Heretical?

[6days]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys. A recent article from a biologist at Biologos,
"...as a Christian biologist I would be perfectly fine with ... God (setting) up the cosmos in a way to allow for abiogenesis to take place. Perhaps he created the first life directly—though, as we will see, there are lines of evidence that I think are suggestive of the former rather than the latter. "
http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...iogenesis-and-the-origins-of-the-genetic-code

Heretical?

 

[daqq]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys. A recent article from a biologist at Biologos,
"...as a Christian biologist I would be perfectly fine with ... God (setting) up the cosmos in a way to allow for abiogenesis to take place. Perhaps he created the first life directly—though, as we will see, there are lines of evidence that I think are suggestive of the former rather than the latter. "
http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...iogenesis-and-the-origins-of-the-genetic-code

Heretical?

Hmmm, well, let's see, did Mary then essentially come from a chimp or a monkey? And would that not mean that Yeshua necessarily had chimp or monkey blood flowing through his veins also? And according to the Trinitarian system then would it not be true that God became a chimp or a monkey to save the chimps and monkeys? But if God became a chimp or a monkey to save the chimps and monkeys then why do so many claiming to know God continue to act like chimps and monkeys? If these things were true then God would not have done anyone any good by becoming a chimp or monkey because it did not change the chimps and monkeys into anything else from what they already were and continue to be. I would say therefore that something is amiss but not sure if what is amiss is only part of the equation or all of it.

 

[iouae]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys. A recent article from a biologist at Biologos,
"...as a Christian biologist I would be perfectly fine with ... God (setting) up the cosmos in a way to allow for abiogenesis to take place. Perhaps he created the first life directly—though, as we will see, there are lines of evidence that I think are suggestive of the former rather than the latter. "
http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...iogenesis-and-the-origins-of-the-genetic-code

Heretical?

Definition of heretical
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by heresy
2
: of, relating to, or characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards : unorthodox

Most things said on this forum are heretical, by the above definition.

 

[patrick jane]

Definition of heretical
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by heresy
2
: of, relating to, or characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards : unorthodox

Most things said on this forum are heretical, by the above definition.

That's blasphemy of TOL - :kookoo:

 

[theophilus]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys. A recent article from a biologist at Biologos,
"...as a Christian biologist I would be perfectly fine with ... God (setting) up the cosmos in a way to allow for abiogenesis to take place. Perhaps he created the first life directly—though, as we will see, there are lines of evidence that I think are suggestive of the former rather than the latter. "
http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...iogenesis-and-the-origins-of-the-genetic-code

Heretical?

Yes.

Heb. 11:1 Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. 2 For by it the men of old gained approval. 3 By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.

Abiogenesis completely annuls Gen. 1 and thereby places all of scripture into question.

 

[iouae]

That's blasphemy of TOL - :kookoo:

Definition of heretical
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by heresy
2
: of, relating to, or characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards : unorthodox

What are "accepted beliefs"? Shall we take the biggest churches beliefs as "orthodox" viz. Catholic beliefs?

 

[patrick jane]

Definition of heretical
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by heresy
2
: of, relating to, or characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards : unorthodox

What are "accepted beliefs"? Shall we take the biggest churches beliefs as "orthodox" viz. Catholic beliefs?

Yes, you must be Catholic :chuckle:

 

[jamie]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys.

Three monkeys sat in a coconut tree
Discussing things as they're said to be.
Said one to the others, Now listen, you two,
There's a certain rumor that can't be true –
That man descended from our noble race.
The very idea is a disgrace.

No monkey ever deserted his wife,
Starved her babies and ruined her life.
And you've never known a mother monk
To leave her babies with others to bunk,
Or to pass them on from one to another
'Til they scarcely know who is their mother.

And another thing you'll never see,
A monk build a fence 'round a coconut tree
And let the coconuts go to waste,
Forbidding all other monks to taste.
Why, if I'd put a fence around a tree,
Starvation would force you to steal from me.

Here's another thing a monk won't do –
Get out at night and get on a stew,
Or use a gun or a club or a knife
To take some other monkey's life.
Yes, man descended (the ornery cuss),
But brothers, he didn't descend from us!

– Author Unknown

 

[6days]

Definition of heretical
1
: of, relating to, or characterized by heresy
2
: of, relating to, or characterized by departure from accepted beliefs or standards : unorthodox

What are "accepted beliefs"? Shall we take the biggest churches beliefs as "orthodox" viz. Catholic beliefs?

Lets say that heresy is a deviation from standard Biblical teaching. If you wish we could discuss how the Catholic church has adopted positions over time that contradict the Bible, or perhaps even contradict their own previous positions.

 

[Cruciform]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys.

