Why perpetuate the foolish creation vs. evolution debate?

 Print This Post

Question:

Why perpetuate the foolish creation vs. evolution debate? There is no debate. Science has proven Evolution true. Though scientifically inaccurate, the Bible’s truths should not be distorted to try and address science, the Hebrews (and Christians after them, I’m afraid) being rather poor scientists, even by Ancient Greek standards. “Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” Listen to Jesus and pay attention to his life. Jesus is constantly revising the Old Testament, the received text of his day, making adjustments heralding his remarkable Kingdom of Heaven.

The Bible (Old and New Testaments, btw) is composed of paper with words written down by fallible men. God is perfect and NOTHING else is in the universe. God is NOT paper. Jesus already made all this very clear. The Pharisees clung to the old paper. What do you cling to?

 

Answer:

 

Hi ,
Thank you for visiting my site and contributing your thoughts. Let me address your viewpoints one by one.

“Why perpetuate the foolish “Creation vs. Evolution debate”? There is no debate. Science has proven Evolution true.”
I would submit that this is not a foolish debate because its implications are real and significant. The linkage between our origins and thus the concepts of a Creator and our identity definitely hinge on this evolutionary debate. Your assertion that there is no debate and that evolutionism has been proven true is also unfounded as creationism and evolutionism are both theories held by two camps. As a side note, it is interesting that the debate is not necessarily purely scientific but also ideological. On the whole, both camps hold to scientific theories and both have potential deeply rooted ideological biases. Thus, we can not simply assume the creationist camp is the only one with an ideological stance and the evolutionary stance is solely rooted in science. I do not dispute the existence of evidence and the reality of micro evolution (evolving characteristics within a species) but I present that when we look to areas such as anthropology, astronomy, biology, physics, even quantum physics the evidence points more closely to an intelligent Creator rather than mere happenstance (i.e macro evolution (evolution between species) is not proven). Science by definition is founded upon a certain methodology that uses repeatable observable events to understand the course and laws of nature. As we understand this, we can clearly assert that no one was present to observe the onset of this universe and hence each camp must present their evidences to back up theories which in effect ensures a debate can occur - theories by definition are different views based on the necessity of a state of uncertainty. I will be posting in the coming months on this topic of creationism vs. evolution and look forward to your comments at that time.

“Though scientifically inaccurate, the Bible’s truths should not be distorted to try and address science, the Hebrews (and Christians after them, I’m afraid) being rather poor scientists, even by Ancient Greek standards.”
I would disagree on this claim of the Bible’s scientific inaccuracy and ask for specific evidence. I would also say that stating the “truths” in the Bible should be a pick and choose scenario based on what is felt or accepted to be true isn’t how it can work. On what basis does one choose to believe one portion and not another when the Bible throughout it testifies to the veracity of the whole. It would also be false to state we should (as many suggest) let science take care of reality and church take care of the religious. These cannot be accepted as “non overlapping magisteria” but that science is the pursuit of truth and Christianity is based on a set of facts rooted in history, science, and reality thus both are complementary. Jesus lays the logic down in John 3:12, how can we believe the things said about the spiritual when the physical (statements in the Bible) isn’t true?

Additionally, I would also ask for you to provide rationale for the broad reaching statement you make against all Jewish and Christian scientists of the past and present day. The greatest scientists in history believed in the Judeo-Christian God and understood God to be a reality. They studied nature and the laws of nature because they expected there to be a Law Giver and not mere chaos. I will name a few scientists who happened to hold to this worldview and you can judge whether the scientific community has deemed them worthy comrades in the pursuit of truth via science*:

Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)
Polish astronomer who put forward the first mathematically based system of planets going around the sun. Copernicus referred sometimes to God in his works, and did not see his system as in conflict with the Bible.

Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1627)
Bacon was a philosopher who is known for establishing the scientific method of inquiry based on experimentation and inductive reasoning. He rejected atheism as being the result of insufficient depth of philosophy.

Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)
He did early work on light, and established the laws of planetary motion about the sun. He also came close to reaching the Newtonian concept of universal gravity - well before Newton was born! Kepler was an extremely sincere and pious Lutheran, whose works on astronomy contain writings about how space and the heavenly bodies represent the Trinity.

Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
Galileo is often remembered for his conflict with the Roman Catholic Church. His controversial work on the solar system was published in 1633. After the "trial" and being forbidden to teach the sun-centered system, Galileo did his most useful theoretical work, which was on dynamics. Galileo expressly said that the Bible cannot err, and saw his system as an alternate interpretation of the biblical texts.

Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
In optics, mechanics, and mathematics, Newton was a figure of undisputed genius and innovation. In Principia he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion on an intelligent and powerful Being."

Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
His work on electricity and magnetism not only revolutionized physics, but led to much of our lifestyles today, which depends on them (including computers and telephone lines and, so, web sites). Originating from Presbyterians, the Sandemanians rejected the idea of state churches, and tried to go back to a New Testament type of Christianity.

William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)
Kelvin was foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundations of modern physics. He was a very committed Christian, who was certainly more religious than the average for his era. Interestingly, his fellow physicists George Gabriel Stokes (1819-1903) and James Clerk Maxwell (1831-1879) were also men of deep Christian commitment, in an era when many were nominal, apathetic, or anti-Christian.

* http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html#GPuH8T9PdkBe

“’Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.’ Listen to Jesus and pay attention to his life. Jesus is constantly revising the Old Testament, the received text of his day, making adjustments heralding his remarkable Kingdom of Heaven.”
As you quote Scripture it is important to realize that anything out of context merely becomes a pretext. Meaning you can make it say anything. The appropriate reading of John 8:32 is set in light John’s Gospel. This truth is about the person and work of Jesus. It is saving truth. As L. Morris says, “it is the truth which saves men from the darkness of sin, not that which saves them from the darkness of error.”

Additionally, Jesus clearly didn’t come to revise truths set forth in the Old Testament. He did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17). He has put aside the Old Covenant and laid a New Covenant in His blood but this isn’t a revising of the past but a progression of God’s interaction with humanity (i.e. not a re-write of history). However, I do agree with one statement “Listen to Jesus and pay attention to his life” – How did Jesus approach the Scriptures? How did He study them? Did He view Scripture as mere reference guides, philosophical precepts, or cultural guard rails for pious living? No. I suggest reading the following verses to gain a glimpse of His view: Matthew 22:29; John 3:12; John 17:17; Matthew 26:54; John 10:35. I also suggest reading my post on the Validity of the Bible (slide 8 specifically) to see Jesus’ views on the Scriptures.

“The Bible (Old and New Testaments, btw) is composed of paper with words written down by fallible men. God is perfect and NOTHING else is in the universe. God is NOT paper. Jesus already made all this very clear. The Pharisees clung to the old paper.”
I would once again suggest reading my post on the Validity of the Bible to understand that we can’t just easily claim the Bible myth without proper investigation. We have ample evidence, especially in comparison to other historic texts, to call it true. We can look at history, archaeology, third-party verification, and fulfilled prophecy (not to mention science) to understand that our trust in the Bible as the inspired Word of God is founded. The Bible doesn’t hesitate to mention names, places, dates, facts of various sorts that could easily be disproven and yet this hasn’t been the case. Even temporal archaeological discoveries that seem to disprove aspects of the text after further discoveries have vindicated the Word in the end. The Scriptures as inspired are wholly true and every word (Jesus himself states) is truth. We do know textual variations exist of insignificant areas and that with each passing day we get closer and closer to the original text – that being said veracity is there (once again see post for details on this). If God is perfect as you present, why can He not make a perfect book? Clearly God is not paper as we don’t view the texts of the Bible to be venerated in a fashion that deems them eternal (as Islam does). We view the Word as eternal (John 1:1) and that Word was and is Christ. I would like to see where Jesus makes it clear to not believe in the Scriptures, as you seem to suggest. As for the condemnation of the Pharisees, that you imply Jesus makes as they “clung to the old paper”. Once again, I would suggest a reading in context as Jesus’ condemnation of the Pharisees, although very true, was not founded in anything to do with the “paper” but to do with the hypocrisy and prestige/image they sought. Jesus' harsh but true criticism of the Pharisees was focused on the fact they had distorted the truths in Scriptures and heaped unnecessary burdens on people in effect making them unclean spiritually. I suggest reading Luke 11:37-54 as we can clearly see what Jesus condemned the Pharisees for (six woes). I will also be posting on this passage in the coming weeks so please stay tuned.

“What do you cling to?”
In short, Jesus Christ and the revelation of the Triune God through the Holy Scriptures. But perhaps I should let Jesus' response clarify the basis for my position… “Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6)

You may also be interested in...

1. Did apes descend from us?
2. Created in the image of God?
3. An Atheist Walking