Welcome Greg to the Forum


(Greg) #1

Dr. Swamidass. So great to see this new forum for hashing out some of the differing worldviews.

I noticed a statement by you that suggested that science cannot entertain design because this would have to entertain the idea of either God or aliens…not fitting for serious scientific research. I thought to myself,“That is a seriously unfair statement” The trade for this not considering faith in aliens is entertaining yet another faith we could call chance, or nothingness or atheistic naturalism… and this faith rarely provides adequate soil for a belief in God and His gospel seed to grow. Let me explain further:

As you may have noticed in previous writings on biologos and others, i would have to ask the question “why not id?” I will give a crude example that may help to explain the grounds for such a question:

A detective is on a missing person’s case. The person is thought to be under the control of their kidnapper in a 100 sq mile area of desert. In that desert, some detectives see a statement in the english language formed by grooves in the sand and it says “Im alive-little canyon reserve” that could be a message the victim is trying to relay as to a potential future location to which the kidnapper was taking her next.

So, i have come to realize that you are a brilliant person who has a heart for our Lord, so please don’t conclude that i am being insulting when i would state the obvious that the detectives who saw that writting did not hesitate in one single instance to conclude that the writting was from none other than a human being with intelligence enough to write. There could be discussion about the purpose of the message or about who wrote it…but there would be no discourse on the potential for the wind to have ruffled up the sand to cause such. No journals marking the nearby cacti for how these locations could have caused the signal. The forensic science engaged COUNTED on this written message in the sand to indeed be by a human being with intellegence enough to write english. And this supposition does not hurt the investigation…it helps! Your comments about ID being a hindrance to real science is just not true and represents a very simple minded worldview indoctrinated into too many minds by the mainstream…

Anyway, ID carries a similar investigative strategy as these detectives for orgins. It sees the writting in the sand EVERYWHERE in creation and it intelligently concludes that a Maker of such MUST be entertained into the mix which must also entertain that this Maker could create in so many numbers of ways including some that may not be decipherable to the human observer. I think we call that science. For these detectives to exert energy in their scientific efforts towards studying wind patterns as the possible maker of this message would be a waste of time and a pathway towards the absurd.

Todays mainstream science thinks it takes the high road by sidestepping intelligence. It thinks that such is a faith not to be recognized as this is unprofessional and unwarranted. But what they have done is backed themselves into a corner of a faith they themselves find tethered to called naturalism and the faith of naturalism will always conclude naturalistically, thus eliminating the very real, and frankly more likely scenario that God just made this thing we call life on earth in its forms…and that perhaps He could have sent flooding waters that according to Dr. Kurt Wise with an Ivy League education, really do have validity for being the cause of our fossil record…

In closing, i would challenge you to consider something as you hear some of the arguments on this website you have created. Im going to challenge your very intelligent mind in a very simplistic way that will possibly help you to understand how we must, as intelligent beings made in the image of God be willing to completely mentally disrobe out of our worldview in order to see the validity of principle out from another. The simplistic way i would suggest you consider is a picture of tile and grout. I know, you say, c’mon Greg, first the desert story now this?!!! Bear with me:

If you were to take a light tan colored group of tiles and glue these to a board next to a group of darker brown colored tiles, all of which had spaces between the tiles and a light tan grout spread equally across them all, i promise that upon looking at the color of the grout between the dark vs light colored tiles, you would conclude that the color of the grout between the dark tile is absolutely, positively and without a dought significantly different in color than the grout between the light tan tile. If you had not known firsthand that the grout was actually the same, youd be willing to bet money they were different and significantly so.

The Bible suggests that wisdom comes from our Lord, and He suggests very strongly threaded throughout Scripture that He created life in its forms we understand today. It does not say He planted a seed and watched nature create. It says He did the creating. I am apart of a group of tiles that not only subscribes to a sense that all of what we know about life on this planet wisely concludes that this is intelligence written in the sand of life points to an intelligent agent making it, but also subscribe to a text scrutized for centuries which holds water as being legitimately of the One and Only God who says He created life in its forms. Unless one is willing to disrobe of their worldview group of tiles labled naturalism and by faith put on another’s robe of tiles labled intelligence for coming to understanding and possible unity, they will always 100% see their grout color differently… and significantly so.


