No, but I have heard of Progressive Eating. 
Do you concur, Dr. Beaglelady?
Humans did NOT evolve in the first place so I highly doubt that they will evolve in any other way either! the question has been answred!
As a bible believing Christ follower,I can NOT accept evolution as any truth what so ever no matter if one wraps it up in the God did it" argument or NOT! the Bible says God said and to me God did NOT say “over many years” the birds will be made or “over MANY YEARS” trees will be made, He said and it happened instantly,to believe anything else is to agree with Darwin which no Christian should ever do! And his {Darwin’s} ideas were anything but Christian in any way! any body who accepts his ways really should be ashamed of themselves!
Correct. God didn’t say how long it took to produce the first bird.
In a lifetime of Bible-reading, I have yet to find in any of the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek texts anything about “it happened instantly”. Yes, I know that that is a popular tradition which many believe (as I once did) but I’m more interested in what God has revealed in his scriptures and in his creation itself.
-
“To agree with anything else” would mean to hold an opinion different from yours. But to say that ALL of those differing opinions would “agree with Darwin” makes no sense. How can *all other views" be some kind of agreement with Darwin? I can’t figure out the logic of that claim.
-
Whether or not some conclusion happens to “agree with Darwin” is irrelevant. Do you deny gravity because to accept the science of gravity would be to “agree with Hitler”? (I have no doubt that Hitler affirmed gravity, photosynthesis, and many other things. Of course, we really don’t know much about what Hitler thought of the Theory of Evolution other than the fact that all of Darwin’s writings were banned under the Nazis—and all books which presented evolutionary biology in any way were prohibited for Germany’s libraries and schools. A banned book found in one’s possession could get individuals in a great deal of trouble, although enforcement varied.)
-
If you determine the truth of an idea based on who does and doesn’t concur with that idea, I can see why considering the scriptural and scientific evidence would not be enough for you. Do you truly believe it is wise to let what any one individual who has been dead for over a century dictate what you do or don’t accept in science?
Scientists don’t care how many things Darwin got right or wrong in his personal thinking and beliefs. And I certainly don’t. Darwin is neither my Savior nor the God of the Bible. I find it interesting that the people who obsess most about Darwin are not scientists but are usually anti-evolution advocates. (Many are also very angry about Darwin, almost as if he were still alive and well and on the speaking circuit. As for me, I give Darwin little thought and really don’t care what his opinion was on a great many topics.) I do know that Darwin would have disagreed with me on many theological topics but so do many people today.
If the Bible prohibits the Christ-follower from affirming the Theory of Evolution, I’ve yet to find that text.
Which ideas? I don’t expect a scientist’s “science ideas” to be “Christian in any way.” That wouldn’t even make any sense. My own theological ideas are certainly “Christian”, but to call my ideas about science either “Christian” or “Non-Christian” has no meaning. Photosynthesis, for instance, is a process commonly found in plants which science describe but which is neither Christian nor non-Christian.
Why? And what do you mean by his (Darwin’s) ways? And why should they be ashamed? Are you again confusing someone"s scientific observations with whether or not you consider the individual “good” or honorable? Obviously, if you did, that would be a logic fallacy. The idea’s value depends on its merits and the evidence which supports it. If you are assuming that “Everything a bad person says is evil and false and everything a good person says is good and true” —and I don’t that is your meaning—then this type of thinking wouldn’t help you much in science.
Correct. God didn’t say how long it took to produce the first bird.
In a lifetime of Bible-reading, I have yet to find in any of the Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek texts anything about “it happened instantly”. Yes, I know that that is a popular tradition which many believe (as I once did) but I’m more interested in what God has revealed in his scriptures and in his creation itself.
-
“To agree with anything else” would mean to hold an opinion different from yours. But to say that ALL of those differing opinions would “agree with Darwin” makes no sense. How can *all other views" be some kind of agreement with Darwin? I can’t figure out the logic of that claim.
-
Whether or not some conclusion happens to “agree with Darwin” is irrelevant. Do you deny gravity because to accept the science of gravity would be to “agree with Hitler”? (I have no doubt that Hitler affirmed gravity, photosynthesis, and many other things. Of course, we really don’t know much about what Hitler thought of the Theory of Evolution other than the fact that all of Darwin’s writings were banned under the Nazis—and all books which presented evolutionary biology in any way were prohibited for Germany’s libraries and schools. A banned book found in one’s possession could get individuals in a great deal of trouble, although enforcement varied.)
-
If you determine the truth of an idea based on who does and doesn’t concur with that idea, I can see why considering the scriptural and scientific evidence would not be enough for you. Do you truly believe it is wise to let what any one individual who has been dead for over a century dictate what you do or don’t accept in science?
Scientists don’t care how many things Darwin got right or wrong in his personal thinking and beliefs. And I certainly don’t. Darwin is neither my Savior nor the God of the Bible. I find it interesting that the people who obsess most about Darwin are not scientists but are usually anti-evolution advocates. (Many are also very angry about Darwin, almost as if he were still alive and well and on the speaking circuit. As for me, I give Darwin little thought and really don’t care what his opinion was on a great many topics.) I do know that Darwin would have disagreed with me on many theological topics but so do many people today.
