Opposition Between Creationism and Evolution is Satanic
Posted: Sun Nov 02, 2014 4:49 pm
Hello everyone,
I am new to this forum so hello! Typically, I don't introduce myself on a forum by starting a thread but I thought it might be more respectful to do this instead of posting my thoughts in another thread about evolution. Hopefully, this way I kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, by introducing myself in terms of the thought I have on the opposition between Creationism and Evolution. Here goes:
In Genesis, we read that God created life and told it to "go forth and multiply." Later we learn that "the wages of sin are death" and that spiritual redemption and salvation from sin leads to heavenly ascent and eternal life.
Now consider the general premise of Darwinian Evolution: organisms propagate as broadly as possible and then the weakest are weeded out by a process of natural selection in which the strongest and fittest individuals survive while the weakest die off. Is this really so different from what the Bible says? Broad propagation is described by the phrase, "go forth and multiply." Natural selection is a bit more complex to explain in terms of the idea of death being the wages of sin, but let me explain:
God exercised the power of creation to set the universe in motion. Out of the propagation of all creative power, destruction emerged as a byproduct. Just as Lucifer is a fallen angel, sin (destructive power) is fallen creative power. Not all sin is killing, but all sin gradually leads in the direction of killing and death because sin begets sin and 'goes forth and multiplies' just as life does.
So although non-human forms of life can't technically 'sin' because they don't have the capacity for conscience and freewill, they are subject to the propagation of deadly forms of destruction that are able to consume animals as well as humans. So, in effect, you can just as easily say that animals die because of sin in the world as you can say that humans do. In other words, the 'wages of sin is death' may also be applied to animals and other non-human life forms.
So if all life-forms are fallen from grace and destroying each other, how can some be 'naturally selected' for survival and reproduction? Basically, just because they propagate faster than death consumes them. They are in a race with death as species. To the extent they are delivered (forgiven) from this fate of extinction, we can say they are selected by grace to persist in 'eternal life' as a species.
So the only real difference between the logic of Darwinian Evolution and what the Bible says is attribution of the processes to God's design. Atheist science wants to claim that nature propagating according to inherent natural laws is somehow exclusive of God's presence as creator of these laws and the divine substance of which the universe is made of, which they perfectly govern. Instead, I would argue that there is a satanic oppositionality in insisting that creation makes claims that contradict natural laws.
The reason I say it is satanic is because truly submitting to God requires that we submit to whatever is revealed as truth because any and all truth can only exist as true because God made it so. Anything that is ultimately revealed as false is not an accurate description of God's work and, of course, bearing false witness is also a sin according to the commandments.
So science suffers from the temptation to pride and competition with God that was Lucifer's fall from grace. A true scientist submits to revelations of truth, which if truly true are direct revelations from God about His creation, insofar as He created this universe for us to know and thereby steward (take dominion) over it according to His will. So for a scientist to argue against God and theism in favor of atheism, focussing on misinterpretations or weaknesses in earlier expressions of divine revelation, is just denial of being submissive to God's will in favor of attributing the will to know truth to humans as separate from God.
Ultimately, I think we should recognize that ALL sincere attempt to seek and know truth are expressions of Holy Spirit. When Galileo had his famous conflict with the church about the center of the universe being the sun or Earth, it was not so much that theism was inherently flawed in its dogma but that the human authorities who maintained church dogma at that time had fallen out of submission to truth in favor of construing the universe according to their own preferences. There may have been good devotional reasons to teach Earth as the center of the universe, but their lack of ability to reconcile devotion with the possibility that Earth was not the center, and need not be for God's presence and power to be acknowledged, tempted them to suppress revealed truth instead of embracing it as a divine gift revealed to them through Galileo.
As such, I think it is accurate to call it satanic the way that modern culture has created an opposition between religion and science. It is a way to use science to evoke pride and rejection of God/religion and also a way to tempt believers into rejecting science as a method for revealing truth about nature, God's work.
Please excuse the length of this post. I could probably have summarized it in a shorter text but once I got going, I decided to just leave it like this. Hopefully, it will make more sense this way. Thank you for your attention if you made it this far.