Welcome Greg to the Forum
Natural Theology vs. Design Arguments vs. ID
(S. Joshua Swamidass) #2

Welcome @greg. It is great to have you here.

Though, I must say your post puzzles me…

Thank you @greg, that is very kind of you.

I’m not sure you understood what I meant. This may be surprising to you, but I do not think science is a complete way of understanding the world. I trust some things more than science. Don’t you agree? I do not see the world from an exclusively scientific point of view. Do you?

I also am part of that same group of tiles. I wisely conclude that intelligence written in the sand of life, and it points correctly to the One and Only God who created life in all its forms.


@greg it is great to have you here, but where exactly is the disagreement?


(John Dalton) #3

Welcome Greg! I hope this criticism does not seem less than welcoming :slight_smile:

And why? Because we have countless examples of writing produced by human beings.

Who decided it was “writing in the sand”? Maybe you see it, but I think you’re making a false analogy here. Where’s the indication of intelligent action comparable to writing, something which can be practically endlessly attested to be an intelligent action?


(Mark M Moore) #4

Welcome Greg, you have found the right place for opinionated people to discuss issues related to science, theology, and creation.


(Greg) #5

Hi Mr. Dalton: How are you? Judging by the description under your name, you appear to be of an agnostic sort…Well, I appreciate your input here and blessings in your endeavors in the search.

A quick reply to your comments: For the life of me, I just cannot accept moral neutral naturalistic processes coming up with things like sexual organisms for procreation purposes or wings for flying. Think about that for a minute…Sexual reproduction. It has to be alive NOW or species dies in a generation. And evolution explains this at all? And please no diagrams how evolution accomplishes THAT.

The complexity of the organs in the opposite sexes of thousands of creatures and how they must interact and cause for a new creature sharing the genes of mom and pop for the beauty of procreation is astounding beyond reason! Writing in the sand.

Scientists studying enzyme use within cleaning solutions find over and over how stubborn these boogers are when they attempt to adapt them to fit the solution conditions because they tend to want to regress back to their original composition. And we think nature developed sexual reproduction? Again, writing in the sand screaming at the top of its lungs INTELLIGENCE! GOD! Name one single other instance where nature causes design. Name one. I have heard many many who show me how bacteria adapt as an example. But they adapt per design not the other way around. They adapt and wa-la they are still bacteria. Do you see the sand?

Obviously reproduction is important or life would not exist on this planet today. Stated once again, reproduction occurs often with unions one with another…for example in pollination. I found one day at college 30 plus years ago that I could be united in relationship with the Living God of the universe. Through a series of circumstances, the illumination about my frailty, imperfection, moral failures and disobediences utterly deflated my arrogance and ego and a friend shared with me that forgiveness can be found in the Person of Jesus Christ, who chose to die on our behalf a gruesome death that He did not deserve, was wrapped in burial cloth an inch thick and entombed in a cave and three days later was raised back to life as seen by over 500 men not including women and children. History tells us that His disciples went from scared scattering little roaches to bold lions carrying after seeing an alive and well Jesus with a message of forgiveness by the crucifixion and resurrection of this Second person of the Only Triune God who Created the universe! We are all sinners who deserved that torture my friend. Jesus took it instead. And we can know Him! I am the most stubborn skeptic you would ever know and ran like a bat out of hell to escape the entrapments of “religion” I was raised in when I went to college…yet God opened my eyes to His goodness and love as a sophomore Miami U student. What you question as a, I dare suggest, searching agnostic can be found in the Person of Jesus Christ if you will by faith Trust Him. I promise you this is the truth. Naturalistic evolution is an absolute complete and utter farce. We are here because God birthed us. We rebelled and were justly shunned by Him, booted from the garden. Yet we can be reconciled back to Him by the propitiation in His Son. This is eternal life: to know Him! Unless you are willing to for one single moment in time, take off the worldview you may be tethered to and chose to put on by faith another…and I am not talking about being a good chap with a SNL church lady sort of smile…I am talking about faith in the Creator who designed us and created us who is willing to forgive us if we are willing to empty our arms full of worthless parcels in order to grab ahold of this greatest of all gifts…if you are so willing with just a smidge little amount of faith admit that you have sinned against a Holy God as we all have and to trust Christ for forgiveness, you will find Him. Please inquire of Dr. Swamidass if you have questions. I’m headed to our cabin on Norris Lake in TN for the weekend, God willing and will not have access to this discussion for a few…

