That was a valuable and refreshing talk about a topic I have came upon in my private considerations. I am glad to hear that my criticisms, which I have been criticized for by traditional Christians, are not merely my sinful whining, but the criticisms of someone trying to make sense of the topic. I can't say how much your talk cleared things up for me.
I could be wrong but he seems conflicted in this message. I don't feel like this presentation answered many questions, though it was interesting and I appreciate his ability to say "I dont know" to areas that really do seem enigmatic in the Origins debate. Nevertheless, I am thankful to see a theological leader discuss this issue.
Well, at the very least, he seems quite certainly not conflicted (at least at the time of recording) that in light of newly published scientific journals and armed with an exegetical principle borrow from Augustine there is no historical Adam in the sense that we modern, western, post-enlightenment culture’s inheritors think of when we talk about a historical Adam in the 6 or 7 ways he outlined, and that neither did the Apostle Paul (the speaker because of “the geeks”, and Paul because of Jewish traditions and exegetical methods).
@CALEB ALVAREZ Depends who are "we"....:))) If you are Christian who does not accept some oversimplified versions of literal interpretations of thr Bible,etc. Then you are right.If some atheists say "there is no God" then they are wrong:)))
@CALEB ALVAREZ The subject is long...look better channel BioLogos. the Bible is not God! It was cooperation of God and man without manipulation on the side of God! Read Arthur Peacocke and Ian Barbour!
@CALEB ALVAREZ Bad style just to quote traditional Scriptures! Brother:) Once I also thought this way... , later though I have studied much more. Read more, develop! Go dis greater than you think! www.peterenns.com
I am happy to hear his thoughts. However, he seems "undecided" and his talk left me that way. I am not sure that I agree with his further assumptions about Jewish teaching on Adam's historicity (no, I am not Jewish) or his assertions that Paul does not "seem" to believe or teach original sin, and so forth. I do recall an atheist website being "undone" emotionally some years back by the notion of Mitochondrial Eve, so I guess there is enough in this whole subject to get people worked up, no matter their perspective or religious belief.
Well, at the very least, he seems quite certainly decided (at least at the time of recording) that in light of newly published scientific journals and armed with an exegetical principle borrow from Augustine there is no historical Adam in the sense that we modern, western, post-enlightenment culture’s inheritors think of when we talk about a historical Adam in the 6 or 7 ways he outlined, and that neither did the Apostle Paul (the speaker because of “the geeks”, and Paul because of Jewish traditions and exegetical methods).
". . .and they got alleles and everything else that doesn't make sense." This guy is a feekin' genius! The reason for the fall of man leads right back to Eve and all her 'else' that don't make sense. 'So God took the rib and closed up the flesh thereof'. I have no desire to unpack the plite of man any further.
"Let God be true and every man a liar." Romans 3:4 This nonsensical praise and appeal to the (in some fashion) wonderful geeks is bizarre and inappropriate. I certainly qualify as a geek and I have kept the company of geeks. Let me tell you, there is nothing so reliably good about us geeks, and please do not forget that much of what passes for science (by geeks and for geeks) is merely the fruit of a spirit of rebellion and mockery. There is good science and bad science, and it is not whether a scientific idea is popular or arrived at by consensus that makes it good.
At 1:29 he mentions Roseanne Sension blogging about science and faith. I looked but can't find a blog of hers. Can someone point me in the right direction?
Isn’t scripture the inspired word of God? Doesn’t He know everything about biology? This guy talks about the writers of the Bible like they came up with it themselves.
@@wilts8965 Evolutionary biology is not a real science. It is impossible to look backward past recorded history across billions of years to know how life began. "If the evidence is reliable then we have as Bible guy to show that the Bible is not wrong." What reliable evidence is he talking about? There is none. Only pretention and wishful thinking. Darwin himself said that his theory would be easily disprovable if we did not find a multitude of intermediate fossils in the ground. We have not, and so his theory is null and void.
In the same way God stared a new ethnic group with Israel out of the nations I'm sure God stated a new branch called Adam and Eve from humoids. Ps no original Sin See Dr Michael Heiser.
Paul Allen , they're hard to even figure out. +Wright is certainly in a communion in which quite a lot has changed, and yet almost nothing has changed, depending on how reassessing, or how reaffirming, of an Anglican you're talking to.
Is it because you know better because "Bible tells you so"???? He, the guy , is very correct and not only him:) Read Arthur Peacocke, Ian Barbour, John Polkinghorne,James Dunn, Stanley Grenz;etc.,etc.
This man in my opinion act like a Jesuit... He is working very hard to destroy Protestantism.... Sadly many people not knowing their Bible will believe him...
That was a valuable and refreshing talk about a topic I have came upon in my private considerations. I am glad to hear that my criticisms, which I have been criticized for by traditional Christians, are not merely my sinful whining, but the criticisms of someone trying to make sense of the topic. I can't say how much your talk cleared things up for me.
Do not be naive. Science is not an ideology, but there is a 'scientism' which is an ideology and which is not scientific.
I could be wrong but he seems conflicted in this message. I don't feel like this presentation answered many questions, though it was interesting and I appreciate his ability to say "I dont know" to areas that really do seem enigmatic in the Origins debate.
