Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
N.T. Wright on Darwin 8
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 тра 2009
- The Bishop of Durham distinguishes between the science of Darwin and the philosophy of Darwinists. Believing that one can be both a theist and an evolutionist, Tom Wright exposes the real agenda of those who argue that religion and science are necessarily in opposition.
im really liking these videos and im especially liking the comments being posted here because its not the normal creationists/evolutionists bashing that normally goes on. Ive read alot of the comments and they have actually helped me understand a few things better... like a normal casual conversation. Thumbs up!
@GaryHurd well, I read Darwin's autobiography not long ago, His objections to God's, if I remeber rightly were mainly based on suffering & death, he personally lost several of his children. He used the Ichneumonidae wasp as an example in his book of how cruel & indifferent the natural world seems, he also criticised Paley's watchmaker argument with his new theory of evolution. From his Beagle diary though, it's clear he remained a theist even after he started thinking about evolution.
and yay for NT Wright. my mans right there
It's amazing how evolution can bring up such strong views when Genesis 1 - 3 in my opinion should not be taken as literally true in terms of science and history. If my faith hangs on scientific truth of Genesis then I'm in trouble. But I start with the Resurrection of Jesus Christ which I believe with all my being.
Well said!
That was really helpful....
The Darwinian Evolution I was taught as a kid is not he same evolution I understand now. Evolution is either the product of a deconstructive process or the development of man's ingenuity. Erosion changes the land form while the automobile had developed from various engineers and designers. The original creation of the automobile had since been developed in the minds of men. If man did not add anything to the automobile or improve upon it a car would have simply eventually break down. The world looks like it was originally created new and is simply breaking down or changing or evolving over time. This scientific fact indicates a once newly created good world that has been breaking down and sorting into variations through duplication over time. Like the Genesis story there was an originally created good world that became corrupt and cursed as man rejected the life giver for his own limited capacity. Our only hope is to turn to the God who revealed Himself through history as we suffer the consequences. Man brought evil into the world as the life giver loved us enough to allow us to come to our senses to seek Him out by suffering those consequences. Jesus died to take the punishment that we deserve after this life is over to give hope now and into eternity. We simply need to turn to Jesus and see things his way rather than the Epicurean way. Will we or have we received Jesus into our lives as Lord and Saviour? We can only do this on the basis of the evidence not to be taken on blind faith.
My Thoughts, totally agree. Evolution is contrary to science’s own observations that all systems increase in entropy, not tending towards more order and better design over time.
Interesting point, it would be cool if we could be sure of that. However the 6,000 years is not explicit nor is the 7 millenniums. An interesting take but one we don't come to from plane text but purely assumption.
How God formed us is not in the Bible, saying from the dust is only an origin and material explanation. it does not explain how God went from dust to bone and cell, how he structured the body etc. The point is all has its origin in God.
I suppose to some extent, science attempts to discover how God works.
It's not a case of "can't" create in 6 days. It's a question of did he create in 6 days? There is no biblical explanation of how God created. For example we have observed the building blocks of matter, yet Genesis 1 doesn't explain this, if it were trying to give the "how" then we would expect to read a step by step of creation as it was done by God. We also don't read when God created man an explanation of how man is put together either. Genesis 1-3 is simply not about telling us how did it
@modomnoc1010
And your claim is the exact claim I don't understand... a person can believe in a God who sent His Son to do miracles, healing, get beaten, crucified and then RESURRECTED to life again to save people from their sins---yet somehow cannot believe this same God created the world in 6 days? Can you explain that to me? Because I've yet to hear a good explanation.... thanks!
For one problem with the Bishop's analysis, he clearly knows nothing about Charles Darwin's personal beliefs. He should have read Darwin's autobiography published posthumously. Nor does he seem aware that it was geology in the 1700s that prompted the rejection of biblical literalism. I suggest reading on the latter point;
Young, Davis A.
1995 “The Biblical Flood: A case study of the Church’s Response to extrabiblical evidence” Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, Paternoster Press
"question of did"
Yes, He did. There's a reason He did it in 6 days also instead of 1, 2, 3, or 5,000 also. It's to mirror the 6 ages(6,000 years) and the last age(1,000) reign of Jesus Christ(Revelation 20). That last age is the rest---the day we stop from our works just as God did.
"How" God formed things is explained, from the dust and from other areas of Scripture--this does not reconcile with modern definitions of evolutionary ideology. To get into so much detail is to miss the point
So if the Bible doesn't tell us how we are made, how stars and planets are formed, it is perfectly justified that we look for that answer outwith the Bible
There is no evidence God created the universe in 6 days unless science is wrong and we assume the writer(s) of Genesis 1 - 3 were writing science? Genesis 1 - 3 in my opinion was a genre of literature called myth that can contain historical data. I believe in the resurrection based on the Apostles testimony and that is faith and not science. There was an empty tomb and Jesus apostles preached the resurrection of Jesus and the hope for us too to be resurrected when we die.
@LucrativeLucius
"Every on is entitled to the opinions, but everyone is not entitled to their own facts." ~ Barack Obama
I do not have a "belief" sir, I stated facts. When intellectual theists see that evolution is irrefutable, they decided to embrace the science and claim "God" was the first cause. However, it holds true that if evolution is correct, then the Genesis account is incorrect and your religion proved myth. Stick to a story, is it evolution or creationism? But you can't claim both!
N.T. Wrong
Around 4:05 he says *maybe* is at work? Really?
Bunch of poorly sourced personal opinions. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Charles_Darwin#Darwin.27s_loss_of_faith and the REFERENCES CITED THERE, as opposed to this guy and his pet theories not even remotely grounded in the historical facts of Darwin's life.
Sir, I don't agree with you here.
hahahahahaha
"question of did"
Yes, He did. There's a reason He did it in 6 days also instead of 1, 2, 3, or 5,000 also. It's to mirror the 6 ages(6,000 years) and the last age(1,000) reign of Jesus Christ(Revelation 20). That last age is the rest---the day we stop from our works just as God did.
"How" God formed things is explained, from the dust and from other areas of Scripture--this does not reconcile with modern definitions of evolutionary ideology. To get into so much detail is to miss the point