Jump to content


Photo

Romans 5:12 and Doctrinal Implications - NT


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#31 Matt Smith

Matt Smith

    Upsilon

  • Forum Manager
  • 4,619 posts

Posted 07 June 2011 - 12:30 PM

Genesis isn't bothered about the MECHANISM of creation


And God said... and it was so... That sounds like the mechanism of creation to me...
Matt Smith
Arizona Christadelphians

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

#32 David Brown

David Brown

    Epsilon

  • Christadelphian
  • Pip
  • 57 posts

Posted 08 June 2011 - 10:03 PM


Genesis isn't bothered about the MECHANISM of creation


And God said... and it was so... That sounds like the mechanism of creation to me...


Sounds like the fact, not the mechanism. If you want to be literal about it, how loud was God's voice? What gave rise to the sound waves if God's outside the physical universe of space and time? To whom might He have been speaking?

And on an earlier post, somebody explain why "David, if man and woman came into being through common descent then there is no need for Christ" isn't just plain wrong? The need for Christ is exactly the same whatever the mechanism God used to create, and whether A&E are a literal pair, or not. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact, if it is a fact, that most evolutionary biologists are non believers.

Unless you interpret Genesis, and references to it, in a figurative way you find yourselves putting God's word at odds with the overwhelming evidence of God's works. I refuse to do that.

#33 Matt Smith

Matt Smith

    Upsilon

  • Forum Manager
  • 4,619 posts

Posted 09 June 2011 - 02:55 AM



Genesis isn't bothered about the MECHANISM of creation


And God said... and it was so... That sounds like the mechanism of creation to me...


Sounds like the fact, not the mechanism.


God speaking is the mechanism.

If you want to be literal about it, how loud was God's voice? What gave rise to the sound waves if God's outside the physical universe of space and time? To whom might He have been speaking?


Does it matter?
Matt Smith
Arizona Christadelphians

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

#34 Kay

Kay

    Phi

  • Admin
  • 5,934 posts

Posted 14 June 2011 - 03:34 PM

Apologies for the delay in responding, David:



Genesis isn't bothered about the MECHANISM of creation

And God said... and it was so... That sounds like the mechanism of creation to me...

Sounds like the fact, not the mechanism. If you want to be literal about it, how loud was God's voice? What gave rise to the sound waves if God's outside the physical universe of space and time? To whom might He have been speaking?

Matt Smith responded to your above comment in Post #33

To continue:

And on an earlier post, somebody explain why "David, if man and woman came into being through common descent then there is no need for Christ" isn't just plain wrong? The need for Christ is exactly the same whatever the mechanism God used to create, and whether A&E are a literal pair, or not.

The pair need to be literal – that is the progression:

What Adam brought into the world and what Christ took out.

Through Christ and his total obedience to his Father, the separation of God from man-kind was removed.

Hence, no literal Adam and Eve:

  • when did sin enter into the world?
Again, the question:

  • if man-kind came into being through common descent – how, through what process did man “evolve” the intelligence, the understanding that he has?
As stated in this post:

“Random Errors Filtered by Natural Selection”

which defines the various views and that how the world-view, evolution, has generated the need to tinker with the Biblical text therefore other explanations see their way into the (our) repertoire changing what God has declared - that He, as Creator, made Adam and Eve, mankind - the simple answer, but then, accepting evolution complicates what the Creator has declared.

The above also includes brethren who say publicly that it "must be evolution" because to their own personal opinion the “design” is sub-optimal or substandard.

God never made claim that the creation was perfect, not that I am aware.

The claim by brethren who ascribe to the philosophy of evolution, "sub-optimal / substandard", in their own personal opinion is rather reminiscent of the words in Isaiah 45 – our readings in the next week or so:

"What sorrow awaits those who argue with their Creator.
Does a clay pot argue with its maker?
Does the clay dispute with the one who shapes it, saying,
'Stop, you're doing it wrong!' Does the pot exclaim,
'How clumsy can you be?'"
Isaiah 45:9

And it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact, if it is a fact, that most evolutionary biologists are non believers.


It has all to do with who we are told to listen to – evolutionary biologists, apparently.

If they are unbelievers then naturally any discussion about design or a Creator is removed, and therefore “Random Errors Filtered by Natural Selection” is ascribed to how life came about.

I also understand that various words used in research papers, or there is a movement to exclude certain vernacular because, if they don't, it may just point to a Creator, an intelligent designer.

Perhaps something similar it would seem to those Bible translations removing gender specific details?

Unless you interpret Genesis, and references to it, in a figurative way you find yourselves putting God's word at odds with the overwhelming evidence of God's works. I refuse to do that.

You have to interpret it in a figurative way, David, if you wish to ascribe to the "philosophy of evolution" (common descent) and also the Bible.

Again, a figurative understanding excludes Adam and Eve and the fall (other invented scenarios also hold no weight as far as the Word of God is concerned) therefore excluding the need for Jesus

  • no Adam and Eve (figurative)
  • no fall
  • no need for Jesus
That said - you can indeed interpret Genesis in a literal way.

As described in Post #30 that the research has shown nothing other than highly complex information processing systems which comprise life - thus confirming Genesis - that God created, made, formed, that there was an intelligence and an intelligent being behind what we see before us today – life, and all that is about us.
"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users