Why I call myself a Conservative, Republican, Christian Creationist Evolutionist

When I first came to EvC, I was a dyed in the wool fundamentalist. Every belief statement of every church that I attended said essentially the same thing:

quote:

---

The Scriptures, both the Old and New Testaments, are verbally inspired of God and are the revelation of God to man, the infallible, authoritative rule of faith and conduct.

---

Assemblies Of God Beliefs Calvary Chapel I used to think that you were an eclectic gnostic and not a Christian as I understood a Christian to be within the definitions of my Protestant Fundamentalist Charismatic experience.Then, I read your Belief Statements:
Jar: On Christianity
Jar: Belief Statement I began to see that much of our arguments centered around our different beliefs regarding human nature. I was always taught that everyone had sinned and that by ourselves we were incapable of being good without Jesus as our representative. (That we needed to trust in Christ and Christ alone)I was scared to allow myself to look into other religions and beliefs. I was always taught that the educated human mindset of this world was of the devil and that human reasoning was incapable of even arriving at any sort of truth without the Holy Spirit empowering an individual from within.And yet I allowed myself...hesitantly...to consider some of the things that you had thought about: It was and still is scary to think for myself. I believe that Jesus died and rose from the dead and is alive right now, just as you also affirm in the creeds.I looked further and found that I never knew that other groups of Christians had been taught differently than how I had been taught.One thing that I am allowing myself to do is to ask more questions and think for myself, knowing that God gave me a brain and that I will not be damned to hell for honestly questioning why things are the way they are and why people think the way they do.I, too am more inclined to believe in biological evolution. It makes sense and the proponents of it have some empirical reasoned answers for why they believe in it.Creationism is too simplistic and I don't see how it is a necessary component of the Christian faith.Edited by Phat, : correction

I believe that God created the universe. I don't believe any of the Biblical Creationism stuff,however.What does that make me?

Diversity exists among the definitions of these terms. I believe that God created the universe. In that sense, I am a creationist. It is true that the term has been identified as anti-evolution based. That does not mean that we must limit the definition, however.I call myself a cosmological creationist (in that I believe that God was the uncaused first cause) but I certainly cant say that I am necessarily a Theistic Evolutionist---only that I respect such beliefs, for I do not know enough to argue logically either way.Theistic Evolution: The belief that new species of animals develop from existing species over a very long interval of time, in response to the guidance, supervision, and intervention of a
deity.In that regard, I am not a Deist. I believe that God interacts with human thoughts, intentions, and logic.
Inspiration: When applied to a sacred text like the Bible, inspiration means that the God affected the thought processes of the writers and prevented them from writing any material that was in error. A logical result of inspiration is that the original text of the Bible was inerrant.I used to believe that the Bible was inerrant because that is what I was taught. Logically, however, it seems not to be the case, unless I am being deceived.

Faith in what? What is the origin of our Faith? If we are to be taken seriously and not to merely parrot the belief of others, what can we say that the object of our faith is?

---

Convictions are very different from intentions. Convictions are something God gives us that we have to do. Intentions are things that we ought to do, but we never follow through with them.
* * * * * * * * * *
"I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily."

​

"Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system. I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance."- --Sir Isaac Newton

To me, God is not some internalized concept of my mind or imagination. God has always been with me, and I believe that I "met" Him when I got born again.Now...I realize that "born again" is a Charismatic catchphrase, but I actually had an epiphany and underwent some massive changes in my character when this event was formally undertaken on January 9th, 1993.Thats another thing that I have been thinking about.Have I "evolved" as a Christian or was I reborn (recreated) as one through a spiritual impartation? It seems to me to be a bit of both.One issue that you forced me to think about was the issue of exclusivity. You pointed out how throughout history, Christians have acted as if they were different from everyone else.Regarding how certain Christians committed horrific actions which were explained away by declaring them to be uninspired pretenders, you said:

quote:

---

I believe we must honestly acknowledge what we (Christians) have done in the past, that “but by the grace of GOD” those people could be us and that we too are capable of committing such horrific acts. If we try to claim that they were somehow different than us, that they were not real Christians, then I fear we are bound to continue down that path.

---

This was, to me, an entirely new social issue which suggested that even though I may have been Born Again I certainly was and am capable of being no different than any other human and that if anything, I am even more responsible for my behavior since I know better.I was always taught that it was all Jesus problem since He took my sins upon Himself. Maybe thats why so many Christians get in as bad or worse trouble than unbelievers.One question that remains unanswered for me, however, is why so many people who call themselves Christians seem to feel that it is imperative that they teach everyone Biblical Creationism.Surely that would stifle any social and communal progress in our society, wouldn't it?

If everyone thought alike, would Jesus approve? Does the Creator really care if His creation believes in Adam and Eve and a Snake and a Flood?Does He not want us to use our minds that He created (directly or indirectly) within us? Are we expected to turn our backs on the hallowed halls of education that brought society out of the ignorance of the past?Perhaps we really are hopeless victims of Original Sin and that we really shouldn't try and deify our own human wisdom as the best answer for a universe full of problems. (problems for us, at any rate.)Can a man be a critical thinker and also believe that Jesus lives within him?

Thanks for some clarification, Percy. You have opened yet another can of worms in my mind, however.

creationist: a person who places their interpretation of religious revelation above scientific evidence.

​

So what do I do when I believe that I am growing through revelation despite the fact that I am becoming a bigger nut case according to the observation of others? Do I choose whether to get mental help or do I retreat behind the walls of the Castle Church and join my fellow cultists in a battle for the souls of humanity?

​

We see monsters where science shows us windmills.

