Leaving creationism = leaving Christianity?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

River Jordan

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2014
1,856
50
48
This Vale Of Tears said:
I'm not sure what to do with these badgering responses stemming from the unfounded premise that I bear the burden of proof.
It seems you're not appreciating the significance of your own arguments. You've claimed that "science doesn't prove evolution", which if true, would be perhaps the biggest scientific upheaval in the history of mankind. You're basically saying that there is a genuine scientific case to be made on that point, and it's so obvious that you, a non-scientist, have realized it.

So I'm asking you to back up this unbelievably bold assertion with some actual discussion and evaluation of the data. Why do you see that as "badgering"?

I don't need to cite specific peer reviewed papers to you to have a discussion on well established conclusions.
You made a specific claim that scientists observe adaptations within species and project that over the course of millions of years to "prove" evolution. I've never seen any scientist do such a thing, so I"m asking you to show where they have. Surely your claim is based on actually seeing a scientist do that, right?

This is the frustration that everyone here is having with you, that you attempt to browbeat opponents with intellectual bluster instead of discussing the evidence.
Um......????? I'm practically begging you to discuss the data. So let's do that.

Also stymying any discussion with you is your intellectual dishonesty in demanding proof for what you already know are well founded axioms of current science. Your pretense that there doesn't exist within scientific circles a robust controversy over what the fossil record indicates is similar to me claiming the world is round and you responding with adversarial demands for proof and specific studies. So let's cut the crap because I, like many others I've seen on these threads, don't want to play your silly little head games.
In order for your accusation to be accurate, you'll have to show where I said what you're claiming. So where did I do that?
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
Let's hear your scientific argument on abiogenesis complete with exactly how a finger is made. Be sure to include how your findings are observable and repeatable. I am not interested in pie in the sky predictions.

If you have no observable and repeatable process, then it seems to logically to follow that creation is just as scientific as your idea.

We do continue to circle the debate, especially as new persons are added. I believe you are sorely mislead in your world view. I find you stiff necked and stubborn about it. When you speak of spreading your views to children I cringe for them and you. It does however, make me ever more diligent in my efforts to fight for our children. Thank you for that.

And with that I will follow your advice and grow up and bow out of this and other related threads. I may pop in with a question or two but no more rants.

I symbolically wipe my feet of this apostasy.
You're not alone. I'm not given to futile errands myself and the only one more foolish than a man who is wise in his own eyes is the man who contends with such a person ad infinitum.
 

Secondhand Lion

New Member
Jan 30, 2012
309
22
0
People's Republic of Maryland
River,

One last time, I know it has its own jargon. I know I need to put effort into understanding. There is plenty wrong with me. I am certainly not as intelligent as you, nor do I claim to be. Not everyone wants to be or can be a biologist...and if everyone were a biologist...who would bring you your pizza? If you want the stupid, ignorant, filthy pizza delivery boy to come over to your side...you have got to be able to communicate with him.

There seems to be only one purpose to writing papers that way. Keep the information as closed as possible, like translating the bible from Latin to English....so the common man could read for himself. You can't trust some people. We all have an agenda. http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/10/03/228859954/some-online-journals-will-publish-fake-science-for-a-fee

SL
 

River Jordan

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2014
1,856
50
48
ChristianJuggarnaut said:
Let's hear your scientific argument on abiogenesis complete with exactly how a finger is made.
The origin of the first life on earth remains a mystery. There are some decent hypotheses with a variety of experimental results. As far as "how the finger is made", in basic terms it's controlled by hox genes.

Be sure to include how your findings are observable and repeatable.
All the lab results are observable and repeatable, as is the role of hox genes in finger development.

Secondhand Lion said:
One last time, I know it has its own jargon. I know I need to put effort into understanding. There is plenty wrong with me. I am certainly not as intelligent as you, nor do I claim to be.
I wouldn't presume anything about our relative intelligence levels. You seem pretty bright to me.

If you want the stupid, ignorant, filthy pizza delivery boy to come over to your side...you have got to be able to communicate with him.
But the first step has to be the pizza boy being open to what's being said, and being willing to listen and learn. If he comes into the conversation already convinced that what you're trying to say is apostasy, it's probably not going to go well no matter how you approach it.

There seems to be only one purpose to writing papers that way. Keep the information as closed as possible, like translating the bible from Latin to English....so the common man could read for himself. You can't trust some people. We all have an agenda. http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/10/03/228859954/some-online-journals-will-publish-fake-science-for-a-fee
Seriously? You're arguing that the reason molecular geneticists have their own jargon is to deliberately exclude laypeople from their work? That's disappointing.
 

