I believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that He historically lived, died, and rose from the dead. I believe that he was the firstfruits of a great harvest of God that will include me personally at the end of time.

I believe every historical account in the Bible as historical. Concerning the most hotly-debated historical account in the Bible, I believe there is room in the account of Creation for this earth as we observe it to be very old. From the quantity of layers in ice to the quantity of rings in trees to the existence of stars millions of light years away to the number of dating methods used by both Christians and unbelievers, it seems pretty obvious that this place is far older than 6,000 years old. I see no reason to doubt that it isn’t. You might ask, “Well, how does that observation fit into our understanding of the Scripture?” I don’t know: about as well as the fact that the earth rotates around the sun fits into our understanding of the Scripture (which, if we’re strapped in by unnecessary literal interpretations, seems to dogmatically imply that the earth does not rotate). To that fact, no one bats an eye anymore. To the old age of the earth, I don’t think any Christian will be batting their eyes as more time passes.

I do not plead agnostic on the theory of evolution anymore. When I say evolution,” I mean the theory that all complex organisms evolved from simpler and yet simpler organisms over vast periods of time. I would dispute it on social and scientific bases before a theological one. Social, in the sense that the current theory of evolution is the product of a university system that works as a blind organism. Scientific, in the sense that this kind of evolution propelled by genetic drifts, mutations, and natural selection has never been observed, is not heavily supported by the fossil record, and only exists as part of a paradigm sifting through the same observations someone who does not believe in the theory grants and uses similarly to support their own paradigm. I believe that the theory of evolution–which is that given time, two different populations of the same species will eventually become two different species–will never find valid support for itself beyond the attempted coherency of the philosophical paradigm it works under, which falls prey to the illusions of those dependent on it to make it more than just another area of human discourse, like literature and religion, which it is.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s