Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Science & Origins



Message

GriefOrGlory -> Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/24/2008 10:03:02 AM)

GriefOrGlory.com

[image]http://drawalot.com/smblog/comics/2007-09-26_web.jpg[/image]

This is a webcomic I drew to express something interesting I was told about interpreting the bible. Please don't misunderstand me, I myself am very Christian and I do not mean to offend any Geocentrists or crusaders.

There's more at www.GriefOrGlory.com. What do you guys think?



brothertodd -> RE: Science VS Evolution (5/25/2008 12:07:02 AM)

I like it, but here's a challenge for you Have the Christian friend fase issues and obsticals that challenge his faith. Ill be keeping an eye on it, Keep it up



GriefOrGlory -> RE: Science VS Evolution (5/26/2008 9:09:57 AM)

Grief Or Glory.com
Click here to view the comic strip
[image]http://drawalot.com/smblog/comics/2007_08_08_strip.jpg[/image]
Here's another strip. I felt this was really deep realization so I worked really hard on this strip. I actually had to redo it 3 different times to get it right.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution (5/26/2008 12:14:50 PM)

The art = amazing. I'd love to see more like this.

I must say though, the words didn't hit their mark with me. Could you perhaps explain the points that you are trying to make in those two strips? I would like to encourage you in them, I think you have a lot of talent.



GriefOrGlory -> RE: Science VS Evolution (5/27/2008 10:23:35 AM)

The first strip can be a little heady, but basically it's saying that the idea that the world was created in literally 7 days will soon be considered as outdated as the idea that the world is flat or that the world revolves around the earth. It simply couldn't be 7 human literal days, because our "day" is defined by the sun, which was created on one of those days.

The second strip begins with the little girl who is listening to Jesus' sermon. At first we don't know who she is listening to because the guys don't see anyone in the room. Jesus is spirit, so only those who are spiritual can see him. In the last panel it is revealed that it is Jesus so you have to then go back to the first panel to understand what he was saying. He is saying that he is watching everyone, but almost no one has any idea.

I have more at my sit, www.GriefOrGlory.com which are far less complicated and much easier to read. Take a look at those and let me know what you think.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution (5/27/2008 11:56:16 AM)

Ah, I understand now. Well, I completely disagree with the point being made in the "heady" strip. I was an old-Earth Christian myself until I started studying evidence for the young-Earth side. I've come to think that old-Earth theology is just a half-hearted attempt to harmonize macro-evolution and creationism, which is quite incompatible by their very nature.

While your argument that the concept of a day is based on the sun, which did not exist in the beginning, I believe that it fails on one significant point - "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the Earth" - the timer starts NOW. Time continues to pass, regardless of who is around to watch it. From this point onward, I believe that several literal days pass as God does his handiwork. Why seven? Why not six? Why Not eight? God just seems to have a thing for the number seven. It appears so many times in the Bible, transcending authors and context to a point of unmistakable importance. God just likes the number 7. He COULD have done it in more or less, but he didn't.

The second major point to be made here is that the book of Genesis was not written as everything was being created. This isn't Narnia (see The Magician's Nephew, by C.S. Lewis). The creation account was written in retrospect, with God-inspired accuracy. Whether that was Abram, Adam (for parts) or someone else entirely, it was most certainly written post-creation.



Well, I looked through your website, and I feel like my opinions are more firmly grounded. Your art is fantastic - it's smooth, consistent, and funny. Your text on the other hand just seems to lack the same level of depth and richness. I hope you don't mind my saying so, that's just how I see it.

If you want me to go into more depth, i'd be happy to. I just didn't want you to think I was layin' the smack down or anything. I do appreciate your work. [:)]



CCCdnt -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/27/2008 2:52:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GriefOrGlory

GriefOrGlory.com

[image]http://drawalot.com/smblog/comics/2007-09-26_web.jpg[/image]

This is a webcomic I drew to express something interesting I was told about interpreting the bible. Please don't misunderstand me, I myself am very Christian and I do not mean to offend any Geocentrists or crusaders.


But apparently you do not mind offending Christians who believe that God did create everything in 6 literal days?

Also, I am curious of the way you described yourself - "very Christian". A person is either a Christian or is not a Christian. If then by this you meant that you try to behave in a "very Christian manner", then I would say that making and presenting a comic that belittles those that believe in a straight-forward/plain reading of the Genesis account of creation is not an example of this manner.



hjemerson -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/27/2008 4:41:40 PM)

I like the strip, I belive it could be used to reach the youth !



