[_ Old Earth _] Creation

[Rick W]

Would you be willing to assume creation in the case of feeding the many for a while?
I've not run across a staunch evolutionist that will admit creation was used but will always dodge the act as anything but.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Would you be willing to assume creation in the case of feeding the many for a while?
I've not run across a staunch evolutionist that will admit creation was used.

Sure.

 

[Rick W]

Let's be clear ok? Christ created the fish from nothing. Where there was no fish, now there was. Creation. He didn't steal the bread, he created it. He didn't transport anything. Fish did not suddenly disappear from fisherman's nets or fly through the air.

Creation. The power of God to create matter where there was none at all. And Christ's power to create bread and fish that did not previously exist.

Can that be accepted for a bit?

 

[kevinmaynard]

Let's be clear ok? Christ created the fish from nothing. Where there was no fish, now there was. Creation. He didn't steal the bread, he created it. He didn't transport anything. Fish did not suddenly disappear from fisherman's nets or fly through the air.

Creation. The power of God to create matter where there was none at all. And Christ's power to create bread and fish that did not previously exist.

Can that be accepted for a bit?

I can.

 

[Barbarian]

I'm not real sure what you're saying

I'm saying that when God does a miracle, it's to teach us something. It's not that He has to do it that way.

so I'll ask point blank.
Was Jesus's miraculous act an act of creation?

I know it was a miracle. How He does miracles, I do not know, nor do I know it its the same as the act that created the universe.

Does it matter?

 

[Rick W]

5,000 people would cover a lot of area. (In Jewish culture of the time only men were counted, not women and children) None-the-less even counting them 5,000 takes up a lot of ground. There were no cameras, no big screen TVs above where Jesus was. Obviously many could not see what was going on where Jesus and the disciples were assembled. Nor did Christ declare in a loud voice to those people what he was going to do.

Many did not know what was going on.

Is that acceptable?

 

[kevinmaynard]

5,000 people would cover a lot of area. (In Jewish culture of the time only men were counted, not women and children) None-the-less even counting them 5,000 takes up a lot of ground. There were no cameras, no big screen TVs above where Jesus was. Obviously many could not see what was going on where Jesus and the disciples were assembled. Nor did Christ declare in a loud voice to those people what he was going to do.

Many did not know what was going on.

Is that acceptable?

It depends on what you contend it is acceptable for.

 

[Rick W]

I'm saying that when God does a miracle, it's to teach us something. It's not that He has to do it that way.



I know it was a miracle. How He does miracles, I do not know, nor do I know it its the same as the act that created the universe.

Does it matter?

Again, the focus being purposely directed on the universe. Why? Because to admit Jesus created food doesn't fit evolution. For if creation did indeed occur after God's creation of the entire universe and especially as "recent" as Christ's ministry then those events can be problematic for the staunch evolutionist.

 

[Rick W]

It depends on what you contend it is acceptable for.

"It depends"

Then we need not continue.

 

[kevinmaynard]

"It depends"

Then we need not continue.

All things depend on context.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Again, the focus being purposely directed on the universe. Why? Because to admit Jesus created food doesn't fit evolution. For if creation did indeed occur after God's creation of the entire universe and especially as "recent" as Christ's ministry then those events can be problematic for the staunch evolutionist.

How are they problematic?

 

[Rick W]

"can be problematic for the staunch evolutionist."

Allow me to clarify. I should have said ""can be problematic for the staunch evolutionist who professes Christianity"
A secular evolutionist could care less about the bible. Therefore "can be problematic" means nothing to the secular.

 

[Rick W]

How are they problematic?
For one thing if creation is believed to have occurred to feed the many then it could be strongly argued that Adam was created in the same way.

 

[kevinmaynard]

How are they problematic?
For one thing if creation is believed to have occurred to feed the many then it could be strongly argued that Adam was created in the same way.

I still don't see how that is a problem. Evolution is just a process. Whether things are created in the middle of the process doesn't change anything.

 

[Barbarian]

Again, the focus being purposely directed on the universe. Why? Because to admit Jesus created food doesn't fit evolution.

I don't see how you got that. Science doesn't deny the supernatural, it just can't say anything about it.

For if creation did indeed occur after God's creation of the entire universe and especially as "recent" as Christ's ministry then those events can be problematic for the staunch evolutionist.

No problem for a Christian who accepts evolution. Since a Christian acknowledges God and His creation, there isn't any conflict at all.

 

[Rick W]

Barbarian,
You say "acknowledges God and His creation". That's fine by me.
But feeding the many through creation isn't something I've known any evolutionist on this board to claim to believe. There's always some other means presented to dodge that one. Transportation is very popular. But stealing bread isn't exactly something Jesus would do.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Barbarian,
You say "acknowledges God and His creation". That's fine by me.
But feeding the many through creation isn't something I've known any evolutionist on this board to claim to believe. There's always some other means presented to dodge that one. Transportation is very popular. But stealing bread isn't exactly something Jesus would do.

Transportation doesn't necessarily mean stealing. the fish could have come from the ocean. The bread could have come from the willing or from wild ingredients and cooked by miracle. Either way I don't see why it matters.

 

[Rick W]

I still don't see how that is a problem. Evolution is just a process. Whether things are created in the middle of the process doesn't change anything.

Then I assume you're not a true Theistic Evolutionist also known as a TE.

 

[Rick W]

Transportation doesn't necessarily mean stealing. the fish could have come from the ocean. The bread could have come from the willing or from wild ingredients and cooked by miracle. Either way I don't see why it matters.

It does indeed matter. You're rather ambivalent about accepting Jesus used creation aren't you? Same thing with every evolutionist I've conversed with. Staunch evolutionists will not claim to believe creation was used whether it matters or not. They just won't do it.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Then I assume you're not a true Theistic Evolutionist also known as a TE.

I have never heard that term before.