Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "Uncle Davey" <noway@jose.com>
Newsgroups: alt.fan.uncle-davey
Subject: Re: I don't understand Creationists (was: Re: Hopelessness in Evolution)
Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:16:36 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Sox "R" Us
Lines: 52
Sender: root@darwin.ediacara.org
Approved: robomod@ediacara.org
Message-ID: <bub5qe$uh9$0@pita.alt.net>
References: <20040111041031.07996.00002703@mb-m16.aol.com> <AB_Mb.11077$9k7.206869@news.xtra.co.nz> <gL4Nb.52381$qC.47838@bignews3.bellsouth.net> <4f697f9f.0401141102.292c7f05@posting.google.com> <bu4mrf$dostt$2@ID-197010.news.uni-berlin.de> <ko7c00tcjvl8dbmenuihrsvl4edbh09427@4ax.com> <4f697f9f.0401151314.31dc612f@posting.google.com> <kiag00dd9che0ov31iprg63pka1rrsbhev@4ax.com> <ee7cdfa3.0401161552.68bfbfc7@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: darwin
X-Trace: darwin.ediacara.org 1074338196 565 128.100.83.246 (17 Jan 2004 11:16:36 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@darwin.ediacara.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2004 11:16:36 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
X-Spam-Level: Level
X-Spamscanner: mailbox2.ucsd.edu (v1.4 Dec 3 2003 15:07:19, 0.7/5.0 2.60)
X-MailScanner: PASSED (v1.2.8 50725 i0HBKmRn059096 mailbox2.ucsd.edu)
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.uncle-davey:1722
"Michelle" <mwestgeest@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ee7cdfa3.0401161552.68bfbfc7@posting.google.com...
> Louann wrote:
> <To them, a Presbyterian or Anglican or Catholic or (name
> a franchise) who doesn't have trouble with evolution is simply showing
> his/her true colors as Not A Real Christian.>
I'll tell you what, a Presbyterian who doesn't believe in Creation may at a
pinch be a real Christian, but by no stretch of the imagination are they a
real Presbyterian.
>
> Believing in evolution is not equilvalent to being "not a real
> Christian." Christianity is more than a book with directives and
> stories. It is a philosophy of life which holds as one of its main
> components the ideal of free will. As such, it is in agreement with
> evolution in a fundamental way. If creationism was to be taken
> literally, this would effectively negate freewill. A life in which all
> of our actions were determined by God would not be meaningful, and our
> actions are ours and ours freely only if the world is not manipulated
> by an outside force.
>
> Being Christian does not mean buying into interpretations. The
> consistency in stories between different religious groups is quite
> high, yet each of these groups has different interpretations.
> Unfortunately, the church is another institution and as such it is
> susceptible to every sort of corruption. As a result, interpretations
> are given to suit the period and purpose of others.
> Thus, religion must be an extremely personal thing, and should not be
> derived exclusively from external sources such as the church. As a
> result, individual Christians grow and change in their concepts of God
> and the nature of existence, but being rational has never been a sin.
>
It's because of that subjective element that we need some objective
benchmark to stop us all going away with the fairies in religion.
This objective benchmark is scripture. The closer our views are to a literal
take on scripture, the closer they are to this objective benchmark.
May I ask whether you believe in the Virgin Birth, a bodily resurrection,
heaven and hell and the end of the world and a New Creation? Each of these
things demands as much suspension of disbelief as the six day creation does,
but these are pretty much central lynch-pins of any Christian theology.
Best regards,
Uncle Davey
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 |
|