Todd Wood has written a great blog post that fits in well with the mission of PS.
While many of us disagree with Todd Wood on many topics, I think he has a lot of our respect.
Todd Wood has written a great blog post that fits in well with the mission of PS.
While many of us disagree with Todd Wood on many topics, I think he has a lot of our respect.
Look, you cannot be that thick in your thinking. Todd Wood, whom I respect, has kept himself out of the fray and aloof from the heat of the battle. I can assure you that if he were here he would be battling hard and making few concessions with your âscienceâ. Wouldnât we all like to make âpeace from a distanceâ like he has done? Then we would have more respect. Ask him to come join the fray and you will lose respect for him within one day, is my prediction. Why? Because he at the core is just another YEC to you.
I think youâre mistaking the way you think for ours. The difference between someone like Todd Wood and you is heâs got enough integrity to admit thereâs an enormous amount of really good evidence for evolution. Do you share that opinion of his?
Heâs a YEC yes, he believes the evidence is wrong and will ultimately be overturned in some way one day. But rather than engage in denial that this evidence really does currently exists and really is very good, heâs making an assumption against it.
By the way, Iâd also be wary of summarizing my opinion of a person on a single question. I donât consider YECs to be âjust another YECâ as if that fully summarizes my opinion of their character. People are more complicated than that. Some people are honest but wrong, other people dishonest but right. We are more than our beliefs on a single question.
I already respect Todd Wood because he acknowledges that evolution has a lot of good evidence that backs it even if he doesnât accept the theory as true.
So much for being reasonable.
Do we know if that is Woodâs voice in the video?
Do you think we could share a joke, or a beer? Thatâs what is at stake, the willingness to treat one another as friends and neighbors. We donât have to agree, but we should be able to talk to each other.
But thatâs not a good thing when you claim an opponentâs argument is good when it actually isnât. Itâs also OK to stick to your guns when youâre in the right and your opponents are not.
That depends upon what weâre talking about. Romans 1 makes it clear that those who reject God do not have any good reasons for doing so, but instead have chosen to suppress the truth. Wood doesnât seem to have a grasp on this.
Biblically speaking, this is also a tricky area. Jesus ate with sinners yes, and we cannot be witnesses to the world without being in the world. But what do we mean by âfriendsâ? If your friend is spiritually dying because they are apart from Christ, what will you want to do for them, foremost? You will want to get them to turn to Christ and be saved. If you are really their friend, youâll have to be exhorting them to Christ, and people who are not open to Christ generally avoid people who want to talk to them about Christ.
âDo not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?â 2 Cor 6:14
This passage is often referenced when discussing marriage between believers and nonbelievers. And it certainly does apply there. But if Paul had been referring only to marriage he could have made that clear. The application is broader. I think any kind of âfriendshipâ that would approach a deep level, or a âcommitmentâ of sorts, would be prohibited here. Ultimately, as believers we do not share our highest goals with unbelievers. In our most important goals, we are at cross purposes. We serve a different Master. âBad company corrupts good morals.â
If the Bible is true, then the only rational and sane path is to be completely devoted to Christ without reservation. Even if that means burning bridges or alienating friends who are not open to Christ.
Who is this âweâ being referred to here? Does Wood not understand that for bible-believing Christians, it would never be an option to âwipe outâ those who disagree with us? Thatâs not true Christianity. Of course history shows plenty of examples of this happening, but thatâs not the teaching of the Bible. Even if our enemies are totally evil (like what it was in the days of Noah, for example). The Bible exhorts us to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. That applies regardless of whether they are totally evil, or just partially evil.
Woodâs words here have a superficial sound of being âreasonableâ, but I donât like his implications. He may sound âreasonableâ (in a worldly sense), but certainly I donât find that he sounds biblical.
I donât think that is a thread we should tug at here. There are plenty of other places to do that.
Theistic evolutionists donât reject God. I can understand the reluctance to join in fellowship with non-believers, but I think it is worth remembering that there are many in the church who accept evolution.
Has anybody on PS said otherwise? Has Todd Wood ever claimed an opponentâs argument is good when it wasnât?
What evidence do you have which would support your accusation against Todd Wood, a fellow Christian?
Are there others (not mentioned in Romans 1) who have chosen to suppress the truth? Are Christians ever guilty of choosing to suppress the truth?
As to Romans 1, who specifically was the Apostle Paul talking about when he wrote:
1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
Certainly there are, and thatâs an unfortunate thing. Itâs a sad witness to the rest of the world that we in the church have become divided on this issue. I would like to see us all come together in rejecting this unbiblical idea.
You are wrong. He concedes that every single bit of science supports the theory of evolution:
Do you think it will be difficult to come together if you are labelling their beliefs as unbiblical and comparing them to atheists?
I have to add my full agreement here. Those in church who have embraced or accepted evolution into their own belief system, I am going to guess have not properly spent the time 1. to research evolutionâs claims which I view as weak, and 2. to fully consider how their embrace runs directly counter to Scripture and 3. to fully consider how their embrace/acceptance will be instrumental in eroding the purity of belief in God and the holy Text in the next generation of believers.
Yes. He has stated there is âgobs and gobsâ of evidence for evolution. As far as I know, he is also on the âfeathered dinosaursâ bandwagonâwhich is in and of itself inconsequential to creation, but nonetheless I donât believe the evidence for this claim is very good at this point.
Sure. You, for example, suppress the truth of the global Flood right alongside Peterâs âscoffersâ from 2 Peter 3.
Yeah, this tendency towards nature worship is universal, and is not limited to literal physical statues. Evolutionism is nature worship as well, including the belief that unaided natural processes can generate life from scratch and cause it to grow in complexity and design over time.
Nope. Not if they submit to the Bible, which they say they believe. If they insist on putting outside claims on a higher level of authority than the Bibleâs own words, then it will continue to be impossible for us to come together on this issue.
The disagreements among Christians on such issues doesnât have to be a sad witnessâbut how those differences are often manifested in rancorous and accusatory division certainly can be a destructive witness.
I would like to see us all come together in praising God for the amazing evolutionary processes he wisely chose for his creationâto diversify life on earth and to adapt organisms to virtually every kind of environment. It is mind-blowing and awe-inspiring everywhere we look! Learning about evolutionary processes has been a faith-building experience for many, a huge incentive to greater worship of the creator, YHWH God.
Of course it does. To outsiders, it gives the impression that God hasnât spoken clearly, when in fact He has. This in turn gives unbelievers even less reason to accept Godâs word, since many who claim to be believers also reject it themselves.
It seems that you are asking them to submit to you.
No, that is not a fair assessment in any way. I am asking them to submit to Godâs clear revelation first and foremost.