Natural Theology?

[StanJ]

Why do you have to say crap like that? What do you think that adds to the conversation?

about as much as your condescension did in post #5.

It also says that God's "invisible qualities" are evident in His creation. Therefore it stands to reason thatwe can learn about these qualities by studying creation.

Paul states what God's invisible qualities are; God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature

Really? Where in scripture does it talk about viruses, bacterial infections, and how to treat them? Well yeah, and one of those assumptions is "I already know all I need to know about creation and I can't be wrong".

the Bible is not a medical book it's a historical and accurate account of God and what he did. it also doesn't teach us things like English and spelling now the rest of that stuff is so I really don't see your point. I know exactly what the Bible tells me about creation and I believe it. You obviously don't so I'm not even sure why you're discussing this because you don't believe what the Bible says.

 

[TravisT]

What exactly does the Bible says Stan? I want to make sure I agree with your exegesis before I too become unchristian in your eyes.

 

[StanJ]

Actually, we don't need to know God personally to be able to study Him. We know thatbecause God has told us so in Romans 1:20 (ESV),

I'm pretty sure we do otherwise we would have no desire to study him. What Paul is saying is that nature clearly indicates an intelligent designer. Despite that being clear these evil men didn't want to have anything to do with pursuing that knowledge because they were totally selfish and self-centered.

Therefore, God can say all nonbelievers are 'without excuse' because they know of God's existence. What have they done with that knowledge?

That's the whole point, they haven't done anything with it. What this knowledge can bring is that it is intuitive to the human Spirit to know that nature is indeed a creation and that there is an intelligence behind the creation. That doesn't mean that they're drawn to God as Jesus said we must be, but just that they can see it. Whether they pursue that or not is another matter altogether.

 

[StanJ]

StanJ, I do not think that believing that God can use evolution for his Glory makes someone turn to the dark side.

I disagree, in the way it is presented by Darwin and those who support it today, it indeed is.

 

[StanJ]

What exactly does the Bible says Stan? I want to make sure I agree with your exegesis before I too become unchristian in your eyes.

That is kind of a broad question. What exactly are you looking for? Do you believe in the fact that the Bible is God-breathed/inspired and that what it reveals is absolute truth?

 

[TravisT]

That is kind of a broad question. What exactly are you looking for? Do you believe in the fact that the Bible is God-breathed/inspired and that what it reveals is absolute truth?

Amen yes and yes

My point is when evolution was first brought up you jumped to the conclusion that River Jordan had turned to the dark side. That is not defending the faith nor is it christ like. Imagine a person searching for Christ and the Holy Spirit is moving Thier heart towards God. They are being taught in school evolution is science and they can see some effect of it in nature. So they search Google for a Christian answer to their struggle and your post pops up calling someone who believes in evolution ungodly. In an instant you could have negated the Spirits work. That's my point. I too do not belive Darwin's theory is right but I do see signs of some form of evolution.

 

[OzSpen]

That's the whole point, they haven't done anything with it. What this knowledge can bring is that it is intuitive to the human Spirit to know that nature is indeed a creation and that there is an intelligence behind the creation. That doesn't mean that they're drawn to God as Jesus said we must be, but just that they can see it. Whether they pursue that or not is another matter altogether.

There's a fair bit of your own invention/imagination here, Stan, about Romans 1:18ff (ESV). 'Intuitive to the human Spirit' and you dare to spell it with a capital 'S'. Come on, Stan!! :wub:

 

[TravisT]

OzSpen

I had to quickly edit my last post because I forgot to capitalize Holy Spirit.

 

[OzSpen]

That is kind of a broad question. What exactly are you looking for? Do you believe in the fact that the Bible is God-breathed/inspired and that what it reveals is absolute truth?

Stan,

Is that absolute truth according to your definition? All of Scripture, that is from a foreign culture to us in the West, needs to be interpreted. Are we going to interpret the days of Genesis as St Augustine, one of the eminent early leaders of the church, did?

St Augustine wrote in City of God, 'For in these days the morning and evening are counted, until, on the sixth day, all things which God then made were finished, and on the seventh the rest of God was mysteriously and sublimely signalized. What kind of days these were it is extremely difficult, or perhaps impossible for us to conceive, and how much more to say!' (City of God, Bk 11, ch 6).

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

OzSpen

I had to quickly edit my last post because I forgot to capitalize Holy Spirit.

I wasn't addressing your issue but the capitalisation of the 'S' of the human spirit is an unusual move. Proper nouns are capitalised, and the 'spirit' of a human spirit is not a proper noun.

Oz

 

[StanJ]

Amen yes and yes
My point is when evolution was first brought up you jumped to the conclusion that River Jordan had turned to the dark side. That is not defending the faith nor is it christ like. Imagine a person searching for Christ and the Holy Spirit is moving Thier heart towards God. They are being taught in school evolution is science and they can see some effect of it in nature. So they search Google for a Christian answer to their struggle and your post pops up calling someone who believes in evolution ungodly. In an instant you could have negated the Spirits work. That's my point. I too do not belive Darwin's theory is right but I do see signs of some form of evolution.

