[_ Old Earth _] Shouldn't theistic evolutionists and YEC's agree to disagree

[Late_Cretaceous]

It seems to me that a whole lot are counter productive arguing goes on between theistic evolutionists and YEC's.

YEC's overlook, or even outright deny the fact that many poeple accept Christ and evolutionary thoery at the same time. Why can't they just accept that someone can be a Christian and an "evolutionist" at the same time, even if they don't agree with them.

Think of it this way. As a Christian should you not be trying to trying to persuade non-Christians about Christ? WHat kind of impression are you giving to non-Christians on this website when you attack fellow Christians as though they were heretics? Do you really think anybody is going to be presuaded when they see Christians fighting among themselves?

I have no problem debating the scientific or theological viability of evolution. However, I really think that Christianity really gets a black eye when you have one sub-group of Christians villifying another.

Another thing is that you are really not going to have any luck proving your point to someone that you have just accused of not being a real Christian. It is extremely disrespectful to say to someone who has accetped Christ into thier heart that they don't measure up in your eyes because of some superfluous disagreement.

Can we agree to disagree?

 

[Heidi]

We can agree to disagree but we are responsible for passing along the truth. There are some who refuse to accept God no matter how He is presented. They will find out when they die the difference between human wisdom and Godly wisdom & how deceived they've been their whole lives. But those who are being drawn by God will see the impossibility of animals breeding or turning into humans. It is they who can see God's logic & wisdom above human wisdom. So I will pass along God's wisdom (which can be found in the bible) as I am led to do so.

 

[Khristeeanos]

Accepting evolution destroys the need for an atoning sacrifice to save us from our sins and death.

It makes God the author of death, not man.

 

[jwu]

Accepting evolution destroys the need for an atoning sacrifice to save us from our sins and death.

Why?

 

[Khristeeanos]

Accepting evolution destroys the need for an atoning sacrifice to save us from our sins and death.

Why?

Jesus was named "Yeshua" by an angel (by God through the angel) because:

• Matthew 1:21
  She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins."

It says that Jesus was named so to save his people from their sins.

How did sin enter into the world?

• Genesis 3:1-7
  Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
  
  The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "
  
  "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."
  
  When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

Also note the following passages:

• Romans 5:12-15
  Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
  
  
  But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!

Reference:

• 1 Corinthians 15:21-23
  For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.

And:

• 1 Corinthians 15:44-46
  it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body. So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual.

The picture could not be more clear here.

God created man in the Garden of Eden in a perfect world that was described by a Holy God as being:

• Genesis 1:31
  God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morningâ€â€the sixth day.

If God called it very good, how could there be bloodshead, thorns, suffering, sin, death, and hateful hearts?

Simply put, it couldn't be!

Very good does not mean full of sin, disease and death!

It means very good!

If man's sin caused death, than God sending His Son makes perfect sense.

But if God caused death, than God's sending His Son makes Him cruel because He is sending His Son to die for nothing (something He created).

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

Very good point Khristeeanos. I've never thought of it that way.

Very interesting indeed.

:o

 

[cubedbee]

If God called it very good, how could there be bloodshead,

Jesus was perfect,and he shed his blood, so how could bloodshed be incompatable with goodness?

thorns,

really don't see anything wrong with thorns. God created them, not man. Unless your claiming man's sin somehow had the power to create a family of plants. The creation story doesn't have that detail.

suffering,

The ability to suffer is an important part of life. There is a disease where you are born without pain receptors, and life is absolutely horrible. God created suffering, and suffering serves God's good purpose.

sin,

God created us with the capability to sin, therefore the capabality to sin is good.

death,

Yes, death is absolutely essential to life. All life on this earth depends on death to exist--God created it this way--it is good.

and hateful hearts?

Nothing to do with God created the world through evolution.

Simply put, it couldn't be!

Simply put,it could and it is, because God did it! Stop telling God he can't do things!

Very good does not mean full of sin, disease and death![quote:f72bb]It can.

[quote:f72bb]
It means very good!

Profound.

If man's sin caused death, than God sending His Son makes perfect sense.

Yes, man's sin caused death of man's spirit, as the Bible teaches. It does make perfect sense.

But if God caused death, than God's sending His Son makes Him cruel because He is sending His Son to die for nothing (something He created).

[/quote:f72bb][/quote:f72bb]No, he's not dying to save us from physical death--if you don't understand that, can you honestly say you understand what Christ's sacrafice was about?

 

[Khristeeanos]

Hi cubedbee

Jesus was perfect,and he shed his blood, so how could bloodshed be incompatable with goodness?

I am speaking about bloodshed before Adam's sin. Sorry I didn't clarify.

really don't see anything wrong with thorns. God created them, not man. Unless your claiming man's sin somehow had the power to create a family of plants. The creation story doesn't have that detail.

The creation story may not have it, but the fall story does:

• Genesis 3:17-18
  To Adam he said, "Because you listened to your wife and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, 'You must not eat of it,'
  "Cursed is the ground because of you;
  through painful toil you will eat of it
  all the days of your life.
  
  It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field.

Thorns and thistles are a result of the fall of mankind.

So if we ever find even one thorn that is supposedly older than 6,000 years, that proves that death existed before the fall.

That would make God the author of death instead of man.

The ability to suffer is an important part of life. There is a disease where you are born without pain receptors, and life is absolutely horrible. God created suffering, and suffering serves God's good purpose.

Suffering is an effect of the fall and didn't exist before the fall.