​

(just a scenario...you know i'm not in need of medication yet! )

Although you have to admit, Jar, that both of us believe that God created the Universe. Scientific evidence has yet to confirm this belief.

quote:

---

One question that remains unanswered for me, however, is why so many people who call themselves Christians seem to feel that it is imperative that they teach everyone Biblical Creationism.

---

There are several possible answers.

Having found acceptance in a christian identity and having been taught that there is a war of sorts between Biblical Creationism and ToE, these naive idealists feel that they are doing a good thing by fighting the status quo. The problem is that they have been told what to think.

​

Having found acceptance from others who are of like minded thought, proponents of Biblical Creationism never get to know anyone who actually studies science and evolutionary theory. Perhaps if they knew some people, they may actually see the other side of the coin.

​

Percy had some choice words on this matter as well in PAF. I think they apply here as well:

Percy writes:

​

What we're looking for at EvC Forum is rational discussion. To assist us in this pursuit we have the Forum Guidelines, which I believe that when fairly enforced go a long way toward helping us achieve this goal. I think that if nothing else, recent events have shown that I can be as hard on evolutionists as creationists, which is as it should be.

​

But why is it that when someone joins who just hasn't a clue about science and is unable to follow simple rules that it's almost always a creationist? This is a rhetorical question, actually. The reasons are obvious. Evolutionists come to the debate out of a love for science, and so they're informed about science, which is what the science forums at this board are here to discuss. Creationists come to the debate out of a love for God and Bible, so they're informed about religion and not about science, which leaves them at a severe disadvantage in the science forums.

​

So okay, a new creationist member comes here and gets the heck beat out of him in his first couple discussions, and so you'd think he'd do something rational like start studying up or sit back a lurk for a while or ask more questions. But you almost never see this. From the day they come till the day they leave they never seem to learn a thing.

​

And this is one of the reasons why I think it is so important to recruit creationist moderators. The hope is that a creationist could be persuaded by another creationist to change his behavior, whatever that might mean for each specific case.

Its not easy to be a creationist moderator. Not only do you have to challenge the beliefs that have been taught to the creationist, which he resents (as opposed to an evolutionist who is used to having his ideas challenged in context) but you have to put up with the dogged determination that many have to convert everybody (including the poor marxist moderator)

​

Edited by Phat, : add by edit

creationist: a person who places their interpretation of religious revelation above scientific evidence.

​

evolutionist: specifically, a person who accepts the theory of evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life on earth. More generally, it is often used by creationists as a blanket term to refer to anyone who places scientific evidence and theories above religious revelation.

​

So to say that I am a creationist is, perhaps, pre-establishing the idea of a Creator?

​

Unitarian Universalism writes:

​

Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religion born of the Jewish and Christian traditions. We keep our minds open to the religious questions people have struggled with in all times and places.

​

We believe that personal experience, conscience, and reason should be the final authorities in religion. In the end religious authority lies not in a book, person, or institution, but in ourselves. We put religious insights to the test of our hearts and minds.
We uphold the free search for truth. We will not be bound by a statement of belief. We do not ask anyone to subscribe to a creed. We say ours is a non creedal religion. Ours is a free faith.

​

We believe that religious wisdom is ever changing. Human understanding of life and death, the world and its mysteries, is never final. Revelation is continuous. We celebrate unfolding truths known to teachers, prophets, and sages throughout the ages.

​

So if I had a personal experience with God, could I call myself a creationist evolutionist, seeing as how I accept the theory of evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life on earth?

This seems like fodder for a new topic! I could call it: Is Humanity significant or insignificant in the grand scheme of things?A question that I always think about evolution is this: What will we evolve into next?

I think that we all should keep in mind that this topic is being read by others and so in that view, we should strive to keep the focus positive.Lets nail the definitions and semantics (the study of meanings in language) between belief in biological evolution and in the concept of a Creator.Can these two views co-exist?Jar apparently argues that they can. It matters not whether Jar is a Trinitarian, a Taoist, or a Texas Two-Stepper.What matters is that we all strive to arrive at a consensus on the sociological (the science of society, social institutions, and social relationships) implications regarding the clash and/or synthesis of these two definitions articulated by our Forum Director.

creationist: a person who places their interpretation of religious revelation above scientific evidence.

​

evolutionist: specifically, a person who accepts the theory of evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life on earth. More generally, it is often used by creationists as a blanket term to refer to anyone who places scientific evidence and theories above religious revelation.

​

I would amend these two a bit for the sake of discussion.

​

For example, if I believe that God was the uncaused first cause of all that is, I place my faith and belief above scientific evidence.

​

Websters writes:

​

creationism \kre-a-she-ni-zem\ n : a doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing creationist \-nist\ n or adj

​

It has been suggested earlier in so many words that God could indirectly create (populate) the Earth by simply allowing Biological Evolution to run its course.

​

Websters writes:

​

evolution \e-ve-lu-shen\ n 1 : one of a set of prescribed movements (as in a dance) 2 : a process of change in a particular direction 3 : a theory that the various kinds of plants and animals are descended from other kinds that lived in earlier times and that the differences are due to inherited changes that occurred over many generations

​

One question, among others, is whether the changes (observed in evolution) require a Creator or not.

​

This brings in another belief system:

​

Websters writes:

​

deism \de-i-zem\ n, often cap : a system of thought advocating natural religion based on human morality and reason rather than divine revelation

​

In any case, the religious arguments can and will go on forever.

​

The crux of this thread, in my opinion, is not just to allow for conversations with our articulate member, Jar but also to open a discussion on the implications of belief on the mindset of scientists and laymen alike who are interested in the social issues regarding Creation beliefs and Evolutionary facts.

Is it possible to be a Christian Deist?

​

What advice do you have for a young man or woman who has attended a conservative Bible college and yet wants to become a science teacher?