David Lamb
Well-Known Member
But the context of that verse is not talking to Gentiles or evolutionists, but to His disciples. This thread, I thought, is about evolutionist Gentiles.
Scripture says "in His Name, the Gentiles will trust" - what will 'Evolutionist Gentiles' trust in Jesus?
- Thread starter Gottservant
- Start date
-
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!
Jesus says He holds us to account for "every idle word" we may speak, is that in love or in truth or both? Evolutionists speak, therefore they can be held to account - do you see this connection? The connection is, if they speak, they are witnesses - hence my quoting Jesus that witness to Him are people who have spoken from the beginning (certainly Evolutionists think they are speaking from the beginning).
@David Lamb see this also?
The primary charge against non Christians is found in John3:18 that they have not believed in Jesus.
It has got to the point (with Evolution) that I acknowledge that every species has a degree of change which they are able to work out (not across species, or between them, just as they were - Jacob utilized this in the OT). But I have also discerned that this "specieousness" can become 'egregious'. That's basically where the Evolutionist stands: do they know what faith they will see in future generations, or not?
God on the other hand, is able to work with our adaptations and help us. God is able to tell us of pressures to come, to give us a baseline for our adaptations and to stabilize adaptations that we are finding difficult. God completes us, in other words - even if the truth about Evolution is true for some creatures.
We don't need to believe that our Salvation is in jeopardy, if we make the wrong choice!
God on the other hand, is able to work with our adaptations and help us. God is able to tell us of pressures to come, to give us a baseline for our adaptations and to stabilize adaptations that we are finding difficult. God completes us, in other words - even if the truth about Evolution is true for some creatures.
We don't need to believe that our Salvation is in jeopardy, if we make the wrong choice!
I came across a Christian proverb, which might shed some light on the relationship to Evolution:
What inspires me about this goes back to Jesus who said "don't let people wear you out - remember the foolish and wise virgins, only the wise kept their oil" (paraphrase). I think we need to say to Evolutionists "you can have all the answers you want, but don't try to take my answers from me, go and get your own"; if we stand our ground, ultimately what we understand will be the most believed.
If all we do, is replace worn welcome mats, people will think "it doesn't matter what makes it dirty, the welcome mat will always forgive me"
In other words, the impression that Evolution makes (the welcome to change) is also the most in need of replacement, because it is worn by people who only treat it like it is there to be used and nothing else.
What inspires me about this goes back to Jesus who said "don't let people wear you out - remember the foolish and wise virgins, only the wise kept their oil" (paraphrase). I think we need to say to Evolutionists "you can have all the answers you want, but don't try to take my answers from me, go and get your own"; if we stand our ground, ultimately what we understand will be the most believed.
If all we do, is replace worn welcome mats, people will think "it doesn't matter what makes it dirty, the welcome mat will always forgive me"
There is something you can identify as common to both Creation and Evolution: neither wants to be gossiped about.
Gossip about Evolution, would be things like "Darwin confessed on his deathbed". Gossip about Creation would be "who was Cain's wife?"
You can see that neither example really helps bring clarity to understanding.
Gossip about Evolution, would be things like "Darwin confessed on his deathbed". Gossip about Creation would be "who was Cain's wife?"
You can see that neither example really helps bring clarity to understanding.
There is no truth to this story. See
Did Charles Darwin recant?
Creation or evolution? It makes a big difference! Over 10,000 trustworthy articles. Evidence for biblical creation.
Did Charles Darwin Renounce His Theory of Evolution on His Deathbed?
"I was a young man with uninformed ideas," he supposedly said.
www.snopes.com
As God only created Adam and Eve, then their children would have to marry their siblings.
I've learned this: if you are able to placate the Devil, the King will not ignore your word.
In other words, "words" have utility; and those in power weigh that utility against their power to rule.
If the Devil causes trouble and you stop him, it doesn't matter how well the Devil knows "Evolution", the King is going to favour (and reward?) you.
Something to think about, when you weigh up what about "Evolution" is true and what not.
In other words, "words" have utility; and those in power weigh that utility against their power to rule.
If the Devil causes trouble and you stop him, it doesn't matter how well the Devil knows "Evolution", the King is going to favour (and reward?) you.
Something to think about, when you weigh up what about "Evolution" is true and what not.
No concept is designed to last forever. Perhaps Evolutionists will begin to trust, that Jesus and His Word, give their concept of "Evolution" the longest possible life?
If I fight the idea of going even one mile with someone else - who expects me to -, I may discover I am less adaptable, than someone who is always willing to go the extra mile? Possible?
It's like saying "there is a possibility of something to drink", for which someone else can then say "and I am willing to remind you of it" - if you don't evolve a concept of drinking water, there is nothing to remind you of, but if you do then reminding you of it (that concept) also has utility - this is "intermediary evolution".