God created us with the capability to sin, therefore the capabality to sin is good.

God is not the author of sin. If evolution is true, than God is the author of sin.

But we know from the verses that I quoted that man is the author of sin.

Yes, death is absolutely essential to life. All life on this earth depends on death to exist--God created it this way--it is good.

The original creation was designed for mankind to live forever if sin didn't come.

Remember the tree of life?

• Genesis 3:22
  And the LORD God said, "The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever."

God would not allow Adam and Eve to take of this tree because they would have lived forever in a sinful state.

Nothing to do with God created the world through evolution.

Hate originated because of sin. Remember when Cain killed his brother?

• Genesis 4:5
  but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.

This is the first recorded hateful heart.

Yes, man's sin caused death of man's spirit, as the Bible teaches. It does make perfect sense.

There was no physical or spiritual death before the fall. Remember this passage:

1 Corinthians 15:39
All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.

There was no physical human death before Adam's sin. When Adam sinned, he immediately died spiritually and the process of physical death started as well.

No, he's not dying to save us from physical death--if you don't understand that, can you honestly say you understand what Christ's sacrafice was about?

Christ died to save us from physical and spiritual death.

When the Resurrection happens we will be given a new physical body and live in perfect communion with God, which is a new Spirit.

Why is this so hard to understand?

 

[Khristeeanos]

Very good point Khristeeanos. I've never thought of it that way.

Very interesting indeed.

:o

Thank you CH.

The problem with melding EVILution with creationsim is that those who accept the lie of evolution seem to care more about proving evolution than they do believing their Bible.

 

[jwu]

It says that Jesus was named so to save his people from their sins.

And then you go on explaining how your interpretation of the Bible says that sin entered the world. But it not having happened that way does not mean that there is no sin. How exactly sin entered the world is irrelevant to the question if sin exists or not, and vice versa.

If God called it very good, how could there be bloodshead, thorns, suffering, sin, death, and hateful hearts?

Simply put, it couldn't be!

Very good does not mean full of sin, disease and death!

It means very good!

"Very good" however included the capability of falling, apparently. Very good =/= perfect. As others already mentioned, God also made pain receptors, thorns, and Adam didn't die physically "on that very day" either. That makes me believe that life isn't supposed to be a cakewalk (why do we exist anyway?), and that the death that is being referred to is spiritual death.

If man's sin caused death, than God sending His Son makes perfect sense.

But if God caused death, than God's sending His Son makes Him cruel because He is sending His Son to die for nothing (something He created).

Why? Regardless of how sin entered the world, God could simply have snapped His fingers and fixed it.

 

[Solo]

Its one thing to say you are a Christian, it is yet another thing to show it by your fruits. Living a lie and rejecting portions of scripture are fruits unbefitting a true Christian. Many claim to be Christian and are not because they have never been born of the Spirit, therefore they are continuing as a natural man, instead of a spiritual man.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

That is an excellent thing to say while looking into a mirror Solo

 

[Solo]

That is an excellent thing to say while looking into a mirror Solo

While you are looking in the mirror, say a prayer of repentance, and ask God to give you wisdom and understanding of his Word. :wink:

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

I will.

 

[Charlie Hatchett]

Charlie Hatchett wrote:

Very good point Khristeeanos. I've never thought of it that way.

Very interesting indeed.

Thank you CH.

The problem with melding EVILution with creationsim is that those who accept the lie of evolution seem to care more about proving evolution than they do believing their Bible.

Right. That's what I don't get.

It's the whole motive thing...The Heart.


And Theistic ToE types also tend to discount anything miraculous:

The Creation; Noah's Flood; The Exodus; Jericho; The Virgin Birth; The

Empty Tomb....It's right in line with Humanism...guised as Christianity.


But many of these individuals are very bright. If they would just use their

effort and intelligence to verify, for themselves that the Scripture can be

defended quite scientifically. And then take action: join in to help stop the

lies that are forced upon us since our very tender years.


I think it's despicable how our nation as a whole tolerates such communion

of State and Church...one State Religion...Humanism....and ToE as one of

it's tenets, forced upon us through our public institutions.

Wake up People!!!


For many, it's peer pressure...or the desire to please man versus God. Many

are much more concerned with what other's will think, than coming up with

their own opinions....and then expressing them...and then taking action.


It's much easier just to fall in rank...go with the flow.


Jesus made it pretty darn clear: If your truly trying to carry out his will, you

will be at odds with the world.


Peace

 

[ArtGuy]

The problem with melding EVILution..

Please, that's just silly, and not really conducive to intelligent debate.

 

[Khristeeanos]

The problem with melding EVILution..

Please, that's just silly, and not really conducive to intelligent debate.

There is no debate.

I posted a whole bunch of verses that prove that evolution and the Bible are at odds and nobody has yet to refute it with Scripture.

 

[spreadingtheword]

Many people believe in Jesus, but don't really believe in Him. If you know what I mean. Many athiests believe in the existance of a historical Jesus, even Muslims have Jesus in their writings. But none of them believe in salvation offered through Jesus. There are those who masquerade as Christians and claim to bleieve in slavation but they don't really have a relationship with christ. Catholics fall into this category. In a previous post LC admitted to being a catholic, and he promotes the theory of evolution. LC is as much a Christian as Osama Bin Laden. Same goes for all the other evolutionist Christians.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

I guess Osama must be the new Hitler.

Oh well, I forgive you anyways.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

I guess Osama must be the new Hitler.

Oh well, I forgive you anyways.