Do you mean to say “little disagreement” there?
1 Like
Exactly. Faith, works, predestination, free will, the Elect. And that’s just off the top of my head.
Apologies, I was not trying to be ridiculous. I guess that I didn’t and don’t understand what you meant, then, regarding the understanding of the biological world. Maybe you were agreeing that there is no intent in biology to be understood, but there is intent in the scriptures to be understood? If so, I agree. But, as is similar in both worlds, there are basic precepts to be understood, which are fairly universal in acceptance, and there are nuances, about which there is much disagreement. This was my reason for juxtaposing understanding of the two realms to begin with.
As always, you are correct. This, though, is nuance. There are aspects to salvation, the depths of which can be plumbed for a lifetime, yet, there is general agreement regarding the concept of “receive and believe”…
Does one need a book with stepwise mutations listed in order to get from a light-sensing spot to an eyeball? Maybe some do. Most professionals don’t. They see enough evidence to be able to connect the dots and to make a conclusion.
1 Like
That wasn’t just apples and oranges. It was apples and octopuses.
Both of which occur in the biological world. 
Look, you are so intelligent that I know you can understand what I mean. There’s a difference between asking a question (or making a statement) because you don’t understand, and making the point that what is being said isn’t perfect. You know me well enough to know that it’ll never be perfect. So bend a little.
Pretty much, yes.
I suppose it comes down to what you consider “basic” precepts. If you want to boil Christianity down to John 3:16 then sure, I suppose that comes across pretty clearly, but I don’t think that’s enough. Christianity contains so much more than that, and I see no reason not to make at a good portion of that clear.
1 Like
Yes, thank you… I meant that there is little disagreement.
As to your first question it is not God’s desired state of affairs. It is the state of affairs that exists due to the nature of God. It just is.
As to your second question, that is what Christianity declares. God made himself undeniably tangible. But apparently not enough times to please everybody. 
1 Like
Posting as causal observer and non scholar. Addressing title of this thread “Does God Adequately Avail Himself to Man”. My response is if there is a God, the Christian God has made himself available on at least two fronts. (1) is he took the form of a man.(What better way to reveal himself in a materialistic world) (Colossians 1:15, etc. and (2) the Shroud Of Turin which is probably a new topic of scientific discussion.
Thanks.
2 Likes
Why? Are you suggesting that God:
A. doesn’t feel any desire to make himself undeniably tangible, or
B. is somehow physically constrained from revealing himself in that way?
“He’s undeniable, except for the billions of people who deny him.”
Hadn’t heard that one before, or else it’s been affected by senior memory. 
And it certainly applies literally around here lately – it was -15 °F Sunday night… the coldest night of the winter (so far 
), and in March!
I can think of a thousand “better” ways to reveal himself if the intention was to make himself obvious to everyone.
And my position is that the important, primary messages of the Bible for our era are indeed readily apparent for the intended audiences. (I also believe that the important, primary messages of the Torah were readily apparent for the intended ancient audience. There are good reasons why the Bible’s two covenants/contracts–also known as the Old Testament and New Testament—apply to and are best understood by their respective parties/audiences.)
Firstly, I don’t consider biological origins as a “fundamental point” among the Bible primary themes. Secondly, I don’t consider creation and evolution as at all in conflict. I am a creationist and I also affirm evolutionary biology. Indeed, surveys show most people in the USA are fine with embracing evolutionary processes within a view of God as creator of all.
As you wrote, that is indeed your presumption. I don’t see any reason to presume that God would have to be any more “up-front” than he already is.
Moreover, when dealing with complex and broad topics, I expect humans to take centuries of research to further understand them. You and I simply have different presumptions and expectations.
1 Like
To add to my recent post. John 15:13 “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends” What more could you ask for if there is a God?
2 Likes
To speak of God as being “physically constrained” demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of God.
1 Like
His intention is to reveal Himself to those who seek, not everyone.
4 Likes
Perhaps it’s not one of the Bible’s “themes”, but I think it’s a pretty important subject in general!
To be more clear - I mean “YEC/OEC” vs evolution.
I suppose we do. As I said before, it comes down to what you think the “basic” points of the Bible are.
1 Like
And when He was alone, they that were about Him with the twelve asked of Him the parable. And He said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God, but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables. That seeing they may see, and not perceived: and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted and their sins should be forgiven them. Mark 4:10-12
This message was kept secret for centuries and generations past, but now it has been revealed to God’s people. — Col. 1:26
We shouldn’t be surprised that something long kept secret (and now revealed to God’s people) would not be easily understood for many centuries.
1 Like
I was asking you if you thought that. If your answer was yes, I would have said you were quite confused. Can I get an answer?