tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post3884017138555794998..comments2023-10-02T05:33:15.293-05:00Comments on The Contemporary Calvinist: "Darwin, Forgive Them, for They Know Not What They Do"Lee Sheltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11254842261338255019noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-55634310601397022362011-07-21T04:01:07.204-05:002011-07-21T04:01:07.204-05:00Creationism: "The highest form of stupidity r...Creationism: "The highest form of stupidity requiring the denial of vast swathes of converging empirical evidence born from the desire to reatain a resolute and unfeasible belief in the literal meaning of a particular scripture"Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-19422440282446639142008-10-11T01:36:00.000-05:002008-10-11T01:36:00.000-05:00Hey Lee, I saw your one verse refutation. I've hea...Hey Lee, I saw your one verse refutation. I've heard that idea before, that evolution depends on death... Using one verse like that may be convincing for people who already lean that way, but I don't think it's particularly useful for others. There's been lots of damage done by people misinterpreting single verses (not that I think you're doing damage with that one, I just don't find it a useful model for finding truth).<BR/><BR/>I pretty much agree with what you've said about macro- vs. micro-evolution and about God not being passive. However, science was made possible through a theistic worldview; God created an ordered world and acts faithfully in that, which makes it possible for us to observe and discern that order. So if evolution and selection is something that we observe then I think God has his hand in it. I'm not saying I believe in theistic evolution, I'm just admitting that perhaps I don't have the knowledge or perspective to understand the situation completely.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-65539458426349725642008-10-02T08:14:00.000-05:002008-10-02T08:14:00.000-05:00For what it's worth, I posted a one-verse refutati...For what it's worth, I posted a one-verse refutation of evolution <A HREF="http://contemporarycalvinist.blogspot.com/2008/06/why-i-dont-support-intelligent-design.html" REL="nofollow">here</A>.<BR/><BR/>As a Christian, my presuppositons are that God exists, that he has made himself known, and that the way we know him is through his word. Therefore, everything I see must be viewed through the lens of scripture. If I observe something that seems to contradict what the Bible says, and I accept God's word as ultimate truth, then I'm forced to reexamine that particular observation in a new light. Chances are I'm misinterpreting what I'm seeing.<BR/><BR/>Evolution (theistic or otherwise) distorts the view of God presented in scripture. He becomes more passive than deliberate in his role as Creator. And if he was passive in our creation, how could we trust him to be deliberate in our salvation?<BR/><BR/>While we may see minor adaptations among the species, no evidence has been found for macro-evolution. The fossil record is severely lacking when it comes to transitional specimens. Apes and humans may share some similar characteristics, but that doesn't mean we share a common ancestry. Those who conclude otherwise have to make a "leap of faith" because the scientific method cannot be applied to something that cannot be observed (i.e. evolution).<BR/><BR/>By the way, I didn't think you were quarrelsome. I know that typed words don't always convey our thoughts the way spoken words can, and I know that I tend to be short and to-the-point in my comments. Sorry if <I>I</I> seemed quarrelsome. :)Lee Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254842261338255019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-24887420601138514342008-10-02T02:42:00.000-05:002008-10-02T02:42:00.000-05:00I'm still working through it. There is some eviden...I'm still working through it. There is some evidence for it, otherwise people wouldn't be so convinced.<BR/><BR/>As a scientist I'm in the thick of it and trying to figure out where to hold this dominating theory and the knowledge that not one sparrow will fall to the ground apart from Him.<BR/><BR/>I really just meant that it's a pretty bold and harsh statement that could leas to more than just being called intolerant. There is a place for harshness sometimes, but 2 Tim also says, "And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will."<BR/><BR/>Heh, perhaps I was quarrelsome before. Sorry, if I was.<BR/><BR/>I will use that wonderful search function and find what else you've written about this, since you've probably already answered my question "What do you base it on?" sometime on your blog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-4967543626074600942008-10-01T22:51:00.000-05:002008-10-01T22:51:00.000-05:00It has nothing to do with arrogance. Evolution isn...It has nothing to do with arrogance. Evolution isn't a "let's agree to disagree" issue. It denies the truth taught in scripture. So, if a theory or teaching states something that is contrary to scripture and distorts our view of God, what else would you call it?Lee Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254842261338255019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-69716374256251563412008-10-01T17:05:00.000-05:002008-10-01T17:05:00.000-05:00"lies spewed forth from the pit of Hell. We wouldn..."<I>lies spewed forth from the pit of Hell. We wouldn't want to be accused of being intolerant, now, would we?</I>"<BR/><BR/>Tolerance, the catch cry of the 21st century is a farse, it's an unrealistic concept that cares for people feelings rather than their actual well being. So one could stand being called intolerant I think, but you also risk being called small minded and arrogant with a statement like that. What do you base it on?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-80999814044197009412008-09-28T18:28:00.000-05:002008-09-28T18:28:00.000-05:00Touché.Touché.Lee Sheltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11254842261338255019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11738269.post-81339938146991880972008-09-27T22:24:00.000-05:002008-09-27T22:24:00.000-05:00"The pit of Hell"? I thought it was named "The Be..."The pit of Hell"? I thought it was named "The Beagle".Chris Wildehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01931613635162303100noreply@blogger.com