The only limitations here are the limitations of language. “Design” is the best word for what I mean. Are you unable to understand what I mean or are simply unwilling to understand what I mean so you can quibble mindlessly without any point whatsoever.
No I don’t believe God designed living organisms. They are a product of their own choices and learning. That is evolution. And design is the ONLY difference between a living organism and a machine. Yes God was involved but as a shepherd using correction not as a designer. I do not believe God took any half measures in the choice between love/freedom and power/control. Disagree all you want, but the only result is that the God you describe will never have anything but my complete contempt.
“Created themselves” is not what I said. They participate in their own creation with the learning they do and the choices they make. But they do not do this in a vacuum. So not only is the beginning of their existence not something they can do for themselves, but even the choices and learning they do is not something they do by themselves either. God is also their creator, not as a designer but as a participant in their life.
The argument that the Genesis 1 does not say something is meaningless. It does not say God created planets, or electrons, or algae, or thousands of other things necessary for our existence.
I guess you can accept or reject any or all of it on the grounds of the knowledge and superstitions / traditions of the day, but it is there for a reason.
Luke 4: 16Then Jesus came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. As was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath. And when He stood up to read, 17the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. Unrolling it, He found the place where it was written:
20Then He rolled up the scroll, returned it to the attendant, and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fixed on Him, 21and He began by saying, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”
Then there’s this…
Acts 17: 11Now the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if these teachings were true.
the scriptures being read in both of the above scenarios were not New Testament, they were the Old Testament.
The Bereans, proved the gospel through careful study of historical writings to ensure consistency and authenticity.
There were no New Testament scriptures at the time of Christ, he was using the prophecies of the Old Testament as reference for His own preaching (which would seem to me to be the opposite of your statement above)
I feel that the New Testament scriptures expand upon the Old. They [two testaments] are validated because the two are in harmony with each other rather than the New superseding the Old.
We have more evidence of my point above when the apostle Paul says that “even Abraham was saved by faith”. References for this are found in Romans 4:3, 22; Galatians 3:6 and James 2:23.
I am deeply confused. How is it contradictory to observe that God is not directly observable or subject to human experiment and then to simply speculate: “It may indeed be the case that he has no other way of accomplishing his ends” ? Here, “may indeed” is functioning as a modal verb phrase.
Remember, I came here as a disbeliever interested in Christianity, not to debate. Show us some Christian manners.
The ToE doesn’t claim that. The ToE explains biodiversity through natural processes just like every other single scientific theory explains natural phenomena through natural processes.
Science also uses parsimony. This means that if the evidence is consistent with natural processes we don’t bring in a supernatural cause that exactly mimics the natural process. With respect to evolution, this was dealt with by George Romanes back in the late 1800’s.
Also, nowhere in the ToE does it say that nature created itself. Nature had already been present for 10 billion years before evolution started on Earth.
However it is fairly easy to see what he meant. Even if Nature (life) existed the various components, organs, bones systems are all manufactured in one way or another which constitutes self creation.
Richard seems confused about the meaning of the word “quoted”
I searched the whole forum and Richard says them frequently but I never have.
These are Richard’s words. And Richard has equated them to evolution: “ToE says nature created itself.” link and “things created themselves (oops Evolution)” link. Now that is an example of quoting someone.
Now I have said living organisms “create themselves” but with caveat that they do not do so in a vacuum or without help. And I frequently say God created the laws of nature to support the process of life. So Richard has basically lied. “Nature created itself” are his own words (describing evolution) not mine, not even in paraphrase.
In fact… @T_aquaticus quoted Richard here in this thread:
just another example of what it means to have quoted someone…
I do not reject the text. I reject the alterations of the text and the lies about what the text says. The reason for Genesis 1 is to tell us that all these things (sun, moon, stars, land, sea, plants, birds, fish, animals) are not gods but creations of God. But that only means they exist because of the action of God, it doesn’t mean God designed them, solely responsible for what they are and how they came to be. It is the same as any storm or earthquake which you seem to agree is not just God judging people. But all the things in Genesis 1 are a product of the same natural laws which produced those storms and earthquakes. But nature (those natural laws themselves), God created them. I have said so many times and never said otherwise.
The real point is that if Evolutionist could step back from the electro-microscope and look at the th8igs that have just appeared they might no be so smug.