If I fight the idea of going even one mile with someone else - who expects me to -, I may discover I am less adaptable, than someone who is always willing to go the extra mile? Possible?
It's like saying "there is a possibility of something to drink", for which someone else can then say "and I am willing to remind you of it" - if you don't evolve a concept of drinking water, there is nothing to remind you of, but if you do then reminding you of it (that concept) also has utility - this is "intermediary evolution".
I suppose a different point of view, is that "a quicker fade from memory, is advantageous, if the difference [of the concept] is moot [of no value]"
In other words, if Evolution doesn't remind you of scripture, then from a scriptural point of view, the faster you can forget it: the better.
Maybe that's why Jesus spoke of "[remembering] Lot's wife"? Evolution is being used to justify 'turning back to the lie', but in the process has nothing to do with seeking a relationship with God, into the future [leaving "salt" but nothing to taste it with].
"Have salt in yourselves and peace with one another" (Mark 9:50), maybe what we need to do is make sure we have peace with one another, now that we have the pillar of salt that is 'Evolution'?
In other words, if Evolution doesn't remind you of scripture, then from a scriptural point of view, the faster you can forget it: the better.
Maybe that's why Jesus spoke of "[remembering] Lot's wife"? Evolution is being used to justify 'turning back to the lie', but in the process has nothing to do with seeking a relationship with God, into the future [leaving "salt" but nothing to taste it with].
"Have salt in yourselves and peace with one another" (Mark 9:50), maybe what we need to do is make sure we have peace with one another, now that we have the pillar of salt that is 'Evolution'?
I think the obstacle or plank if you will, in the Evolutionist's eye, is the idea that first comes the mutation, then comes the power. Scripture tells us, "if the master had known when the thief would break in, he would have watched and not let it happen" (from memory, the Gospels). You aren't just lucky, at some point - that's not how it works: if the Devil gets in, he is ready to destroy everything.
Somehow we need to communicate this wisdom, to Evolutionists - that way, when they consider their theory they won't say "how lucky do I need to be?" but "how far short of the standard was I going to be, without God's help?". Can you see the difference?
Somehow we need to communicate this wisdom, to Evolutionists - that way, when they consider their theory they won't say "how lucky do I need to be?" but "how far short of the standard was I going to be, without God's help?". Can you see the difference?
I think there is something to be said for the opportunity-to-believe something, in your mind. It's the idea that the mind is capable of a "cognitive load", that influences how it perceives things associated with what is on the mind. When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
So when you have Evolution, what progression seems to most avail itself to your mind? The idea that you just see connections between species, is disingenuous - not only do you not "nail" anything with those connections, how you "nail" them doesn't affect the success of the outcome. Nobody says "well, I built a tower, not bad for slime that emerged from the ocean", "I particularly like how the tower hung together, the way I did when I was slime - I remember that!" Like people aren't getting memories of past lives as slime, are they?
I'm not saying this in an effort to ditch Evolution, obviously predation is part of a working eco-system and pressure to micro-evolve keeps species alive far longer - maybe that's it: pressure to micro-evolve (do mates like green or red feathers? for example), is distinct from reappraising macro-orders of attenuation (the way hunting packs sort out who is strongest and fastest? for example)? This is sort of pan-specieist theory, rather than Evolutional mutational delirium?
Naturally things come back to the word of God nicely, when categories are respected meaningfully. "Heaven does not come by observation" as Jesus said (from memory) "For the kingdom of God is near to you, even within you", it is important not to covet stronger and stronger standing in terms of species description, but to be able to reflect on what has worked through the species to the Glory of God. There is more that could be said in terms of the specific death of a species, the way Christ was ready to die on the Cross, but I will save that here!
So when you have Evolution, what progression seems to most avail itself to your mind? The idea that you just see connections between species, is disingenuous - not only do you not "nail" anything with those connections, how you "nail" them doesn't affect the success of the outcome. Nobody says "well, I built a tower, not bad for slime that emerged from the ocean", "I particularly like how the tower hung together, the way I did when I was slime - I remember that!" Like people aren't getting memories of past lives as slime, are they?
I'm not saying this in an effort to ditch Evolution, obviously predation is part of a working eco-system and pressure to micro-evolve keeps species alive far longer - maybe that's it: pressure to micro-evolve (do mates like green or red feathers? for example), is distinct from reappraising macro-orders of attenuation (the way hunting packs sort out who is strongest and fastest? for example)? This is sort of pan-specieist theory, rather than Evolutional mutational delirium?
Naturally things come back to the word of God nicely, when categories are respected meaningfully. "Heaven does not come by observation" as Jesus said (from memory) "For the kingdom of God is near to you, even within you", it is important not to covet stronger and stronger standing in terms of species description, but to be able to reflect on what has worked through the species to the Glory of God. There is more that could be said in terms of the specific death of a species, the way Christ was ready to die on the Cross, but I will save that here!