Blessings Sir.


(John Dalton) #6

Thanks Greg! John is fine! I’m not sure how morality would be involved. But I understand your point; it’s hard to imagine how all kinds of specific functions and processes might have evolved. Yet the available evidence shows that animals have evolved from simple to complex forms, with a variety of adaptations. Even if we can’t imagine how any particular adaptation occurred, we do know that many adaptations have occurred. On the other hand, there’s no convincing evidence I’m aware of that shows that direct design by an external agent was the cause of such processes. And if we do appeal to an external agent to “resolve” points where we don’t have complete understanding, we’re left with a new set of questions like “What caused the external agent?” That’s where I stand in short, though I understand that many, like yourself, see it very differently!

Took a quick look–Norris Lake looks great. Hope you enjoyed the weekend!


(Greg) #7

Well John. We never made it to the lake this weekend afterall. Possibly next. It is a beautiful place. The community we are in has only a handful of houses built so we have 500 + acres almost to ourselves…and hoping more will build so we have neighbors to enjoy too! We love the night skies on clear nights far from the city lights…The faint lights sometimes whole other galaxies! Some go to the Biblical book of Genesis for references to God as the Creator of those but I will tell you that the bible as a whole addresses God this way including the last book of the bible: Revelation 4:11 “Worthy are you, our Lord and God to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they existed and were created.”

And quite ironically, I came across a fantastic blub on an ID website referencing work by Nancy Pearcey that addresses really really well the correlation between looking at all of life from a materialistic standpoint verses from a design standpoint which addresses your point about how these discussions involve morality. You can find this here:
https://evolutionnews.org/2018/08/nancy-pearcey-urges-inconsistent-materialists-love-thy-body/
Notice that this is dated after our discussion and is almost perfectly fitting! And I know of nobody in this organization personally to manipulate the timing.

The first time I ran across Pearcy is I think in Chuck Colson’s book, Kingdoms in Conflict. Boy that might have been 20 + years ago…

Our observations of the universe we call science are in essence discerning cause and effect relationships. Since science has never truly witnessed in even the most perfect of all laboratory circumstances life being uplifted from non life or for that matter a complex living creature evolving from a simple, you would think that the incredulous complexity in too many aspects to mention now of reproduction qualities in species would be logical for science to throw its hands in the air to say “We just don’t know!” And, “Perhaps a higher being is involved.” That is not unscientific. Its honest and its logical and should be rendered better science than just putting together models that foolishly suggest that nature could somehow evolve from nothing or simple celled organisms such complexity.

If I’m bitterly honest with myself and read all of the articles to do with the science of our beginnings, I would have to conclude that it is much more logical to conclude that evolution is indeed true but only makes sense on a micro level. This defines young earth creationists and old earth creationists only. Theistic evolutionists and materialistic evolutionists have traditionally been left out of this category. We creationists notice that species just show up in the fossil record fully developed and seemed to be designed in their genetic makeup to adapt. From this, when one sees the hind leg structure of a dino look similar to a chicken’s, they should conclude common design, not common decent. When one sees dna sequences, the building blocks of all of life that even find comparability in sequences between even pigs and humans, this should relay loud and clear, common design, not common decent.

