It's OK to believe in evolution?

Did you listen to the whole podcast? About 10 minutes. Pulpit and Pin does again what it normally does as it spreads it's distain for the SBC...they prove they are no better or more ethical in reporting than the liberal main-stream media. The question has to do with whether someone could "be saved" while still holding a belief in evolution...I wasn't aware that what one believes in evolution has to be settled in order to trust in Jesus as Savior. You might do well to listen to first generation material rather than trust in what others say about things. I say all this to say I am not a big JD Greear fan and disagree with him on several things...but at least let him speak for himself...and understand that he only speaks for himself. Go ahead take 10 minutes and listen for yourself about ALL that he said.

https://jdgreear.com/askmeanything/can-christians-believe-in-evolution/
 
T-Bone said:
Did you listen to the whole podcast? About 10 minutes. Pulpit and Pin does again what it normally does as it spreads it's distain for the SBC...they prove they are no better or more ethical in reporting than the liberal main-stream media. The question has to do with whether someone could "be saved" while still holding a belief in evolution...I wasn't aware that what one believes in evolution has to be settled in order to trust in Jesus as Savior. You might do well to listen to first generation material rather than trust in what others say about things. I say all this to say I am not a big JD Greear fan and disagree with him on several things...but  at least let him speak for himself...and understand that he only speaks for himself. Go ahead take 10 minutes and listen for yourself about ALL that he said.

https://jdgreear.com/askmeanything/can-christians-believe-in-evolution/
Click to expand...

I think you incorrectly assume that 1611 and The forum?s Ruckmanite read the thing in the first place. It was only fodder to attack the SBC. They both seem to actually believe that the SBC is operated like the Catholic Church...all orders come down from on high.

As we both know, the SBC does have actual problems...this just isn?t one on them.  :)
 
Tarheel Baptist said:
T-Bone said:
Did you listen to the whole podcast? About 10 minutes. Pulpit and Pin does again what it normally does as it spreads it's distain for the SBC...they prove they are no better or more ethical in reporting than the liberal main-stream media. The question has to do with whether someone could "be saved" while still holding a belief in evolution...I wasn't aware that what one believes in evolution has to be settled in order to trust in Jesus as Savior. You might do well to listen to first generation material rather than trust in what others say about things. I say all this to say I am not a big JD Greear fan and disagree with him on several things...but  at least let him speak for himself...and understand that he only speaks for himself. Go ahead take 10 minutes and listen for yourself about ALL that he said.

https://jdgreear.com/askmeanything/can-christians-believe-in-evolution/
Click to expand...

I think you incorrectly assume that 1611 and The forum?s Ruckmanite read the thing in the first place. It was only fodder to attack the SBC. They both seem to actually believe that the SBC is operated like the Catholic Church...all orders come down from on high.

As we both know, the SBC does have actual problems...this just isn?t one on them.  :)
Click to expand...

Yup!
 
A Christian (and even a Bible Believer for that matter) can believe that God is the ultimate creator but that he used the process of evolution.  While I don't believe in Darwin's theory on the Origin of Species (and Favored Races....his title...), I also don't take Genesis as "literal" as many others. 

I believe that God created everything from nothing.  I believe that God created man in his own image.  I believe animals can change and adapt over time, but I see no evidence that mutations can produce new species.  I believe the Earth is younger than 6 Billion years old....but older than 6,000.  I believe that Genesis is inspired scripture and it shows us God's creative power and control...but it "might" not be intended for literal interpretation. 
 
16KJV11 said:
https://pulpitandpen.org/2020/01/04/sbc-president-says-its-okay-to-believe-in-evolution/?fbclid=IwAR3EfQlyM0aZ6ciAr-AhyxJUrE0SnmvSkoTAmWKoaJfSFgva9_0ua7eZtpQ

To quote the editor of Pulpit and Pen...
"Is there a compromise on the Bible that Southern Baptist leadership won?t tolerate?"
Click to expand...