I've had many discussions with RJ and decided a while ago to put her/him on my ignore list. Just recently I took a few people off my ignore list with the intent of being more patient. Of course when I read her/his initial contribution here, it just kind of enforced what I already knew. I didn't call her on Godly I said she's gone to the dark side. It's a common colloquialism. Well at least for us Star Wars fans.

 

[StanJ]

Evolution is both a theory and a fact. It's a fact because we see populations evolve. The theory of evolution provides an explanation for how it happens. It's just like the germ theory of disease. It's a fact that germs cause disease because we see them do it. Germ theory provides an explanation for how that happens.

Louis Pasteur confirmed the theory back in the 19th century. He was actually there and so were the germs. Evolution can't be proven because nobody can go back that far. Big difference. It's like comparing apples to oranges. My Bible says the Earth was created in 6 days, and those days in the Hebrew are literally 24 hour / lunar days, just as we have today. The theory of evolution has never been confirmed despite people claiming that it is not really a theory but fact. Flat earthers claim the same thing as do the conspiracy nut jobs who claim man never landed on the moon, and a good deal of them are Christians or at least purport to be so. In any event this topic is not about Evolution but about natural theology by what we can see of God in his creation. Let's try to stay on track.

 

[StanJ]

There's a fair bit of your own invention/imagination here, Stan, about Romans 1:18ff (ESV). 'Intuitive to the human Spirit' and you dare to spell it with a capital 'S'. Come on, Stan!!

Well that's what I see when I read Romans 1 and I didn't spell spirit with a capital S, Google Voice did. I don't always proofread everything I type or I should say everything it types.

 

[River Jordan]

about as much as your condescension did in post #5.

So when I point out inconsistencies I'm being "condescending".....what do we call it when you do it? <_<

Paul states what God's invisible qualities are; God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature

And by studying His creation we find that His eternal power includes creating populations that evolve.

the Bible is not a medical book it's a historical and accurate account of God and what he did.

You said, "His word tells us all we need to know about his creation". Are bacteria and viruses part of His creation?

it also doesn't teach us things like English and spelling now the rest of that stuff is so I really don't see your point.

The point is, in a discussion about the idea of learning more about God by studying His creation, you tried to shoot the idea down by saying "His word tells us all we need to know about his creation". That raises an obvious issue, i.e., that things like bacteria and viruses are part of His creation but aren't mentioned in His word, which implies that you are basically arguing that we had no business learning about those things. IOW, if the Bible tells us everything we need to know about His creation and bacteria and viruses aren't mentioned in the Bible, then the existence and nature of bacteria and viruses are in the category of "things we don't need to know".

I know exactly what the Bible tells me about creation and I believe it. You obviously don't so I'm not even sure why you're discussing this because you don't believe what the Bible says.

Yes, yes....we all know that anyone who reads scripture differently than StanJ simply "doesn't believe what the Bible says", because StanJ is the absolute and infallible arbiter of the proper way to read scripture.

 

[River Jordan]

Louis Pasteur confirmed the theory back in the 19th century. He was actually there and so were the germs.

Again you misunderstand how science works. That germs cause disease is a fact because we see it happen. Germ Theory is an explanation for how that happens.

Evolution can't be proven because nobody can go back that far. Big difference.

Um....we see populations evolving pretty much every single day.

My Bible says the Earth was created in 6 days, and those days in the Hebrew are literally 24 hour / lunar days, just as we have today.

How could the first few days have been lunar days when neither the sun nor moon had been created yet?

The theory of evolution has never been confirmed despite people claiming that it is not really a theory but fact.

Got news for ya' Stan.....you just saying that does not make it true. Anyone can go into a discussion board and say stuff.....cats are really dogs, the earth is really flat, whatever....but it doesn't mean a thing.

Flat earthers claim the same thing as do the conspiracy nut jobs who claim man never landed on the moon, and a good deal of them are Christians or at least purport to be so.

Exactly. Just like you, those people apparently think just saying something makes it true.

In any event this topic is not about Evolution but about natural theology by what we can see of God in his creation. Let's try to stay on track.

Those two topics aren't mutually exclusive. If we study God's creation and find that populations evolve, then we've learned that evolution is one of God's creations.

 

[TravisT]

River Jordan

Please limit the discussion to natural theology and not to backlash on StanJ. He at no point said he is infallible.

 

[StanJ]

So when I point out inconsistencies I'm being "condescending".....what do we call it when you do it?

Well if that is what you actually did and left the attitude out, you'd probably get better responses but as it's not what you do, you reap what you sow. I don't purport to be a saint.

