 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
 Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 7:01 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Flashman wrote: | Wow! I've just read this entire thread. And I actually leared a great deal about science, atavisms, genomes, DNA and more.
|
I'm glad that you found my babblings to be useful! If you have any questions about this stuff, feel free to ask. I actually like answering scientific questions.
| Flashman wrote: |
P. I have to say that you have done your homework and it is difficult to refute the experts. Now, you have me wondering (not about my faith, of course) about how could this seeming contradiction be answered.
Rev, I understand your frustration when debating those who haven't the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Hang in there.
I'm going to ask God, when I see Him, if He'll explain it to me and why He created all these seeming controversial things of science.
|
Are you talking about when you die and go to Heaven?!? Don't you want some answers BEFORE then?!? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
Flashman
Pit Bull
Joined: 28 Apr 2006
Posts: 371
Location: MO
|
| Posted: Tue May 02, 2006 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| P1234567890 wrote: |
Are you talking about when you die and go to Heaven?!? Don't you want some answers BEFORE then?!? |
Yeah. God knows everything and He will impart instant understanding to me then.
Before then...hmmm. Ya know, there are tons of things I'd like to know more about before I go to heaven. (I intentionally left out "die") There just isn't enough time in my day, nor space in my pea sized brain to cram in all the new knowledge I'd like to have, along with the knowledge I MUST have.
I actually have all the knowledge I need to live to a ripe old age. But it's really fun to know more so you can converse with others about topics of common interest. The really complicated stuff, I have to set aside for now. Maybe if things get really slow or dull. 
God love ya,
Flashman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Isn't it just maybe a possibility that the atavism argument shows that the Bible is not literally true, but instead is meant to be interpreted figuratively, and that maybe macroevolution happened? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6816
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 5:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
P, we are in danger of oversimplifying the issue here.
Has it occured to you that the truth of the matter is somewhere in the middle of your assessment?
I understand you want to beleive and assert that macroevolution is truth, and in accordance with that desire you must necessarily negate the truth of scripture, so your options always come out one-sided:
1) Macroevolution is true so the bible must be false
or
2) Macroevolution is true so the bible must not be literally true
What I suggest is that you consider that your understanding of macroevolution is not complete, nor accurate and that our understanding of the literal/figurative state of scripture (creationism) is not complete nor accurate. Somewhere in the middle is the truth and the propostion is not one or the other (TOE/YEC), but something of both. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: |
I understand you want to beleive and assert that macroevolution is truth, and in accordance with that desire you must necessarily negate the truth of scripture, so your options always come out one-sided:
1) Macroevolution is true so the bible must be false
or
2) Macroevolution is true so the bible must not be literally true
|
I prefer the way you said # 2. I'm not trying to say that the Book of genesis is garbage. I'm just saying that it was meant to be read figuratively. It still has all sorts of valuable moral messages. I'm just arguing against it being a science textbook which is meant to literally describe a sequence of events. It was written to be read by a bunch of people who had practically no knowledge of science.
| RevJP wrote: |
What I suggest is that you consider that your understanding of macroevolution is not complete, nor accurate and that our understanding of the literal/figurative state of scripture (creationism) is not complete nor accurate. Somewhere in the middle is the truth and the propostion is not one or the other (TOE/YEC), but something of both. |
Sure, I'll play ball. Here is an account of creation / evolution which falls somewhere in the middle:
Creationism is true in the sense that God created man in His image. He created the spark of life that originally produced simple organisms on Earth, and abiogenesis is false. He purposefully designed life so that it is based on a DNA blueprint, which can mutate. He built the original life out of raw materials (Earth, mud, clay, etc.) just like it says in Genesis.
He then used selection pressures in order to turn the life into whatever He wanted via mutation. When necessary, He guided events to make things happen the way He wanted. With man, He used the selection pressures to create man in His image, just like it says in Genesis. He gave man a soul, put him in a very nice part of the Earth (Eden), etc.
This account has a number of advantages:
1. It is consistent with scripture, and is even almost literal. It certainly is consistent with the spirit of the story of creation.
2. It is consistent with science.
3. It explains why our genome is such a mess; the original DNA in the life that God created would have been a beautiful blueprint, but then He purposefully let random mutations take over, so by the time we came to be, so many mutations had happened that His original elegant blueprint had long since been garbled.
4. It explains atavisms perfectly.
As far as I can tell, there are no good arguments against this account. Scientists might want to attack it based on the fact that it doesn't contain abiogenesis, but they don't have any good arguments because abiogenesis is a weak theory. Believers might want to attack it because it doesn't follow the traditional interpretation of Genesis, but they don't have any good arguments because this account is almost literally in line with Genesis.
Remember, Genesis was written to be read by (or to be told to) a bunch of people who had practically no knowledge of science. If the authors of the Bible would have put all of the details of DNA and mutations and selection pressures into Genesis, nobody would have understood it! So they did what they had to do: they simplified the account so that your average person back then could wrap their mind around it. It is perfectly reasonable to believe that parts of the Bible are simplified to fit its target audience.