GriefOrGlory -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/27/2008 10:37:25 PM)

Wow, thanks Locke for taking the time to read more of my work. I appreciate your critique of my writing. In depth would be even more appreciated :)
I like conveying my stories visually and I've been trying to keep the words to a minimum. But maybe I wouldn't be afraid to say more if I knew how to strengthen the writing. I certainly don't want it to be lacking in depth and richness.

II Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

Gen 1:31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/28/2008 2:34:51 PM)

Alrighty, well let's see:

Turn the other cheek:
The final text bubble was obviously intended to be a semi-witty ending, as many strips often do. It gives the strip completion. However, this statement seems unnatural. If this strip is a rebuke of the literal interpretation of that verse, you may want your character to say so. "You don't have to take it so literally" as an example of content, not necessarily exact wording.

The Mexican kid series:
While initially mildly amusing, turned offensive pretty fast. Even your "Christian" character seems quite happy to take it way too far. Not out of character, because he also has some rather violent tendencies. Don't get me wrong - I think that there is a place for humor in that context, I just don't think it was written with enough respect or delicacy for the subject matter. Writing-wise, the words pretty much fell flat for me. They weren't overly interesting or funny, just... there.

Creationism:
Even if you disagree with this belief, the bible speaks out very clearly about mockers. "The mocker seeks wisdom and finds none, but knowledge comes easily to the discerning." - Proverbs 14:6. I don't expect your beliefs to fall in line with my own, but I would ask you to be careful not to venture into mockery with your work. These aren't satan-worshiping people that you're mocking - they're brothers and sisters in Christ. Now, of course there is a place for satire in such things - but as above, it must be done with delicacy and respect. Anyway, from a writing standpoint, it was just offensive to a young-earth believer such as myself. CCCdnt said it more harshly than I would have, but I can't say that I disagree. More on mockery in the bible.

Mexican kid & the girl:
That was both funny and yet still not unoffensive. Kudos [;)]

Mexican kid tries to swear:
The words in this strip cheapen your "Christian" character, making him hypocritical and not worth respecting.



Hopefully these comments gave you a good start, anyway.

God bless!



GriefOrGlory -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/29/2008 8:59:21 AM)

Thanks for the help. I think it will take a while for me to really reach the level of writing I am aiming for, but my newer strips should be progressively better in terms of writing. It's quite difficult to make each strip funny and really have some kind of kicker at the end but in the future I'm sure I won't have to resort to slapstick or offensiveness as often.

The only idea I think I'd disagree with is on the creationism strip. How can we seriously defend such an obvious misinterpretation of the bible? Science has substantial evidence against us and there's no reason why "day" couldn't be just another parable to help us human beings understand something that God did before we even came into existence. It's fine if one chooses to believe in a particuliar interpretation, but we should be able to provide at least some form of substantial evidence if we really want logical and reasoning people to take us seriously.



CCCdnt -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/29/2008 10:29:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GriefOrGlory

Thanks for the help. I think it will take a while for me to really reach the level of writing I am aiming for, but my newer strips should be progressively better in terms of writing. It's quite difficult to make each strip funny and really have some kind of kicker at the end but in the future I'm sure I won't have to resort to slapstick or offensiveness as often.

The only idea I think I'd disagree with is on the creationism strip. How can we seriously defend such an obvious misinterpretation of the bible? Science has substantial evidence against us and there's no reason why "day" couldn't be just another parable to help us human beings understand something that God did before we even came into existence. It's fine if one chooses to believe in a particuliar interpretation, but we should be able to provide at least some form of substantial evidence if we really want logical and reasoning people to take us seriously.


Rather than get into a debate here on a six-day creation, it would probably be better to search through the Science folder, as YEC versus "long-age evolution" has been debated over and over there, and if you want to further discuss it, to start a thread there. My guess is that this thread would probably be flagged as off-topic if that debate were to happen in this thread since the subject of your thread seems to be to get people's opinions on your comic strips.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (5/29/2008 10:53:46 AM)

At the end of the day, this isn't about how long it took God to make the universe. This is about picking your battles. While you COULD be campaigning fiercely against perceived flaws in young-earth theory, your work could be concentrating on things that actually save souls and encourage people to be more Christ-like.

Slapstick is a valid medium. Even offense can be a valid medium, in a very controlled context. What you have to learn to do is stay on the side of believers, and not to alienate them, so you are working WITH us instead of against us.