Nevertheless, I am thankful to see a theological leader discuss this issue.
Well, at the very least, he seems quite certainly not conflicted (at least at the time of recording) that in light of newly published scientific journals and armed with an exegetical principle borrow from Augustine there is no historical Adam in the sense that we modern, western, post-enlightenment culture’s inheritors think of when we talk about a historical Adam in the 6 or 7 ways he outlined, and that neither did the Apostle Paul (the speaker because of “the geeks”, and Paul because of Jewish traditions and exegetical methods).
Even Christians are fed up with young earth creationists.
Long ago:
@CALEB ALVAREZ Depends who are "we"....:))) If you are Christian who does not accept some oversimplified versions of literal interpretations of thr Bible,etc. Then you are right.If some atheists say "there is no God" then they are wrong:)))
@CALEB ALVAREZ Of course it is wrong as we know better today! But it does not change the fact that God is still creator:)))
@CALEB ALVAREZ The subject is long...look better channel BioLogos. the Bible is not God! It was cooperation of God and man without manipulation on the side of God! Read Arthur Peacocke and Ian Barbour!
@CALEB ALVAREZ Bad style just to quote traditional Scriptures! Brother:) Once I also thought this way... , later though I have studied much more. Read more, develop! Go dis greater than you think! www.peterenns.com
I am happy to hear his thoughts. However, he seems "undecided" and his talk left me that way. I am not sure that I agree with his further assumptions about Jewish teaching on Adam's historicity (no, I am not Jewish) or his assertions that Paul does not "seem" to believe or teach original sin, and so forth. I do recall an atheist website being "undone" emotionally some years back by the notion of Mitochondrial Eve, so I guess there is enough in this whole subject to get people worked up, no matter their perspective or religious belief.
what if we will find a watch with dna?
Well, at the very least, he seems quite certainly decided (at least at the time of recording) that in light of newly published scientific journals and armed with an exegetical principle borrow from Augustine there is no historical Adam in the sense that we modern, western, post-enlightenment culture’s inheritors think of when we talk about a historical Adam in the 6 or 7 ways he outlined, and that neither did the Apostle Paul (the speaker because of “the geeks”, and Paul because of Jewish traditions and exegetical methods).
". . .and they got alleles and everything else that doesn't make sense." This guy is a feekin' genius! The reason for the fall of man leads right back to Eve and all her 'else' that don't make sense. 'So God took the rib and closed up the flesh thereof'. I have no desire to unpack the plite of man any further.
"Let God be true and every man a liar." Romans 3:4
This nonsensical praise and appeal to the (in some fashion) wonderful geeks is bizarre and inappropriate. I certainly qualify as a geek and I have kept the company of geeks. Let me tell you, there is nothing so reliably good about us geeks, and please do not forget that much of what passes for science (by geeks and for geeks) is merely the fruit of a spirit of rebellion and mockery. There is good science and bad science, and it is not whether a scientific idea is popular or arrived at by consensus that makes it good.
At 1:29 he mentions Roseanne Sension blogging about science and faith. I looked but can't find a blog of hers. Can someone point me in the right direction?
musingsonscience.wordpress.com
Thanks, you guys!
The cheers from the audience indicate a motion down the slippery slope of apostacy.
Slopes go in more than one direction, including fundamentalism.
@@1956gaba Which particular parts of doctrine do you consider to be fundamentalist?
Isn’t scripture the inspired word of God? Doesn’t He know everything about biology? This guy talks about the writers of the Bible like they came up with it themselves.
So you think the writers of the bible are supposed to know about 21st century science?
@@wilts8965 good move!!!
@@wilts8965 Evolutionary biology is not a real science. It is impossible to look backward past recorded history across billions of years to know how life began. "If the evidence is reliable then we have as Bible guy to show that the Bible is not wrong." What reliable evidence is he talking about? There is none. Only pretention and wishful thinking. Darwin himself said that his theory would be easily disprovable if we did not find a multitude of intermediate fossils in the ground. We have not, and so his theory is null and void.
In the same way God stared a new ethnic group with Israel out of the nations I'm sure God stated a new branch called Adam and Eve from humoids. Ps no original Sin See Dr Michael Heiser.
His views of church and theology changing are interesting but false
Paul Allen , they're hard to even figure out. +Wright is certainly in a communion in which quite a lot has changed, and yet almost nothing has changed, depending on how reassessing, or how reaffirming, of an Anglican you're talking to.
Paul Allen Assertions are not Arguments. You have to tell us why or how he is wrong.
Relax. This is UA-cam not a debating before the Supreme Court
Is it because you know better because "Bible tells you so"???? He, the guy , is very correct and not only him:) Read Arthur Peacocke, Ian Barbour, John Polkinghorne,James Dunn, Stanley Grenz;etc.,etc.
Evolution the most important lie in history
No threat to Christ and His Gospel.
@@1956gaba it's caused many to be deceived out of belief in God
This man in my opinion act like a Jesuit...
He is working very hard to destroy Protestantism....
Sadly many people not knowing their Bible will believe him...