I think this is more an intellectual matter than a spiritual one. What really makes me raise my eyebrows is when he says Christians should read Genesis with an open mind. Open mind to what? First you interpret Scripture by scripture and second just look at it logically. Evolution is naturalistic by nature (there is no personal creator involved at any point). Theistic evolution teaches that God directed evolution (you won't find that anywhere in Genesis unless you mean God commanded them to be fruitful and multiply which he commanded the sea creatures and the fowl on one day and humans on another day. If evolution was true there would be no need to repeat this command as human evolution goes back to sea creatures that we evolved from).  I've read Genesis dozens of times a long with whole Bible and at no point did ever believe in evolution though I've wavered from Old Universe to Young Universe. I don't see it in Scripture at all.
 
brianb said:
16KJV11 said:
https://pulpitandpen.org/2020/01/04/sbc-president-says-its-okay-to-believe-in-evolution/?fbclid=IwAR3EfQlyM0aZ6ciAr-AhyxJUrE0SnmvSkoTAmWKoaJfSFgva9_0ua7eZtpQ

To quote the editor of Pulpit and Pen...
"Is there a compromise on the Bible that Southern Baptist leadership won?t tolerate?"
Click to expand...

I think this is more an intellectual matter than a spiritual one. What really makes me raise my eyebrows is when he says Christians should read Genesis with an open mind. Open mind to what? First you interpret Scripture by scripture and second just look at it logically. Evolution is naturalistic by nature (there is no personal creator involved at any point). Theistic evolution teaches that God directed evolution (you won't find that anywhere in Genesis unless you mean God commanded them to be fruitful and multiply which he commanded the sea creatures and the fowl on one day and humans on another day. If evolution was true there would be no need to repeat this command as human evolution goes back to sea creatures that we evolved from).  I've read Genesis dozens of times a long with whole Bible and at no point did ever believe in evolution though I've wavered from Old Universe to Young Universe. I don't see it in Scripture at all.
Click to expand...

To your point #1. Religious texts are not meant to be scientific. Verses shouldn't necessarily be interpreted by other Scripture, but can be corroborated. Rather, they should be looked at in the context: What is the culture? What was the penman trying to say? How was it to have been perceived by the ORIGINAL listener/reader? For the OT, you have to back to Judaism and rabbinical teachings. To take Genesis 1-3 literally is a misinterpretation. Consult Judaism for cultural interpretation. After all, it is preserved in their holy text. Not saying to take their theology as infallible, but rather use their hermeneutic to learn how the passage was intended as viewed by their culture/religion.

To you point #2, science is logical, faith isn't. I am NOT suggesting that science is always right (it is very fluid) nor suggesting faith is always wrong, but you used the term "logically" which would indicate a form of science over faith-based hermeneutic.

On both points, interpreting Genesis 1-3 as literal science/anthropology is a pretty shaky viewpoint at best.
 
Smellin Coffee said:
To your point #1. Religious texts are not meant to be scientific. Verses shouldn't necessarily be interpreted by other Scripture, but can be corroborated. Rather, they should be looked at in the context: What is the culture? What was the penman trying to say? How was it to have been perceived by the ORIGINAL listener/reader? For the OT, you have to back to Judaism and rabbinical teachings. To take Genesis 1-3 literally is a misinterpretation. Consult Judaism for cultural interpretation. After all, it is preserved in their holy text. Not saying to take their theology as infallible, but rather use their hermeneutic to learn how the passage was intended as viewed by their culture/religion.

To you point #2, science is logical, faith isn't. I am NOT suggesting that science is always right (it is very fluid) nor suggesting faith is always wrong, but you used the term "logically" which would indicate a form of science over faith-based hermeneutic.

On both points, interpreting Genesis 1-3 as literal science/anthropology is a pretty shaky viewpoint at best.
Click to expand...

Here is one Jewish perspective concerning Adam & Eve. He concludes the penman of Genesis was relating Adam & Eve were created as one being and separated to become separate individuals.

https://youtu.be/6R5XzlZiwAM

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top