• First of all, "heresy" applies specifically to matters of doctrine (theology), not to questions of science (biology). So the answer to your question would be an unequivocal "no."
• Second, the principle of organic evolution with respect to the human species in no way suggests that "people evolved from monkeys." You may want to adequately educate yourself in matters of science before commenting further on such matters.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[6days]

First of all, "heresy" applies specifically to matters of doctrine (theology), not to questions of science (biology). So the answer to your question would be an unequivocal "no."

When a church, or Christian leader adopts and teaches secular 'science' that contradicts God's Word, it does become a matter of doctrine (theology)

[*]Second, the principle of organic evolution with respect to the human species in no way suggests that "people evolved from monkeys." You may want to adequately educate yourself in matters of science before commenting further on such matters.

Perhaps this topic is hitting too close to home for you. If you wish to be a bit more technical, evolutionism (which the Catholic church seems to accept?) DOES apply to the human species evolving from ape like creatures.

 

[jamie]

If you wish we could discuss how the Catholic church has adopted positions over time that contradict the Bible, or perhaps even contradict their own previous positions.

Matthew 24:4-5 And Jesus answered and said to them: "Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name saying, ‘I am the Christ’ and will deceive many."

There are men who claim they are not the person of Christ but they are the authority of Christ as head of a church.

There is a long string of these men ... and they have deceived many.

 

[Rosenritter]

• First of all, "heresy" applies specifically to matters of doctrine (theology), not to questions of science (biology). So the answer to your question would be an unequivocal "no."
• Second, the principle of organic evolution with respect to the human species in no way suggests that "people evolved from monkeys." You may want to adequately educate yourself in matters of science before commenting further on such matters.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

Perhaps it would be more technically correct to say "evolved from rocks" then.

 

[Ben Masada]

Would you consider it heresy for a Christian to teach that life arose from non life; and people evolved from monkeys. A recent article from a biologist at Biologos,
"...as a Christian biologist I would be perfectly fine with ... God (setting) up the cosmos in a way to allow for abiogenesis to take place. Perhaps he created the first life directly—though, as we will see, there are lines of evidence that I think are suggestive of the former rather than the latter. "
http://biologos.org/blogs/dennis-ve...iogenesis-and-the-origins-of-the-genetic-code

Heretical?

No, it would not be heretical to teach that life arose from non-life or that people evolved from monkeys. It would be illogical and ignorant, especially if they cannot prove what they say. From the moment we were granted the attribute of Freewill, we have all the right in the world to use it for good or for evil.

 

[Cruciform]

When a church, or Christian leader adopts and teaches secular 'science' that contradicts God's Word, it does become a matter of doctrine (theology).

• There IS no "secular science." There is only "science."
• In what setting might "a church or Christian leader" be teaching science?
• Precisely how do you imagine science could "contradict God's word"?

Perhaps this topic is hitting too close to home for you. If you wish to be a bit more technical, evolutionism (which the Catholic church seems to accept?) DOES apply to the human species evolving from ape like creatures.

Yes, and...?

 

[Cruciform]

Perhaps it would be more technically correct to say "evolved from rocks" then.

No...

 

[Rosenritter]

No...

Then what, allegedly, did humans evolve from? Rocks is the official theory. In the beginning, There were rocks. And it rained on the rocks and from those rocks the amino acids formed which then magically formed the first cell which evolved into men and mangos.

 

[6days]

When a church, or Christian leader adopts and teaches secular 'science' that contradicts God's Word, it does become a matter of doctrine (theology).

•There IS no "secular science." There is only "science."

I agree, and that is why I put the word science in quote marks. There are people who teach things as if it is science, but instead they are promoting secular ideas about our origins. ( secular 'science')

•In what setting might "a church or Christian leader" be teaching science?

What I said was "When a church, or Christian leader adopts and teaches secular 'science' that contradicts God's Word, it does become a matter of doctrine (theology)". If a person teaches from the pulpit that death existed in our world for millions of years before sin - then they are teaching secular 'science'...and preaching a compromised gospel.

•Precisely how do you imagine science could "contradict God's word"?

Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word. Science never contradicts His Word. However secular 'science' undermines the gospel.

Perhaps this topic is hitting too close to home for you. If you wish to be a bit more technical, evolutionism (which the Catholic church seems to accept?) DOES apply to the human species evolving from ape like creatures.

Yes, and...?

Interesting that you so willingly disregard the Bible. We are not descendants of monkeys, rocks, or ape like creatures. We were created in His image on the 6th day... man formed from the dust and woman from mans rib.

 

[The Horn]

According to science, humans did not evolve from monkeys. They evolved from a common ancestor with chimpanzees, who are apes, not monkeys . No one know exactly how life began , but science does not say that life evolved from non life.

 

[Rosenritter]

According to science, humans did not evolve from monkeys. They evolved from a common ancestor with chimpanzees, who are apes, not monkeys . No one know exactly how life began , but science does not say that life evolved from non life.

So where did this First Life come from?