Secondhand Lion

New Member
Jan 30, 2012
309
22
0
People's Republic of Maryland
River Jordan said:
Seriously? You're arguing that the reason molecular geneticists have their own jargon is to deliberately exclude laypeople from their work? That's disappointing.
No, but I did state that in a way that would make somebody think that (told ya you was more smarter). My bad. My point with the link is that it just isn't quite as unreasonable as we are led to believe that everything could be misrepresented. That guy was semi-trying to get caught. I am not trying to say every article is a lie or that peer review never works. But is it completely insane to be very cautious with what we are told? I just do not think so.

SL
 

ChristianJuggarnaut

New Member
Feb 20, 2012
433
29
0
River states that the origin of life is a mystery but they are making progress in the lab "pretending they can manipulate the data to assume they can replicate earth's early environment" (quoted part is mine).

Is it wrong of me to question a Christian who thinks the origin of life is a mystery? Oh well.

River then explains that hox genes make fingers and you can repeat this in a lab. Now, does genetic material require life? Yes. So then, making a finger is also still a mystery.

Apparently this is no problem for scientists in a lab.
 

River Jordan

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2014
1,856
50
48
Secondhand Lion said:
No, but I did state that in a way that would make somebody think that (told ya you was more smarter). My bad. My point with the link is that it just isn't quite as unreasonable as we are led to believe that everything could be misrepresented. That guy was semi-trying to get caught. I am not trying to say every article is a lie or that peer review never works. But is it completely insane to be very cautious with what we are told? I just do not think so.
Of course, but what does that have to do with what I've posted? I've kinda lost where you're going here.
ChristianJuggarnaut said:
River states that the origin of life is a mystery but they are making progress in the lab
Because that's reality.

"pretending they can manipulate the data to assume they can replicate earth's early environment" (quoted part is mine).
So can you cite a relevant paper that you've read and point out exactly what errors you spotted?

Is it wrong of me to question a Christian who thinks the origin of life is a mystery? Oh well.
I'm speaking about exobiology. Just as God uses tectonics and volanism to make mountains, He can use chemistry to make life.

River then explains that hox genes make fingers and you can repeat this in a lab. Now, does genetic material require life? Yes. So then, making a finger is also still a mystery.
The fact that you think this is at all a valid argument against evolutionary biology speaks for itself.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
River states that the origin of life is a mystery but they are making progress in the lab "pretending they can manipulate the data to assume they can replicate earth's early environment" (quoted part is mine).

Is it wrong of me to question a Christian who thinks the origin of life is a mystery? Oh well.

River then explains that hox genes make fingers and you can repeat this in a lab. Now, does genetic material require life? Yes. So then, making a finger is also still a mystery.

Apparently this is no problem for scientists in a lab.
I suffer from no delusion that River is a Christian.
 

UppsalaDragby

New Member
Feb 6, 2012
543
40
0
River Jordan said:
Other people seem to understand, so I don't know why you're struggling to.
What do I care what "other people" understand? I asked YOU the question and I expect YOU to be honest and answer it, but obviously you don't have an answer.

What exactly is the creationist model.
Are you "struggling" with this or are you just asking the question pretending that you don't know. The creationist model, as far as this discussion is concerned, is based on the Biblical account which clearly describes life being created as differnt kinds during the time period of six days.

Can you cite some textbooks saying that "life comes from non-life is a scientific fact"?
I NEVER said that my comment was based on the existence of that specific quote. I base it on memories of being taught in school and in the media that life originated in the sea, or a pond and I think most honest people here recognize that that kind of thing has been going on for decades without the slightest protests from scientists that abiogenesis is not a fact. But sure, we can PRETEND that the scientific community does not assume abiogenesis, if you like!
 

Secondhand Lion

New Member
Jan 30, 2012
309
22
0
People's Republic of Maryland
This Vale Of Tears said:
I suffer from no delusion that River is a Christian.
I have seen comments like this a number of times and I have avoided commenting on them because it could deviate from the main topic, if it does, maybe we could start a new thread on this subject.

River and I do not seem to agree on much of this topic, but, for the most part, have been able to have a civil discourse on the topic. She has gotten frustrated with me, and I have gotten frustrated with her, but never has she resorted to questioning my salvation nor I her. It is simply not needed.

While I can appreciate "standing in doubt" of someone (Galatians 4:20), I do not see how it serves a purpose to bash them over the head with it continuously. Permit me to run the scenario out. Let us assume, for the time being, that the viewpoints she has were to somehow mean that she was not saved. She believes she is. Salvation is an issue between her and God....just as it is between all of us and God. Let's even assume that somehow a man could know the heart of another man (I am making impossible assumptions). What does human nature tell us? When you are attacked...does it make you a.) say "hey thanks a lot" or b.)take a defensive posture and "dig in"? If we then make her "dig in" to a position that she can not be saved from (again assuming she is not saved)...who bears responsibility?