I am new to this forum so hello! Typically, I don't introduce myself on a forum by starting a thread but I thought it might be more respectful to do this instead of posting my thoughts in another thread about evolution. Hopefully, this way I kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, by introducing myself in terms of the thought I have on the opposition between Creationism and Evolution. Here goes:
In Genesis, we read that God created life and told it to "go forth and multiply." Later we learn that "the wages of sin are death" and that spiritual redemption and salvation from sin leads to heavenly ascent and eternal life.
Now consider the general premise of Darwinian Evolution: organisms propagate as broadly as possible and then the weakest are weeded out by a process of natural selection in which the strongest and fittest individuals survive while the weakest die off. Is this really so different from what the Bible says? Broad propagation is described by the phrase, "go forth and multiply." Natural selection is a bit more complex to explain in terms of the idea of death being the wages of sin, but let me explain:
God exercised the power of creation to set the universe in motion. Out of the propagation of all creative power, destruction emerged as a byproduct. Just as Lucifer is a fallen angel, sin (destructive power) is fallen creative power. Not all sin is killing, but all sin gradually leads in the direction of killing and death because sin begets sin and 'goes forth and multiplies' just as life does.
So although non-human forms of life can't technically 'sin' because they don't have the capacity for conscience and freewill, they are subject to the propagation of deadly forms of destruction that are able to consume animals as well as humans. So, in effect, you can just as easily say that animals die because of sin in the world as you can say that humans do. In other words, the 'wages of sin is death' may also be applied to animals and other non-human life forms.
So if all life-forms are fallen from grace and destroying each other, how can some be 'naturally selected' for survival and reproduction? Basically, just because they propagate faster than death consumes them. They are in a race with death as species. To the extent they are delivered (forgiven) from this fate of extinction, we can say they are selected by grace to persist in 'eternal life' as a species.
So the only real difference between the logic of Darwinian Evolution and what the Bible says is attribution of the processes to God's design. Atheist science wants to claim that nature propagating according to inherent natural laws is somehow exclusive of God's presence as creator of these laws and the divine substance of which the universe is made of, which they perfectly govern. Instead, I would argue that there is a satanic oppositionality in insisting that creation makes claims that contradict natural laws.
The reason I say it is satanic is because truly submitting to God requires that we submit to whatever is revealed as truth because any and all truth can only exist as true because God made it so. Anything that is ultimately revealed as false is not an accurate description of God's work and, of course, bearing false witness is also a sin according to the commandments.
So science suffers from the temptation to pride and competition with God that was Lucifer's fall from grace. A true scientist submits to revelations of truth, which if truly true are direct revelations from God about His creation, insofar as He created this universe for us to know and thereby steward (take dominion) over it according to His will. So for a scientist to argue against God and theism in favor of atheism, focussing on misinterpretations or weaknesses in earlier expressions of divine revelation, is just denial of being submissive to God's will in favor of attributing the will to know truth to humans as separate from God.
Ultimately, I think we should recognize that ALL sincere attempt to seek and know truth are expressions of Holy Spirit. When Galileo had his famous conflict with the church about the center of the universe being the sun or Earth, it was not so much that theism was inherently flawed in its dogma but that the human authorities who maintained church dogma at that time had fallen out of submission to truth in favor of construing the universe according to their own preferences. There may have been good devotional reasons to teach Earth as the center of the universe, but their lack of ability to reconcile devotion with the possibility that Earth was not the center, and need not be for God's presence and power to be acknowledged, tempted them to suppress revealed truth instead of embracing it as a divine gift revealed to them through Galileo.
As such, I think it is accurate to call it satanic the way that modern culture has created an opposition between religion and science. It is a way to use science to evoke pride and rejection of God/religion and also a way to tempt believers into rejecting science as a method for revealing truth about nature, God's work.
Please excuse the length of this post. I could probably have summarized it in a shorter text but once I got going, I decided to just leave it like this. Hopefully, it will make more sense this way. Thank you for your attention if you made it this far.