Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,810 Year: 4,067/9,624 Month: 938/974 Week: 265/286 Day: 26/46 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why I call myself a Conservative, Republican, Christian Creationist Evolutionist
mike the wiz
Member
Posts: 4755
From: u.k
Joined: 05-24-2003


Message 73 of 81 (375356)
01-08-2007 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Hyroglyphx
01-07-2007 2:08 AM


Personalities of the homo babasapien
Hi Nembaba.
If Jar says that God is awesome, and he deduces that from looking at nature, but nature is an unguided process, then where in that is God glorified as the Creator? Sounds to me like Jar's Creator would be more aptly named as the Observer.
I was thinking about this recently. I saw that show, "big-brother", where you observe people's mundane activity, and have no influence on the outcome of things.
I also use Jar's definition of Creationist when I refer to my own position.
It's still possible that God guides the winds, so to speak, even if he doesn't get directly involved with the actual hands on stuff. He might leave that to his servants, such as the earth, "let the earth bring forth" etc..
I don't know why Jar is controversial and I am not, despite a similar position on this. I am guessing that it might be because Jar apparently never supports any type of traditional theistic argument, and seems to agree with the atheists, and defend them. I think that's because he is convinced that their position is the correct one, and that the believers' position isn't. That might be hard to swallow or understand, to a die-hard Christian, but that's because they associate God with the bible. Some of us aren't strict biblists though. I also used to believe it impossible to agree with anything an atheist says.
Also, emotive words such as referring to God as "she" or "bling bling pimp daddy", might seem unusual to die-hard Christian folk. Also, atheists use terms such as the invisible pink unicorn, and santa, etc...I'm not against Jar, or atheists, for doing this as such - I'm just trying to explain why his stance might be controversial.
If you want to show people that there is another way, I believe that you have to show them that you're not just trying to destroy their set of beliefs. As a YEC, that's the only thing I didn't like - that that particular belief caused so many people to come against me. That's not the way though, because everyone has a right to believe what they want.
But yeah - it is possible to be an evolutionist-creationist, if your definitions aren't contradictory.
I have no quarms with popular scientific theories or natural explanations. I used to, but it's silly really. It's like denying that thunder is natural. I can't believe the energy I wasted as a YEC.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Hyroglyphx, posted 01-07-2007 2:08 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024