So one must then assume that such design and the existence of energy insinuates the existence of a designer and a creator living outside of our paradigm where usable energy is running out. But did that Designer reveal Himself or itself? I build things and it sure makes no sense for me not to take credit for those as I would never be able to make a living! On a kind of a similar level, this universe was energized and it sure seems to have been designed…I think it makes sense that the maker and designer of that makes Himself known. So which one?

So, If I were (again) bitterly honest and compared and contrasted the religious worldviews, I would conclude that Christianity is more likely of the true Creator. Many many religions suggest that one must climb the ladder on our own to achieve to God or the ultimate experience, what have you…On the other hand, Christianity says something like the One and Only Holy God designed, created and sustains the universe so humans who obviously are bent on immorality, selfishness are additionally terribly arrogantly wrong to suggest that they could earn God! That is why Christianity has such a focus on grace for forgiveness, so that no man may boast (Eph 2:8,9) For this, in a court of law, you would seem to think that the jury would conclude that Christianity seems to be more likely a picture about the real God revealing Himself to man while the others which seem bent on attributing glory to mankind, it would seem more logical for these to be made by the imaginations of man! That is what I concluded as a sophomore in college and have been free ever since because the grace of God that forgives sin by the blood of Christ both forgave me of my sin against God and made the propensity for error in my ways far less powerful. That is goodnews Mr. Dalton!


(George) #8

Let’s suppose that your analogous example of finding “Im alive-little canyon reserve” would be like seeing John 3:16 encoded on the human “Y”.

What we are seeing is people taking pictures of rocks in the ground that they think are pointing vectors right to the Canyon.

The problem is the rocks are pretty vague… but can be interpreted that way.


(Ashwin S) #9

Not exactly… its people taking pictures of rocks pointing to the canyon… but refusing to investigate the canyon because its beyond the scope of their investigations… and some among this group claims, rocks cannot point to anything and so they refuse to see the obvious…
So this small group within the larger group then turns around and says… we searched, but found no canyon… Only rocks.


(John Dalton) #10

Hmm I see from the blurb she’s talking about philosophical materialism, which i don’t ascribe to, and which isn’t required for evolution. But let’s see.

Oh dear. I got about four minutes in. I don’t see why this is so hard for some people. Believing that we are ultimately biological “machines” doesn’t somehow strip us of our emotions, social inclinations, relationships, etc. The implication that only a belief in gods can give us such things is just silly IMO. There’s an equivocation here which is typical of such philosophies in my experience–that because we, biologically speaking, are machines of a sort, that automatically gives us a value equivalent to a purely mechanical machine.

Our observations of the universe we call science are in essence discerning cause and effect relationships. Since science has never truly witnessed in even the most perfect of all laboratory circumstances life being uplifted from non life or for that matter a complex living creature evolving from a simple, you would think that the incredulous complexity in too many aspects to mention now of reproduction qualities in species would be logical for science to throw its hands in the air to say “We just don’t know!” That is not unscientific. Its honest and its logical and should be rendered better science than just putting together models that foolishly suggest that nature could somehow evolve from nothing or simple celled organisms such complexity.

Well, you’re conflating abiogenesis and evolution for a start, and they are two different matters. Leaving that aside, I don’t see it this way. Scientists have developed a theory over a period of years which accords with the available evidence. It gives us a picture of what appears to have occurred in the past and to be continuing. There’s no good reason I can see to toss the available evidence aside and feign ignorance. And as I’ve said, although appealing to a higher being may make sense to many people for a variety of reasons, on an explanatory level it just adds more questions.

My understanding is that the basic processes of evolution apply at micro and macro levels.

I’m not quite sure what you mean here. Can you give an example?

From this, when one sees the hind leg structure of a dino look similar to a chicken’s, they should conclude common design, not common decent. When one sees dna sequences, the building blocks of all of life that even find comparability in sequences between even pigs and humans, this should relay loud and clear, common design, not common decent.