To constantly hit someone with the "You aren't saved because you hold a different position than me" argument is then not only counterproductive, but could also be very dangerous ground to be walking on.

God has us all at different stages of our walk (sanctification) with Him. To assume someone should be at the same stage as us (whoever is right)...is not only presumptive but also reeks of arrogance. "Thank God I am not like that sinner". We maybe should all try to remember who we were before coming to Christ, and not only that, but some of the viewpoints we had even after we came that He has corrected in us. Christ alone is worthy and alone can change a heart, are you willing for it to be yours? Maybe not about this topic...but any topic?

SL
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Good words, second hand lion.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
I have seen comments like this a number of times and I have avoided commenting on them because it could deviate from the main topic, if it does, maybe we could start a new thread on this subject.

River and I do not seem to agree on much of this topic, but, for the most part, have been able to have a civil discourse on the topic. She has gotten frustrated with me, and I have gotten frustrated with her, but never has she resorted to questioning my salvation nor I her. It is simply not needed.

While I can appreciate "standing in doubt" of someone (Galatians 4:20), I do not see how it serves a purpose to bash them over the head with it continuously. Permit me to run the scenario out. Let us assume, for the time being, that the viewpoints she has were to somehow mean that she was not saved. She believes she is. Salvation is an issue between her and God....just as it is between all of us and God. Let's even assume that somehow a man could know the heart of another man (I am making impossible assumptions). What does human nature tell us? When you are attacked...does it make you a.) say "hey thanks a lot" or b.)take a defensive posture and "dig in"? If we then make her "dig in" to a position that she can not be saved from (again assuming she is not saved)...who bears responsibility?

To constantly hit someone with the "You aren't saved because you hold a different position than me" argument is then not only counterproductive, but could also be very dangerous ground to be walking on.

God has us all at different stages of our walk (sanctification) with Him. To assume someone should be at the same stage as us (whoever is right)...is not only presumptive but also reeks of arrogance. "Thank God I am not like that sinner". We maybe should all try to remember who we were before coming to Christ, and not only that, but some of the viewpoints we had even after we came that He has corrected in us. Christ alone is worthy and alone can change a heart, are you willing for it to be yours? Maybe not about this topic...but any topic?

SL
The mistake you're making is a common one. I don't comment on anyone's salvation because that's ultimately in the hands of God. But when it comes to being Christian, there has to be lines drawn that define who we are and more importantly what doesn't fall within the definition of Christianity. The word loses its meaning when it can be defined however people want. Though Christians disagree on certain details of creation, we all believe that God created the heavens and the earth, the plants and animals according to kind, and then as a crowning achievement, man in His own image. All of this is a glaring contradiction to the claims of evolution that says we evolved from crap flinging apes.

So no, I don't accept at face value anyone's claim to be Christian when their beliefs give lie to that claim, nor am I obligated to. And more to the point, somebody needs to speak up for Christianity as a defined term with discernible boundaries. And if I'm the lone voice in the wilderness doing it because everyone else is too frightened, then so be it. Regarding ultimate salvation, that's in God's hands. I hope that God is merciful to me and I hope God is merciful to everyone and I believe that on that day, we will be amazed anew at just how amazing grace is. But in the mean time, Christianity is some things and isn't others and I will be eternally AND UNAPOLOGETICALLY vigilant in fighting all efforts to water down what it means to be Christian.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
i thought being a Christian was following Christ, Vale........since when does fighting for a literal interpretation become part of the definition?
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
aspen said:
i thought being a Christian was following Christ, Vale........since when does fighting for a literal interpretation become part of the definition?
You're intentionally skewing the question for a desired response. Though some take the text of Genesis more literally than others, every CHRISTIAN believes the general principles I laid out. The Catechism of the Catholic Church even details the story of Creation with those essential elements which means you're not only out of the definition of Christianity, you can't even be properly defined as a Catholic by means of your dissent to the Magisterium; not any more so than Nancy Pelosi.

If you want to claim to be a Christian while waging war against the tenants of Christianity, you're free to do so. It doesn't mean I have to believe you.
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are adding to the requirements of Christianity, Vale. And you are deciding who is and who isnt a Christian based on that criteria. I happen to believe that the entire Bible is inspired by God, but if I did not, while still believing that Jesus is the Son of God, part of the Trinity, and died for my sins - i would still be a Christian. Finally, i believe the creation account contains truth about the human condition, but like all visions or revelations - it is not meant to be taken literally. Despite your desperate desire to make the Catholic Church as conservative as possible - i am perfectly at home in my Church.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
You are adding to the requirements of Christianity, Vale. And you are deciding who is and who isnt a Christian based on that criteria. I happen to believe that the entire Bible is inspired by God, but if I did not, while still believing that Jesus is the Son of God, part of the Trinity, and died for my sins - i would still be a Christian. Finally, i believe the creation account contains truth about the human condition, but like all visions or revelations - it is not meant to be taken literally. Despite your desperate desire to make the Catholic Church as conservative as possible - i am perfectly at home in my Church.
Let me ask you something, Aspen. Did the story of the Great Flood actually occur, or was it an allegorical work of fiction meant to communicate a moral lesson?
 

