Denialists depend upon other denialists to grapple (or not grapple) with the evidence for them. That’s Second-Degree Science-Denialism.

2 Likes

I’ve found that they are afraid of evidence.

2 Likes

I love all people as God so loves THE WORLD. God loves all people and even in God’s sovereignty, the Bible says that He remains patiently waiting on folks to consider accepting the greatest privilege: His Son who died for us and who was willing to offer us his righteousness in place of our foolishness.

Anyway, I love people of all races, religions, creeds but this does not mean that I will grow so close that I want to adopt ill advised lifestyles and belief systems that they might adhere to.

When it comes to this issue of evolution from a common decent, while for some (and perhaps not you who are listening to this) it may seem wise to absorb principles surrounding common decent evolution to make the terms of Christianity more palatable towards the non-christian world in the name of loving them, instead I believe that this comes dangerously close to defaming God, the very one who we are supposed to be trying to get folks interested in. And according to 1 Cor 13, love delights in the truth.

Sometimes I ask myself what would Jesus think of me if he showed up on this planet and looked into my face and instantly recognized what worldview system I was promoting for all these years which happened to be more grounded upon determinations in mankinds’ eyes and not upon His prophets and apostles teachings. I revere Him enough to never want to be in that position.

As one martial arts movie put it best: “hey, that’s a lot of nuts”…

@Socratic.Fanatic, I would like to order up some of that TradeMark True Christians™ paraphernalia …
can I get the leggings with extra bunny fur?

George

1 Like

Try this thought experiment, Greg: try imagining that the Christian brothers and sisters that you disagree with are actually just doing their very best to discern the truth. Just like you, they’re not trying to conform to the world. Maybe they happen to understand that Biblical definition of the world has to do with pride and arrogance, not with whether common descent is true or not. Maybe you can learn something from them.

It might seem weird and uncomfortable, because maybe you have never imagined the body of Christ that way before.

Let the Spirit of Christ mold your words into instruments of edification.

Excluding “perhaps not you who are listening to this” from your defamatory words is not what God is calling you to, Greg. He is calling you to stop using defamatory words about the entire Church He loves. Avoiding defamation of the few of us who happen to be conversing with you in this forum is only the very first step, and it’s a very small one at that. God is calling you to more.

I believe that is why He brought you here. You thought that He was bringing you here to rebuke ungodliness. But now it turns out that He brought you here to expose some ungodliness in your heart that He wants to cleanse you of, because He loves you too much to leave you untransformed.

Blessings,
Chris

5 Likes

Dear Mr. Brooks:

We would be happy to send you a link to this season’s newest The Complete True Christian™ Regalia & Gear Electronic Catalog, as soon as you complete the 1427 questions of our True Christian™ Theology, Lifestyle, Politics, & Personal Piety Questionaire. To preserve the integrity and spiritual impact of the True Christian™ trademark and logo, all distribution of True Christian™ Regalia & Gear is under strict licensing to qualified True Christian™ customers only.

Watch for the True Christian™ logo. Don’t be fooled by cheap knock-offs. Always remember our motto:

“If it’s not a True Christian™, then to hell with it!”

Copyright 2017. True Christian™ LLC.
All rights reserved.

4 Likes

@Socratic.Fanatic

I had to quote your entire presentation… I would hate to lose one precious word of it if someone convinced you to change it!!!

I’lll have you know the Asian markets are making good quality “knock-offs” of this stuff… but for much less sacrifice … so I think I’ll be seeing the Buddhists about some of their nicer monastic fabrics and such …

But I do appreciate the speed with which you responded to my request … even if it was only because you were predestined to respond with such speed…

Thanks again,

Pax Vobiscum … oops… I mean “Paks of Nabisco”!

Most of our page views come from people who don’t ever post. And several people I know say that what convinced them to abandon their YEC views was watching people like Greg have their lame arguments patiently dismantled in way that was obviously not inspired by hostility. So yeah, the main reason we appreciate these threads (and the effort people put into providing good information with a kind spirit) is for the benefit it provides all the people who are on the fence, reading, but not actively participating.

The moderators will be discussing this issue of “slander,” as it has come up on this thread and also on the one with Frank defending Jeff Tompkins. @AMWolfe (or anyone else) if you have any suggestions on how moderation should define and police “slander” on these boards, PM me. And remember it would have to be something we could apply in all directions (i.e. what would slandering Creationist or ID folks look like?).

7 Likes

[quote=“grog, post:153, topic:35076”] I believe that this comes dangerously close to defaming God, the very one who we are supposed to be trying to get folks interested in. And according to 1 Cor 13, love delights in the truth.
[/quote]

Greg, this is exactly my thought when I hear the YEC crowd denying what their eyes see about God’s creation, essentially calling God a deceiver and the author of lies by saying God would create a universe that only looks ancient, leading people away from him by the deception.
It leads us to understand that both scripture and physical reality are true and good, as declared by God, and there is no conflict.

2 Likes

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

We are only children, incomplete and immature. When we see Christ face to face, this thing we call knowledge (or worldview) will be the last thing on our mind. In fact, it will fade into insignificance, and our previous ways of thinking will seem like a childhood game of make-believe. The full knowledge that we will have then is the intimate, personal, relational knowledge of Christ, who is Emmanuel.

Dangerous to teach evolutionary theory? I couldn’t imagine why it would be. My conservative Christian high school (run by a local PCA church) taught both sides of the story, and then tasked us with writing a paper defending one side over the other. Granted, that was 9th grade biology class, and I sided with the creationists out of ignorance, but I still appreciate what I learned and the value of learning both sides of The Controversy™. To this day, my former high school uses that approach. It has the potential to clarify, or to create massive amounts of cognitive dissonance, depending on what one has been taught regarding Genesis. However, looking back, I recall being taught something similar to the framework interpretation during my sophomore year in Bible class (Old Testament survey).

There is value in being a well-rounded person, especially when it comes to science. Learning all sides and reading books from multiple perspectives helps one come to their own conclusions based on the available data. Personally, I find some of the things proposed by those who would advance the extended evolutionary synthesis to be quite appealing.