I’m not sure why. If we just consider those facts, common descent seems to be an equally viable explanation.

Well, as you can see from the latter portion of my title, I haven’t yet come across one which is compelling to me :slight_smile: More power to you though!


(Greg) #11

Hi John: I totally believe that you are capable of loving your family and enjoying the beauty of nature while adhering to a materialistic view of our existence! I sense that you are a kind hearted person who means well in even this discussion.

I would also surmise that you are a person agnostic in your beliefs that maybe leans towards yes, there is a Designer but unsure of which it is instead of putting a lot of stock in the idea that we exist out from nothingness. I could be wrong but this is my guess.

If this is correct, then the Christian worldview suggests that amidst the good qualities we have which are attributed to the fact that according to the Bible we are all made in God’s image, we also have bad ones. Don’t you believe that telling someone a lie to hide an impropriety on your part wrong? Or taking something from somebody not yours…that is called stealing. Jesus would even suggest that looking at a person with lust is adultery and having anger towards a fellow man like murder! I fall quite short of the standard. We are all prone to sin against the perfect God who created this universe.

Again, the Christian faith says that we are all under sin and our propensity to oppose goodness in our actions and demeanor warrant eternal separation from the very God who gives all good things and the ability to enjoy those good things!

That is the bad news.

The Goodnews is that the God who exists and loves us sent us a part of Himself in the form of a man who did miracle after miracle on earth and who died and rose again on the 3rd day. His name is Jesus.

Hollywood tries to depict Jesus in a bad light, always making his followers look like fools. And the Nature channel fails to bring the idea of a creator up in anything to do with our existence. We are inundated with psychological ploys to discredit anything to do with the Christian worldview. And I will be the first to tell you that choosing to follow this God by faith upon trusting Him for the forgiveness of my sin is not the easy road. I have been judged, ridiculed, accused of things totally contrary to my character. But following this God by faith and adhering to His Word is by far the best life and I would not trade back to my misery and second guessing life I had before.

I think if you considered some of the evidence posed by many in the ID movement, you would come to grips with the very real possibility that the theory of common decent macro type Darwinian evolution is quite a farce. But that is not enough. Even demons know that Darwinian evolution is a farce and that God created the universe. What is enough is choosing to by a mustard seed of faith humble oneself before that Creator, admitting sinfulness, repenting of it and receiving forgiveness from Him through His Son who died on a cross in our place.

Of course I cannot force you…I can only encourage you. I have nothing to gain…I have no blog to sell nor do I make a living on the back of sharing this message…I am losing time at work to share this. But I gain the potential for opportunity to one day call you “brother in Christ!”

Anyway, enjoy your day Mr. Dalton. Off to work I shall go. Will enjoy continuing the conversation.

Greg


(John Dalton) #12

Thank you, and likewise!

You’re wrong :slight_smile: I’m agnostic exactly in that I don’t know what the answer is. I’m not aware of convincing evidence for a designer, but to me that doesn’t imply that we would necessarily “exist out of nothingness”. What it does imply is an unanswered question. As far as I can see the designer itself would presumably have to exist out of nothingness, so I don’t see how that gets us anywhere.

I never quite get this–simply put, how come we get the blame for the bad qualities but not the credit for the good qualities? It’s a bit offensive to me as a humanist. I see the good and bad all as part and parcel of humanity. I might believe in God more if someone gave him the blame as well as the credit :slight_smile:

Sure.

In short, these basic doctrines of Christianity have never made much sense to me.

I think that’s pretty fair. I don’t watch much Hollywood material truth be told. I believe in being respectful to people about their beliefs, within reason. I appreciate when my personal beliefs are respected. I don’t have the answers to a lot of questions, and I understand that people can reasonably come to different conclusions about these things. I’m glad you’ve found peace in your beliefs.