And by studying His creation we find that His eternal power includes creating populations that evolve.

Let's just be clear that evolving and evolution are not the same thing. The God-given ability for people, animals and plants to adapt, is not quite the same thing either. There are plenty of examples in nature itself of organisms that have always been the same and have never undergone any type of evolution. I could name a ton, but that's not what this thread is about, despite your efforts to try to make it so.

Are bacteria and viruses part of His creation?

Indeed and we know all we need to know, in that he created them. I keep telling you the Bible is not a science book, but it is a historical account of how mankind came to be on this planet including its creator. It is also a biography of all those that came before us and a depiction of how God works with his people. It runs the gamut of Old Testament and New Testament. But it was finished over two thousand years ago and since that time mankind has learned a lot. The fact is that mankind would have learned a lot more had God not kicked Adam and Eve out of the garden. I don't live in a world of what if.

The point is, in a discussion about the idea of learning more about God by studying His creation, you tried to shoot the idea down by saying "His word tells us all we need to know about his creation". That raises an obvious issue, i.e., that things like bacteria and viruses are part of His creation but aren't mentioned in His word, which implies that you are basically arguing that we had no business learning about those things. IOW, if the Bible tells us everything we need to know about His creation and bacteria and viruses aren't mentioned in the Bible, then the existence and nature of bacteria and viruses are in the category of "things we don't need to know".

Many things are not mentioned in the Bible and again as I said they weren't meant to be. God gave mankind intelligence for a reason, then he left us to our own devices for a reason that did not preclude us continuing to walk in faith with him it just precluded that he didn't have to teach us much. Sadly man has made many bad decisions over the Millennia in terms of whether or not to walk with God and in terms of whether or not to believe what his written word tells us. The point of this thread is to learn more about God through his creation not deviate from it.
Learning more about God through his creation will never teach us things that the word of God doesn't about God. Learning things through our own intelligence and understanding apart from the word of God will indeed lead mankind away from God as it always has. Your rationale here was faulty and predictably so as you structure it to support your own point of view. Fortunately most of us are not swayed but your type of logic. In contacts my comments are quite reasonable and on topic where is you continue to try to take this thread off topic.

Yes, yes....we all know that anyone who reads scripture differently than StanJ simply "doesn't believe what the Bible says", because StanJ is the absolute and infallible arbiter of the proper way to read scripture.

Well if you really believe that then you wouldn't be here arguing the contrary. Facetious comments like this don't really score points with anybody and just show your inability to express yourself in an acceptable fashion. How long have you been a Christian RJ and how long have you studied the Bible? Now on the opposite side of that, how much studying have you done about Evolution and how long have you done it? Do you have a degree? I think your answers will tell us a great deal about where your priorities are.

 

[StanJ]

Again you misunderstand how science works. That germs cause disease is a fact because we see it happen. Germ Theory is an explanation for how that happens.

No, I have a pretty good idea how science works especially in the certain fields. Even within the scientific community as a whole there is not a whole lot of solidarity as to what a theory is and what a fact is. The sad thing is all the Believers within the scientific community are eventually castigated and/or ostracized for their beliefs in God or even their beliefs in an intelligent designer. The reason is because the leaders of most of those scientific communities are unbelievers and would rather think that everything in nature was happenstance and coincidence. They would rather believe in mother nature than believe In Father God.

How could the first few days have been lunar days when neither the sun nor moon had been created yet?

Again another example of what you don't accept or understand about Genesis 1 but in any event I've explained this count was time to not be afraid to go there to see my answers and stop trying to divert this thread.

Got news for ya' Stan.....you just saying that does not make it true. Anyone can go into a discussion board and say stuff.....cats are really dogs, the earth is really flat, whatever....but it doesn't mean a thing.

Well I'll keep that in mind when you post something.

Exactly. Just like you, those people apparently think just saying something makes it true.

Not like me because I back up my statement with Biblical facts, but yes anybody can do that, including you.

Those two topics aren't mutually exclusive. If we study God's creation and find that populations evolve, then we've learned that evolution is one of God's creations.

Never said they were, but in this conversation they are. This is not about populations, this is about natural theology. What don't you understand about natural theology as explained by the OP? People evolving is not the same as what evolution teaches. Now please stick to the topic.

 

[TravisT]

Absolute Truth
Truth that is defined as being absolute, possesses the following qualities.4

• Truth is discovered not invented
• Truth is transcultural: it can be conveyed across different cultures.
• Truth is unchanging: it can be conveyed across time.
• Beliefs cannot change a truth statement no matter how sincere one may be
• Truth is unaffected by the attitude of the one professing it
• All Truths are absolute
• Truth is knowable

In order for truth to be absolute and holding these qualities, it must be grounded in a source that is personal, unchanging, and sovereign over all creation.

Pat Zukeran

We can all agree on this. Correct?

 

[StanJ]

Correct and amen!