aspen

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few
Apr 25, 2012
14,111
4,778
113
52
West Coast
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have written several posts about the flood already so i will just give you a quick response. i believe the message of the flood story is that God is faithful and all powerful. Based on physical evidence and what we know about animal husbandry and the fact that the narrative appears in different forms and different cultures with different details, it appears to be a story rather than a literal event. If i am wrong about that, God with correct me someday. However, there is currently no physical evidence for a worldwide flood.
 

This Vale Of Tears

Indian Papist
Jun 13, 2013
1,346
61
0
Idaho
I have written several posts about the flood already so i will just give you a quick response. i believe the message of the flood story is that God is faithful and all powerful. Based on physical evidence and what we know about animal husbandry and the fact that the narrative appears in different forms and different cultures with different details, it appears to be a story rather than a literal event. If i am wrong about that, God with correct me someday. However, there is currently no physical evidence for a worldwide flood.
Thank you for your candor. So now that we've established that the Bible is open to interpretation and we can develop arbitrary criteria for deciding what actually happened and what's just a load of horse manure, where do you propose we draw the line? And what if my line is different than yours? In spite of St. Peter referring to the Great Flood as a literal event (1Peter 3:20), your criteria says that our first Pope was full of it too. So what spares the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ from consignment to the collection of myth and lore?

I get that you're unfamiliar with scripture. You probably don't even know what I'm talking about when I say that Abel, son of Adam, was mentioned by Jesus as a literal, historical figure whose death would be avenged, not a character in a clever saga. So you can question the Creation account, Adam and Eve's original sin and the fall of man, and anything else you want to based on your interpretation of physical evidence lo these 7000 years later. I choose not to. I don't pay lip service to the Bible being inspired by God as you do, I actually believe it.

And I don't see any way you and I can come to an agreement on this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KingJ

Secondhand Lion

New Member
Jan 30, 2012
309
22
0
People's Republic of Maryland
This Vale Of Tears said:
The mistake you're making is a common one. I don't comment on anyone's salvation because that's ultimately in the hands of God. But when it comes to being Christian, there has to be lines drawn that define who we are and more importantly what doesn't fall within the definition of Christianity. The word loses its meaning when it can be defined however people want. Though Christians disagree on certain details of creation, we all believe that God created the heavens and the earth, the plants and animals according to kind, and then as a crowning achievement, man in His own image. All of this is a glaring contradiction to the claims of evolution that says we evolved from crap flinging apes.

So no, I don't accept at face value anyone's claim to be Christian when their beliefs give lie to that claim, nor am I obligated to. And more to the point, somebody needs to speak up for Christianity as a defined term with discernible boundaries. And if I'm the lone voice in the wilderness doing it because everyone else is too frightened, then so be it. Regarding ultimate salvation, that's in God's hands. I hope that God is merciful to me and I hope God is merciful to everyone and I believe that on that day, we will be amazed anew at just how amazing grace is. But in the mean time, Christianity is some things and isn't others and I will be eternally AND UNAPOLOGETICALLY vigilant in fighting all efforts to water down what it means to be Christian.
Hello Vale,

I was not trying to single you out, sorry if I gave that impression. I agree with most of your post, but many have come before us who have had questions about origins. I do not believe Scofield was right in believing in the gap theory...however....I am unwilling to say he was not a Christian. Are you?

Almost everyone here would be able to tell you that I am a "biblical literalist" and agree with your creation ideas. I am not willing to go that extra step with anyone who says they can not possibly be a christian because of it. I disagree with Aspen on a number of issues, but she has a different set of gifts than I do...she has God's attributes of grace and mercy built deep inside her. Others on here have a burden for God's judgement deep inside. All of us see things slightly different because God needs all to give the whole story. If we only focused on His mercy...liberty would turn to license. If we only focused on His Judgement...He would seem so overbearing no one would ever come to Him. The reality is....He has both of those attributes and many more. It is so hard for the "mercy guy" and "judgement guy" to see eye to eye because of the gifts God has given to each. So, when I run into one of Aspen's posts that just seem "ridiculous" to me...I stop to remember...maybe she is more in tune with an attribute of God than I am....and that is okay...I have my own gifts I try to not mess up.

River...maybe...just maybe...is working through something God has in mind for her....to reach people we never could...we are just part of her process.

SL

Ps. Aspen...I am not trying to "hammer" you in anyway. Just using that example.