I’ve looked at some of the ID arguments. Most simply, the great majority of scientists accept that evolution is true. I’m not a biologist but the evidence I’m aware of is pretty convincing. Newer developments like DNA seem to match up perfectly with what would be expected under evolution. I don’t see why God couldn’t have created life through evolution, as well. Even if I were to become a Christian one day, I would still accept what the scientists are saying here, and don’t see the two as mutually exclusive.

Indeed you can’t :slight_smile: I don’t think you’ll ever be able to call me that, but that’s okay. As a humanist, I hope we can all be brothers and sisters, even if our beliefs differ in some respects. Well, get back to work :slight_smile: Have a good one Greg, enjoying the conversation as well.


(George) #13

@Ashwin_s,

All analogies ultimately fail. I’m certainly going to invest in a lengthy discussion about where yours works and doesn’t work.

The only thing scientist won’t do is devise experiments that require controlling for divine variables.

This is exactly what alchemists tried to do… praying during experiments… to measure the power of god.

These notorious limits should be obvious too by now.


(Ashwin S) #14

I agree totally… how about avoiding analogies and sticking to facts…:slight_smile:

Making up analogies and counter analogies makes my head hurt.


(George) #15

THEN just use evidence… instead of inventing rarified applications of deduction that are no longer rooted in the real world.


(Greg) #16

I believe all people who have a foundation of being forgiven by Christ will be rewarded for the good they do on earth when they meet their Maker. Problem has it, that without that foundation, even good that is done on earth, if it finds its ultimacy in extraterrestrials, trees, idols, animals or perhaps worst of all, self, this would be considered sin in the eyes of a Holy God and would be completely and totally worthless and will burn.

And speaking of your being a humanist: If this is what you believe then that is fine. It is your choice. But you might want to redefine your status as an agnostic because perhaps reality has it that really, you are your own god disinterested to really entertain any other forms of truth claims outside the parameters of the revelation of your own mind. I don’t want to sound mean. I want to speak truth in love to another fellow human being I care for! Pride was the exact original sin in the Garden of Eden and perhaps the worst of all sins before God. Humanism is a form of pride bolstered by the world everywhere from Hollywood to the human resources dept in businesses. We are inundated with it. Those serious about seeking truth will be willing to in a shrewd and calculated way give this viewpoint a stiff arm for truly considering the tenants of other belief systems. I wonder about you sir. Are you willing?


(S. Joshua Swamidass) #17

@greg, you never answered some of the questions I had.

I’m honestly confused.


(John Dalton) #18

Well, the agnostic in my title has a specific connotation. I’m agnostic about the ultimate nature of reality–I don’t know what it is. I think I do entertain other truth claims, as can be shown by my participation in this conversation, for example. I’m pretty sure I spend more time considering these questions than most people.

Not the way I’m using the word. It’s a simple belief that human life has its own value. If you see value elsewhere in less clearly definite forms, I would normally say that’s fine. However, I don’t see it. And I find value where I do see it. I’d ask you why you call this a form of pride; I think it’s completely humble. It’s just us out here. There’s nothing more special making us special (not that there’s anything wrong with that :slight_smile:)


(Greg) #19

I should have quoted you Dr. Swamidass. I saw a statement from you that the process of scientific research does not withstand alongside itthe idea of intelligent design. To do so would be to essentially entertain even aliens (or God) into the scientific equation which can inhibit scientific research. Instead good science rides on the back of naturalistic methodologies. I agree to this point for solving present day issues like developing medications for human ills. I disagree that this form of science can be relied on for determining how complex life as we know it got where it is in this modern world. This form for determining how life became what it is today is the classic stance in the theistic evolutionist or evolutionary creations movement as it battles those in the ID movement.

If you did not suggest this, I apologize that I understood your statement wrongly.

Anyway, holding onto an evolutionary worldview that is highly similar in its methodology of Darwinian evolutionists (but perhaps uses differing jargon) is to hang ones hat on methodological naturalism as the cause of all of complex life. This is purely against the Bible both in what it says directly about how God created life in its forms and against the Bible in that this philosophy puts God in a little teeny weeny box while nature takes the ultimate credit.

