Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

Philosopher_at_large



    Posts: 681
  • Darwins +18/-2

After having watched what has laughingly been referred to as a “debate” between Ken Ham and Bill Nye, I felt obligated to direct a comment or two at my fellow theists who subscribe to Creationism and Evangelicism.

First, a word about divine revelation:

As Christians we believe that we have a divine revelation. As I’m fond of quoting, Adler said:

“would god have revealed to us, anything that we could normally think by ourselves? No, it’d be a waste of time wouldn’t it? What God revealed is something that we can’t understand very well.” 

In other words, divine revelation is by nature, information that we cannot normally think by ourselves and is difficult to understand. The incarnation, the trinity, the resurrection, these are all good examples.

Matthew. 21:17, for example, is not a divine revelation.

The genealogies in Genesis were not put there in order for us to know how old the earth is, they were a chronicle of a particular family line.

The authors of the book of Genesis had no curiosity about the age of the earth or how organisms developed on this planet,  and more to the point, we don’t NEED a divine revelation in order to know those things. The age of the earth and the way that species develop on it are things that we can normally think by ourselves. We do not need divine help to understand them or to know them. 
 

Secondly, the most glaring objection that any reasonable person, theistic or non-theistic; should have to Creationism is the premise, however, the crux of the underlying premise is often misunderstood by both sides.

The first errant assumption made by Creationism is that “The origin of species” and the theory of evolution in general is an attempt to discredit the book of Genesis. I know this may be hard for Evangelicals to accept, but scientists have better things to do with their time than shake their fists at your beliefs all day. An attempt was made by the institution of science to discern the best, most demonstrable explanation for how organisms developed on this planet and the conclusion was Darwinian evolution and natural selection. I hate to be so harsh about it, but the results just happened to contradict a legalistic, literal reading of the book of Genesis as well as numerous other Creation stories. I am truly sorry that Evangelicals and literalists are factually and scientifically obliged to admit that they have “faith”, as opposed to a Swiss army book that answers every question and points to their perpetual correctitude, but that’s just the way it goes. 

Again, I don't mean to be rude, but the theory of evolution is not the theory that there is no God, it just happens to fly in the face the incredibly solipsistic nature of modern Evangelical thought and understanding of scripture.

Thank you.



Changed Change Reason Date
jetson Golf clap May 27, 2014, 09:30:03 PM
Anfauglir Very well put. March 11, 2014, 10:33:50 AM
wright Nice to be reminded there are non-literalist Christians February 22, 2014, 03:02:10 PM
Jag Very well said, thank YOU! February 22, 2014, 02:52:46 PM
Ataraxia "theory of evolution is not the theory that there is no God" February 22, 2014, 02:42:16 PM