Am I wrong? Is there something terribly flawed with this whole account? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Flashman
Pit Bull
Joined: 28 Apr 2006
Posts: 371
Location: MO
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
P, not to change the subject entirely, but I just had an epiphony I have to run past you:
| Quote: | | Remember, Genesis was written to be read by (or to be told to) a bunch of people who had practically no knowledge of science. |
In the bible there is quoted, a few times, the phrase: "As far as the East is from the West".
I'm pretty sure no one had actual "scientific" knowledge that the earth rotated on the N/S axis. How might it be explained that they did know that you could travel East or West eternally?
I'm low in time, so rather than expand on that question a lot, I'm hoping this is enough clarity. I'll read your answer when I get home and make it clearer if necessary.
Flashman |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 5:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Flashman wrote: |
In the bible there is quoted, a few times, the phrase: "As far as the East is from the West".
I'm pretty sure no one had actual "scientific" knowledge that the earth rotated on the N/S axis. How might it be explained that they did know that you could travel East or West eternally?
|
I have two possible explanations:
1. The quote "As far as the East is from the West" doesn't necessarily indicate that people back then knew that you could travel East or West eternally. This might have just been a metaphor for "A very great distance." ie. the distance from the Westernmost part of the known world to its most Easternmost part. This is still many thousands of miles, which is a huge distance; it doesn't necessarily have to be infinite.
2. If, as you say, this quote actually is a metaphor for infinity, then it could be explained by the fact that the ancient Greeks DID know that the Earth is a sphere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6816
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Am I wrong? Is there something terribly flawed with this whole account? |
Terribly flawed? No, not at all. I would suggest something, a qualifier of sorts, be added, which would not steer the hypothesis towards any particular bias (not extremely anyway )
I would suggest that in God's creation as you described it that He indeed used DNA as a blueprint, but created hominid's seperately from other forms of life - using the same blueprint. Flipping the appropriate 'switches' in the genome Himself rather than waiting for 'mutations' to form human into His image.
This does two things: It agrees with and supports the creation of man as a seperate entity from the animal world, and it still allows for the 'evolution' of life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: |
I would suggest that in God's creation as you described it that He indeed used DNA as a blueprint, but created hominid's seperately from other forms of life - using the same blueprint. Flipping the appropriate 'switches' in the genome Himself rather than waiting for 'mutations' to form human into His image.
|
I'm not necessarily saying that He 'waited'. He might have created selection pressures Himself that He knew would do the trick of flipping the appropriate switches, or as you say, He might have flipped the switches Himself. In either case, we got His special attention, and as far as I can tell, that's all that really matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6816
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 7:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Wow  I don't know what to say now! We actually have come to some sort of agreement on something! A workable theory that incorporates what we know as the truth of the process of evolution, which does not unnecessarily include the theory of macroevolution, but does allow for its limited possibility. A theory that does not reject the essential truths of Creation, but does not unnecessarily include the insistence on 'young earth creationism'.
I'm staggered.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
P1234567890
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 11 Mar 2006
Posts: 6772
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RevJP wrote: | Wow I don't know what to say now! We actually have come to some sort of agreement on something! A workable theory that incorporates what we know as the truth of the process of evolution, which does not unnecessarily include the theory of macroevolution, but does allow for its limited possibility.
|
It still looks like macroevolution to me! Selection pressures are selection pressures, regardless of whether or not God causes them to happen.
| RevJP wrote: |
A theory that does not reject the essential truths of Creation, but does not unnecessarily include the insistence on 'young earth creationism'.
I'm staggered.... |
Yes, this is interesting. We've got a theory which is more or less scripturally sound, and more or less scientifically sound. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Galaxy
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 5844
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Flashman wrote: | In the bible there is quoted, a few times, the phrase: "As far as the East is from the West".
I'm pretty sure no one had actual "scientific" knowledge that the earth rotated on the N/S axis. How might it be explained that they did know that you could travel East or West eternally? |
Simple: they didn't. It's more likely they were referring to the East end of the world and the West end of the world, as they are necessarily as far apart as anything can get on a flat Earth.
When you stop looking at the Bible with presentism, it will make more (and less) sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6816
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 12:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It's more likely they were referring to the East end of the world and the West end of the world, |
Actually it is MORE likely that the Word of God knew certain things before man did and that some of us... cough ***FFT*** cough... will assert any opinion in order to avoid admitting demonstrated biblical truth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Galaxy
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 5844
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay. Explain to me, how on a sphere, East and West are far apart.
I'll give you a hint: they're the same place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RevJP
Moderator
Joined: 18 Apr 2003
Posts: 6816
Location: USA
|
| Posted: Wed May 03, 2006 12:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Uh.. yeah.
They are the same place equally as they are never the same place - on a sphere. I agree that biblical man would not have known or understood that, but GOD did since He made the darn sphere to begin with. Word is GOD-BREATHED and imbued with HIS wisdom and knowledge, not that of man. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