I know you are busy but am curious if I am understanding your position wrongly. Where do you officially stand on this issue today?


(Greg) #20

Aha-pride is the most interesting of all ideas. I have mentioned this once before to some friends: I read Ben Franklin’s autobiography and he spoke of his goal of achieving more virtuous character traits by assigning a periodic goals of bettering himself in 13. He included virtues such as cleanliness, sincerity and justice amongst another 9 on the original list which he would practice. As the story goes, Franklin was encouraged by a friend to include humility on the list too. At first Franklin was insulted by this suggestion, but chose to make it virtue number 13 to be practiced and accomplished.

What is so fascinating about the behavior project Franklin engaged himself in is that he admitted success in only becoming more virtuous in 12 of the 13 traits. The one he failed to achieve was humility because the more humble he got, the more proud he became of his accomplishment! Now that is honest.

He also interestingly submitted that out of all of the character traits he sought to better himself with, the one he failed to achieve but at least acted out in his behavioral facade-humility-was the one that profited him the most financially! lsn’t that true! I always give the business to the partner who appears the most down to earth and humble. Humble looking people who seem concerned about your interests are just more likeable and seemingly trustworthy! But it seems that humility without reflecting it back to Another is quite difficult indeed and I would dare say impossible because self credit inducing pride sneeks in as it did in Franklin’s case.

In God’s economy per the Bible, this form of humility would be called hypocrisy or false humility. Humility in God’s economy is loving and adoring and honoring Him because He first loved us. My wife and I have that as our marriage verse. 1Jn 4:19

This brings us full circle: The reason why the issue of theistic evolutionism vs creationism is such a hot topic in the Christian worldview is because Darwinian evolutionary forms that is largely accepted in much of its methodology by theistic evolutionists tends to place God far off the radar of our thinking to be replaced with naturalism. That can easily introduce form of significant pride as forms of religiosity with God out of view can grow such pride in the worst of all forms. I bet you know some of them. Theistic evolution says, God seeds the planet, then let nature do its thing. God can be easily seen as impotent and unworthy and far off human kind’s radar for humankind to take the cake. I’ve been there a time or two and had to be taken back to the spiritual wood shed so to speak for some good ole fashioned discipline :slight_smile:

This is not to say that those who invented such a philosophy meant for this. they were perhaps well intentioned. But evolutionary philosophies can easily cause mankind to forget God who is not the distant observer, but the close, hands-on Creator.

Our pastor just this past Sunday mentioned a quote by Dietrich Bonhoeffer out of one of his books that says, “satan does not here fill us with hatred of God, but with forgetfulness of God…” I believe this is very true and for this, I promise you that I will be praying for you and others in your position that I encounter that you will see even more clearly, remembering that God exists and that He is good and loving in things like:
1.your viewing of every sunrise and sunset,
2.starlit sky on clear country nights
3. newborn babies mustering up a smile seeming out of nowhere to their Momma and grandpa
4.acts of kindness by strangers
5. observations of the deepest of complex forms in life which include processes that cause for life to be reproduced,
6. even the blade of grass that in all of its essence is quite complex, containing dna strands a mile long as the symbols that define its essence as created by God.

I know, I know, it may seem awful arrogant of me to use the semantic will see even more clearly when you claim you do not see God at all in these things. But in humility, I submit myself to the revealed truth in the Scriptures that says in Romans 1:18-20 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteous of men (that is all mankind)…for what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.” I humbly submit to God’s Word and pray that God gives you even more clarity about what you already see of His handiwork in what you already have been shown and have clearly seen! When you see such clearly, you will understand very plainly how the Gospel of Jesus Christ is forgiveness and reconciliation to God by faith and grace so that no man may boast. This is the happiest place I have chosen to rest and I know it to be true, John. My hope for you is that you will experience the same.