Bones, different shapes and sizes often in pairs with attachments and tendons. self lubricating joints with a piece of cartilage so conveniently reducing wear and smoothing the use. How did that material just get created? Cartilage had to come first. Bone in the wrong place is a form of cancer, in fact any specialised cell in the wrong place is cancer
The sequencing belies credibility/ Even the basic double helix the the complimentary RNA carriers. . How many billions of failed attempts? The statistics are mind boggling and it is a wonder that only 1 meteor came to the party if the Lottery odds are anything to go by.
One hates to use the “C” word but really?
I wonder how nature managed to figure out the dynamics of a bird wing in flight, so complex we have never been able to successfully reproduce it. Wings, feathers muscles, nerve links, all working in perfect harmony. And it is different for every wing size and shape.
I have never said that “nature created itself.” It is contrary to what I believe. Nor have I said that Evolution means “nature created itself.” However, you have said those words as I have linked above.
Yes it does. Evolution does not happen in a vacuum. It happens in response to an environment which has all kinds of things and other living organisms in it, sometimes including farmers and shepherds.
Evolution certainly doesn’t say God is a part of it. But evolution doesn’t say God is not a part of it either. Science never says anything about God because God is not measurable.
…and every such bird individually grows from a fertilized egg that displays none of its promise.
Psalms 139:13-14
For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Wonderful are your works; my soul knows it very well.
Developmental biology never loses its wonder for me. That every cell knows its place, and it all comes together symmetrically, invokes awe. And yet, there are pretty well understood physical mechanisms controlling the process. Nature can inspire a sense of the miraculous.
In the similar fashion, the history of life on Earth, including the rise of flight, is wondrous. That does not mean that nature was relegated to the sidelines. If God’s laws yielded the world we see, that does not diminish God as Creator.
I think part of the problem is that we tend to think on the work of God in terms of our own creative endeavors, like that of an artist adding things to his painting, out of little more than fancy. But of course, this is a work not only of four dimensions rather than merely two dimensions, as well as engaging far more than just sight, but also more of his being than mere aesthetics. I look at how our own creative endeavors have advanced, from painting, to films, to interactive games where we make ourselves a part of our creation. I see these engaging more of our being as this develops and it suggest to me that God’s creation is likely engaging much much more of His being than our works have done.
Why couldn’t something written by ordinary people br self-evident? I’m an ordinary person, and I’m writing to you that 1 + 1 = 2. It’s self-evident, no?
In order:
We have evolved and has nothing to do with history but the study fields of paleontology, anthropology, acheology and geology. That fact does not distract from Genesis 1 that God created man through evolution. Adam was created in Genesis 2 for the purpose of bringing sin into the world.
You should believe the Bible and what it teaches theologically and realize that some events like creation and the origin of man were written under the inspiration of God from what they understood at the time.
You can prove Christianity because it is a religion and the followers have been billions. I think what yiu are asking is can I believe in Christ? That is the most important question in life and the answer is yes. But it is up to you to examine the evidence and pray about what you have read. If you are serious the Holy Spirit will lead you. Suggest you google or seek the evidence for the risen Christ. Too lengthy to list here but very solid nevidence and logical.
For your last question. I have been a Christian becasue I was raised in the faith. As I got older I sought out reasons why just like you are doing. If you seek, you will find the fundamental basis of Christianity that Adam brought sin into the world and Jesus, in order that man could have a relationship with God, died and rose again to remove your sin forever in Gods eyes.
There is a lot more that can be said but enough for now.
Thank you for your inquiry. More people should be asking these questions and seeking out the answers.
Have a blessed outcome to you search.
Well said, Caleb. I guess I think it is well said because I agree! But anyway…And I especially like your summation of the value/intent of the creation accounts. Moses had never heard of Darwinian evolution…neither had his neighbors or his father in law Jethro, etc. In fact, Darwin was millennia down the road in history. His grandfather did not even yet exist…the lands of his [Darwin’s] ancestors were likely not even known by Moses or most of his fellow citizens of the ANE.
So it is useless to suppose he or the composer of Genesis had any thought that way. I recently read something noting that much of what Moses was being “taught” by “the real God” was intended, at any rate, to counteract the Egyptian theology that he would have learned as a child of the kap.
There are many perspectives on what the “biblical view” of women is, just for the record. Some far more progressive than others.
Christianity isn’t supposed to be based on a book, it’s supposed to be based on a person, Jesus Christ, who Christians believe was God become human to relate to humanity and reconcile them to God. The biblical texts aren’t magical. You can’t “put your faith” in them. If you have never encountered God, if you aren’t approaching the Bible as a vehicle of communication that God’s spirit uses to reveal truth to humans through human words, experiences, and stories, it’s just an ancient text.