Most compelling evidence for EC


#1

Hey All,
It’s been a while since my last post but I never left this forum. As it’s been said before, I don’t think that’s possible (kind of like Hotel California). This post is especially directed toward those who embrace EC. Now I generally wouldn’t be so reductionistic, but I anticipate a few upcoming conversations with friends and we’ll have limited time for discussion. What for you is the single most compelling evidence from science and from scripture that you would commend to a Bible-believing Christian for their consideration?

As of now, I’m considering:
From science- shared ERVs
From scripture- ancient cosmology, especially the firmament (raqia)

Thanks in advance to all who chime in.


(Randy) #2

I’m looking forward to this discussion. After talking about this with a minister and a close family member who are YEC, I’m getting the idea that if it focuses on God’s character, that’s the area that is most likely to jive. For example, one protested that EC agree that Jesus rose again, but deny God’s power in creating. Talking about whether God was deceptive or honest in leaving the signs in the earth and astronomy measurements of extreme age caused my family member to agree to re examine the evidence (the omphalos hypothesis); and using Tim Keller’s Biologos statement helped my pastor friend a bit (there is a lot remaining to talk about there).


(Quinn) #3

Use what made me leave YEC and return back to EC, the fossil record and scientific data of the age of the earth. When I was YEC I denied it and used the “different worldview” method to try and shake it off. But over time I couldn’t ignore the evidence and took the evidence for what it was. Also it the idea that all this complexity couldn’t have happened all by it self and a sovereign hand had to guide all this complex life in the course that its in now and that was made me accept evolution and kept my faith in God. My way of understanding Genesis 1-2 is from the ANE Cosmology point of view and that God explained the story of creation in a way the ancient people back then could understand. The main point of the story is that God is the only one and that only He and He alone made the universe. The ANE Cosmology point of view has helped me to look at Gen. 1 and 2 and still see them as the words of God that are pure and true.


(Phil) #4

Randy and Quinn pretty much said what I was going to write. I think of actual scientific data, the age of the universe and earth is foundational to evolution, and is well supported by multiple independent measurements. If you assume those measurements to be accurate and reproducible, then you have the conclude that if God is good and would not deceive, then the young earth interpretation is false.
Then, ERVs are probably the latest and most compelling evidence of evolution as you stated. I try to explain it to non- science oriented folk as analogous to how when you make a copy of a copy, you pick up spots and stains on the paper and copy machine that would allow you to reconstruct the order that the various copies were made,
Ultimately, however, I think that the scientific evidence is secondary, and my effort would be to present other well thought out interpretations of Genesis and argue that they are faithful and true to the text, but allow freedom for us to explore the mechanism of creation.


(Laura) #5

Thanks for that ERV explanation – I keep meaning to do some serious “reading up” on this in expectation for my own conversations someday, but just haven’t.

For science I would agree with the multiple lines of evidence, and I might focus on the age of the earth before common descent, but that’s just based on my own background. I would probably emphasize the simplicity of measurement and the inadequacy of the “we all just interpret the evidence differently” hand-waving sorts of statements.


(Randy) #6

Yes, that sound great. I am starting to listen to the “Lost World of Genesis One” by Walton on Audible, and found that very clear–am buying a copy for my minister friend. The ERV is a great point and illustration. I used @DennisVenema’s illustration of the vitamin C gene for my family member, and it helped.


(Dominik Kowalski) #7

I liked NT Wrights lecture on this topic.

This should prove great in a discussion when talking only about scripture. But I also have to admit unfamiliarity with those kinds of discussions, since we have virtually no anti-evolution groups in the public church in Germany that I know of.


#8

Thanks to all who chimed in on discussion. I have shifted in my views over the past year. I now feel more strongly that EC ought to be commended to thinking Christians for consideration (rather than just tolerated).


(system) closed #9

This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.