I will remain patient in seeing what some of the prominent conclusions may be drawn within this forum. This is no light matter…we are only speaking on behalf of God Himself. Just like Job’s friends who spoke for God so eloquently and confidently and in the end were embarrassed to find God declaring them as incompetents.
I have noticed a trend lately that God is not letting godless chatter and unbecomming behavior and theology slide without direct action and discipline by Him as of late. Times are different. I can give numerous examples. I will try to abide more to remain more true to Scripture and reverent to God a literal Creator of kinds so i dont get caught w my pants down so to speak.To all the players,in this discourse, there is reason for reverence. God says He created forms directly…how far do we want to take the evolution thing borrowed by the mainstream?
As far as teleology is concerned, it gets quite confusing because there seem to be players in the arguments here who SAY they accept teleology but the essence of their views is that they are repeating a mainstream naturalistic evolutionary stance and somehow suggest that God did this as He indwelt nature etc. Hey, if that is what one wants to believe, fine. This does nothing to attract a person to the real God of Scripture. In fact, if i were a non believer and recognized that a person was attempting a model that gave a rationale for materialistic common decent evolution and at the same time suggested that God really did it, i would have NO interest in that God. What an impotent God that would be…i would think that this guy is trying to pull the wool over my eyes and trying to sell me a religious book while he doesnt receive any flack from his scientist counterparts at the university for denying what they all believe: evolution. Thats a recipe for religiousity-puke. God is either God with a big G,God, or forget it…your just trying to sell me another book. Most agnostic biologists in this country lean more toward there being a God than not while still trusting evolutionism. Aren’t Christians to be beyond this? Christians believe in God, not god.
I have read some of Joshs works which propose mathematically that chimps and humans must be related. He says that no one has come up with better math to shoot this proof for evolution down. Well, what i sense is that his mistake is letting too many presumptions FOR evolution guide his setting up the model for the mathematical computation. In one post Josh makes the comment “if there is a God” or “if God exists” then yada yada. Wrong thinking. God does exist and let faith in God, Creator of kinds FIRST, direct the possibilities and math second. With God, those possibilities are endless.
For example-You will probably think of me as imbeccilic for suggesting this but here it goes anyway…who is to say that the apes did not devolve from human kind? Could we consider this in the realm of possibility? Of course, why not? I dont know…Scripture talks of God granting to sinners the state of being of the idols which they worship and ancient cultures definately did deify animals.
Considering this as a possibility in a realm of infinite possibilities on an earth that God created and is sovereign over demonstrates that applying mathematical analysis supporting the evolution from apelike to humanlike first assumes that they evolved when there could be a whole host of other options that blow up that math…some of which could be options completely out of range of what we would have expected. Yes, historical science mixing with big G God is tough. Be humble or you end up like Jobs friends.