Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution

[Whateverist]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-d...76345.html

Zen shared this with me on fb and I thought it would be of interest here. This is an example of mature Christian thought I'm always extolling but only rarely encountering anywhere. So Frodo, I think, is already on board. Chad I guess might be too. How about you Drich, Cat, GC, Ronadee, Consilius? Do you see any problem with this line of reasoning?

As someone raised evangelical, I realize anti-evolutionists believe they are defending the Christian tradition. But as a seminary graduate now training to be a medical scientist, I can say that, in reality, they've abandoned it.

...

In theory, if not always in practice, past Christian theologians valued science out of the belief that God created the world scientists study. Augustine castigated those who made the Bible teach bad science, John Calvin argued that Genesis reflects a commoner's view of the physical world, and the Belgic confession likened scripture and nature to two books written by the same author.

These beliefs encouraged past Christians to accept the best science of their day, and these beliefs persisted even into the evangelical tradition. As Princeton Seminary's Charles Hodge, widely considered the father of modern evangelical theology, put it in 1859: "Nature is as truly a revelation of God as the Bible; and we only interpret the Word of God by the Word of God when we interpret the Bible by science."

In this analysis, Christians must accept sound science, not because they don't believe God created the world, but precisely because they do.

...

.. no amount of talk about "worldviews" and "presuppositions" can change a simple fact: creationism has failed to provide an alternative explanation for the vast majority of evidence explained by evolution.

[Gawdzilla]

Problem with that is that they would have to accept all of science because "god" built it into the Universe. If that is true then they have to consider that "god" waited 14,000,000,000 years before humans came along. So why the wait?

Bottom line, you can't reconcile Christianity and reality.

[fr0d0]

I don't know when the modern revolution started, but John H Walton's book certainly sealed it. I've always had the view that evolution is correct, but reconciling the biblical view as I misunderstood it wasn't perfect. I had trouble confronting what I thought then were literalists. I've learnt now that that isn't literalism at all, but mistranslation. Seriously misguided translation beautifully put out to grass by Walton's humble bombshell.

Atheists confronting the flawed interpretation waste their time on that dinosaur. Godzilla is right... you can't reconcile that Christianity and reality. In my opinion.

[Drich]

I've done two or three different threads on this already. My theory incorporates/assimilates evolution into the creation account. To where it becomes a non issue.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14190.ht...=Evolution

[Whateverist]

I've done two or three different threads on this already. My theory incorporates/assimilates evolution into the creation account. To where it becomes a non issue.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14190.ht...=Evolution

Drat, your link doesn't work for me.

I wonder what you think of the idea that the natural world as we find it is the best revelation of God's creation, so that whatever we can find out through science is part of the revelation?

[The Grand Nudger]

I've done two or three different threads on this already. My theory incorporates/assimilates evolution into the creation account. To where it becomes a non issue.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-14190.ht...=Evolution

No, they don't- and no it isn't. You've failed at science, then and now. This literalism of yours, btw, just one of those "minor" differences that Frodo et al don't like to talk about while they devalue said differences. The minor difference being that he concludes that your christianity is unreconcilable with reality - whereas his is..apparently..not.



So what say you Drich? Should I take Frodos word for your faith's status?

[Whateverist]

Man I wish that little emoticom guy would stop shakin em and let those dice roll.

[Minimalist]

Augustine castigated those who made the Bible teach bad science, John Calvin argued that Genesis reflects a commoner's view of the physical world,

But modern fundamentalism has nothing to do with Calvin or Augustine. It is a late 19th/early 20th reaction among the ignorant who prefer fairy tales to reality. One has to laugh when these baptist shitheads start in with their "old time religion" routine. When the lunatics were railing against evolution at the Scopes trial the whole movement was about 20 years old.

[Whateverist]

I don't know when the modern revolution started, but John H Walton's book certainly sealed it. I've always had the view that evolution is correct, but reconciling the biblical view as I misunderstood it wasn't perfect. I had trouble confronting what I thought then were literalists. I've learnt now that that isn't literalism at all, but mistranslation. Seriously misguided translation beautifully put out to grass by Walton's humble bombshell.

Atheists confronting the flawed interpretation waste their time on that dinosaur. Godzilla is right... you can't reconcile that Christianity and reality. In my opinion.

I googled JH Walton and read his wiki but am not quite clear what he thought about creation. Something about a ceremonial purpose?

[Minimalist]

you can't reconcile that Christianity and reality.

They will simply declare you "Not a TRUE Xtian," Frods. You know how that goes.