If the Bible prohibits the Christ-follower from affirming the Theory of Evolution, I’ve yet to find that text.
1 Like
Wise response. I must always call it theistic evolution to make certain that no one would think I were an atheist. Some individuals feel even uncomfortable with that, and I therefore say that I believe in Intelligent Design since many people see that I take a Christian view to creation. The term “evolution” reminds people of only atheistic evolution and I reject that concept with all my very soul.
I must say that you are correct; however, people need something that will tell them that I reject Darwinism. It is the same as saying “I am a Democrat;” however, I am a fiscal liberal and social conservative. Therefore, I must say something to distinguish myself from modern liberals, e.g., Harry Truman or Jack Kennedy Democrat. A distinction must be made to clarify my belief system.
I certainly understand that problem. (Indeed, I finally stopped calling myself a Republican when I found myself using an impossibly-long and clumsy series of adjectival disclaimers that emphasized my disagreement with so much of what the Republican Party has become. It got to where I wondered if I was a Republican-in-Name-Only.)
When forced to label myself, I prefer evolutionary creationist to theistic evolutionist. It has always bugged me that in the last half century the word “creationist” has lost much of its original meaning and now tends to make people think that one is a Young Earth Creationist, as if they “own” the word creationist.
I also generally eschew the “guided evolution” phrase because it tends to reinforce a traditional notion of God being a deity so weak that he has to continually tweak-and-nudge a universe which he failed to create properly from the beginning! Yes, I realize that we must inevitably resort to anthropomorphisms in our efforts to describe God’s involvement in his creation but I draw the line at a notion as insulting to God as “divine tinkerer”, as if the Creator lacked the ability to “get it right” the first time and must always be vigilant to make the universe operate as he wishes it to operate. (A truly omniscient and omnipotent creator would be capable of creating the universe to operate by means of natural processes which “naturally” make sure that the universe functions as God willed. Only a fallible engineer must constantly adjust and tinker. Yes, the Bible does use anthropomorphistic language to emphasize God’s sovereign power over the universe----but that is a concession to the human mind, NOT a declaration of God’s limitations in getting the universe “right” from the beginning.)
For those who haven’t read anything from this view previously, I’ll summarize the position this way: I believe God is wise enough and powerful enough that he could create a universe that doesn’t need some sort of continuous tweaking to operate as God intended. (That doesn’t rule out intervention in the form of miracles as God chooses. But in essence, a miracle is the exception which proves the rule, as we used to say—though the expression seems to be dying out in the English language.)
Of course, because time is an attribute of a matter-energy universe, I don’t believe time existed before God created the universe. (Yes, I do understand the cause-and-effect ramifications of such a statement, but I believe cause-and-effect can exist even where/when time does not. That’s a big topic for another day.) So it makes no sense to me when someone speaks of God being bounded by time, something he created. God is not “waiting” for anything to happen because God sees ALL dimensions, including time, in his omniscience just as he can see all points in a 3D space. We humans can only experience time according to the moment-by-moment arrow of time. Yet God is not so bounded. For God, “now” is no more “now” than the moment that Moses parted the Red Sea or the moment when Jesus died on the cross. All of those points in time are the same to God, with no one point being “now”. That is why God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, not was. He is the Alpha and the Omega, outside of time because he created time when he created the universe. (Just try defining a unit of time without making reference to matter or energy. You can’t do it because time is an attribute of the physical universe.)
The future is subjective for us, but not for God. (Indeed, I don’t like Openness Theology not just because it assumes God is far less than what the Bible describes him to be. It also strikes me as entirely ignorant of what Einstein helped us to understand about the nature of time. In fact, I’ve had atheist colleagues who found it shocking that Openness Theology could be so oblivious to the nature of time and then assume that God understands less than Einstein did.)
I believe God chose to create the universe in such a way that what we regard to be “the laws of physics” inevitably led to life and the evolutionary processes which diversify life to produce the biosphere we observe today. I’ve never cared for the term “front-loaded” because it too strikes me as overly anthropomorphic. Instead, I believe that in choosing the reality we know as all of history, past, present, and future, God chose an enormous sequence of events (rather than some other possible enormous sequence of events) because God in his wisdom and sovereignty willed it all, including every mutation of a genome and every instance of decay of every radioisotope. So God created Homo sapiens and used all sorts of evolutionary processes, and that is no less a reality of creator-and-creation than any breathing into a clay-figure analogy to that creation.
Do I expect the Bible to explain to ancient people how evolution works? No. I do expect the Bible to explain to ancient and modern peoples that God created everything, deliberately and specifically. It does.
1 Like
I can say no more than that. I wish to thank you for your comments. Yes, I too believe that God sees all time at once. For us, this is the first time this moment has happened; however, God sees it differently. How many times have we lived this moment. A total thesis could be written about this; however, it would not be enough to cover the greatest through our great and wonderful God. He made all of this and will renovate it at the Second Advent of His son. At that time, the beasts of the wild will be lead by a child and we shall be changed from the creatures that we presently are. May God bless you and love you and give you peace.
This topic was automatically closed 3 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.