I came across this little beauty, in my searching:
Faith in Jesus ensures there is a link, between one child and an another, to their parents - which is crucial, to the whole question of which families flourish and which do not.
In other words, there is a logic to how species mate, that is not given in strict terms of pressure. The more black and the more white a couple may be, the more their children will be versed in the difference between these two opposites. The more "allowing", the more adaptible, we may imagine.
Faith in Jesus ensures there is a link, between one child and an another, to their parents - which is crucial, to the whole question of which families flourish and which do not.
There is a choice, as to the pressure, whether it is macro or micro; there is a choice, as to the cultivation of that choice, whether more aggressive or aiming further; there is a choice as to how that cultivation is shared and preserved, whether it is fought or fired up. None of these things has God denied the creature of any nation, how they want to progress.
It is the Devil's lie, that you need to validate your progress with him or be overlooked for the greater difference - the Devil is trying to separate his enemies, from God and one another. As Christians, we should be making people aware of how the Devil is trying to entice those who would otherwise stand and defend their choice and the choices of those with them (to some degree).
There is no righteousness that God has denied, to those who believe in Christ Jesus!
It is the Devil's lie, that you need to validate your progress with him or be overlooked for the greater difference - the Devil is trying to separate his enemies, from God and one another. As Christians, we should be making people aware of how the Devil is trying to entice those who would otherwise stand and defend their choice and the choices of those with them (to some degree).
There is no righteousness that God has denied, to those who believe in Christ Jesus!
I'm not sure if this concept will help you the way it helped me: but I had this idea, that is like immunisation. Immunisation works by exposing the immune system to a virus, that it then resists. It works because the exposure is not enough to be dangerous, but the resistance is able to develop a strong response to the virus, which gives the immune system a chance to overcome it. I think this applies to Evolution too.
I think, when it comes to adaptation, a parent of a child is able to expose the child to a limited shock, which the child then develops a response to, that helps it overcome the threat associated with that shock. This can be done in the cell, in the womb or as a baby - at each stage, the shock is mitigated by the parents protection and guidance, and the child is able to develop a robust response.
It might be starvation, which the child then learns to hunt for; or it might be cold, which the child learns to hibernate for; or it might be being hunted, which the child learns to avoid dangerous areas by. These are just examples; the reason they work, is because they rely on the shock germinating a response, through design. It is the design that links starvation with hunting; the design that links cold with hibernation; the design that links being hunted with finding safety.
The principle is that 'partial' exposure to evolution, with the defense of the pack, grounds change in what helps the species. The idea that Evolution has to get everything right, before it assumes total control is not just wrong, its misleading (I would argue that for our species especially, it is socially misleading). This exposure is what I would call "a strategy for effective micro-evolution".
I wonder what you thoughts are?
I think, when it comes to adaptation, a parent of a child is able to expose the child to a limited shock, which the child then develops a response to, that helps it overcome the threat associated with that shock. This can be done in the cell, in the womb or as a baby - at each stage, the shock is mitigated by the parents protection and guidance, and the child is able to develop a robust response.
It might be starvation, which the child then learns to hunt for; or it might be cold, which the child learns to hibernate for; or it might be being hunted, which the child learns to avoid dangerous areas by. These are just examples; the reason they work, is because they rely on the shock germinating a response, through design. It is the design that links starvation with hunting; the design that links cold with hibernation; the design that links being hunted with finding safety.
The principle is that 'partial' exposure to evolution, with the defense of the pack, grounds change in what helps the species. The idea that Evolution has to get everything right, before it assumes total control is not just wrong, its misleading (I would argue that for our species especially, it is socially misleading). This exposure is what I would call "a strategy for effective micro-evolution".
I wonder what you thoughts are?
soberxp
Well-Known Member
Natural selection and survival of the fittest is one of the most plausible scientific explanations for the Jesus Christ.He evolved from a man to an archangel.
Interesting thought - I have not heard that before.
He evolved from a man to an archangel.
Wouldn't it make more sense to say "He developed power over Archangels"?
soberxp
Well-Known Member
soberxp
Well-Known Member
8:18
Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have.
Humans have used nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, so NASA discovered a huge celestial body that has stolen nuclear energy from the sun.
Take heed therefore how ye hear: for whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have.
Humans have used nuclear weapons and nuclear energy, so NASA discovered a huge celestial body that has stolen nuclear energy from the sun.
I think I've got it! It's actually very simple: you have adaptations and you have mutations. Adaptations are good and you want pressure to be applied in a way that improves your adaptations. Mutations are bad, you want pressure away from mutations, to limit them.
Jesus is the guarantee that the pressures won't go too far one way and then the other.
Jesus' message doesn't change, Evolutionists can trust that!
Jesus is the guarantee that the pressures won't go too far one way and then the other.
Jesus' message doesn't change, Evolutionists can trust that!