For instance. I think that 5-point Calvinism is bunk. Please, no posts debating Calvinism. That's not why we're here. I believe that it is a ridiculous and completely unbiblical belief - however - you won't catch me laughing at Calvinists in my writing. I may express my opinions about Calvinism by showing them to be wrong in my writing, perhaps through argument between characters, but I will treat their mis held belief with respect because I don't want to alienate people - I want to show them truth.



GriefOrGlory -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 10:42:00 AM)

I've been praying about it and I decided to take down 2/3 of my strips. When I write the strips I usually one draw about 1 out of every 10 or so ideas that I come up with. I might as well put my art through the same process of elimination to try and raise my own standard. I feel really good about it.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 1:24:35 PM)

Good for you! I know that it's hard... as a graphic designer, I have to reject my own work constantly, and it always pains me. Interesting thing too - sometimes even the rejects are salvageable, they just need a little more thought & attention.



Miril -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 5:01:57 PM)

HI Shaun. [:D]

That is beautiful clean artwork.

Don't be afraid to be a bit radical, that is what we are missing in our faith. Too many people are afraid to offend, art is art, and Christian art while keeping the message of God will sometimes be offensive to one person or the other.

I didn't find the Hispanic kid to be offensive and I am Hispanic. I thought it was cute.

However, I do wonder about all the slapping you have going on? Keep the violence but make it spiritual, not in the flesh. I see your message but you are portraying it in the flesh instead of in the spiritual realm. Aside form the date with Jesus. [:D]

Remember, that we are fighting evil spirits not other people in the flesh. See what you can come up with. Read revelations.

here are some people you may want to acquaint yourself with... http://www.jctv.org/flashindex.php

Familiarize yourself with world news but from a Christian perspective, if you are not already. Here is a good site: http://www.christianpost.com/

Acts 13:49 (NKJV)
49 And the word of the Lord was being spread throughout all the region.

Proverbs 16:3 (NKJV)
3 Commit your works to the LORD,
And your thoughts will be established.



evry1needsgod -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 8:39:52 PM)

Yeah, I too have to say that it was a bit confusing reading those 2 strips. I did not quite understand them until you, GriefOrGlory, explained them.

And I agree with CCCdnt and Locke. I, as a YEC Christian and a literal interpreter of God's word, was very offended by you comic strip. I understand that you believe there is scientific fact that proves a literal interpretation of the Bible wrong, but I just don't agree with you. There is plenty of evidence, which is completely IGNORED by evolutionists and such that supports a literal 7 day week mentioned in Genesis. I suggest visiting AiG (www.answersingenesis.org) and CMI (creationontheweb.com) and you will see how much evidence there is for a YEC, literal interpretation of God's word, specifically in Genesis. And I do not believe your intentions when writing you comic strip was to offend fellow Christians, but it has and will. Just my 2 cents.



Blackhawkk -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 8:57:54 PM)

Hi folks!

Don't post often since I've joined, but I'm going to try to get more involved.

Just thought I would say that as Christians we're defending a guy who rose from the dead! Science doesn't exactly agree to that, so it doesn't matter if science agrees to a young-earth or creationism or God creating the earth in 7 days real time! If we believe Jesus rose from the dead, why is it so hard to believe that God could also create the earthnin 7 days?



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 9:18:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miril

Remember, that we are fighting evil spirits not other people in the flesh. See what you can come up with. Read revelations.


Revelation. Singular. I'm sorry, it's just a pet peeve of mine. [:)]

I disagree about your statement about not worrying about offending everyone. Jesus taught that we should do everything in love.

quote:

Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails" (1 Cor. 13)


Speak the truth - yes, but in love. Speak your opinions, sure - but speak them in love... and don't be afraid to leave them open to discussion, as opposed to assuming that you are right. As I said, I was an old-earth Christian for a very long time, but study of the verses in question called me out of that.



evry1needsgod -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 9:18:42 PM)

quote:

If we believe Jesus rose from the dead, why is it so hard to believe that God could also create the earthnin 7 days?


Very good question! You can also use this argument for a multitude of other Christian beliefs.



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 9:20:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: evry1needsgod

quote:

If we believe Jesus rose from the dead, why is it so hard to believe that God could also create the earthnin 7 days?


Very good question! You can also use this argument for a multitude of other Christian beliefs.


Like..?

All things must be considered in a spirit of discernment and in its biblical context.



evry1needsgod -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 9:43:01 PM)

quote:

All things must be considered in a spirit of discernment and in its biblical context.


What do you mean?

quote:

Like..?


Like whether or not God ca/has perfectly preserved His spoken words (Scripture) in a translation with which we can read. This is a pet peeve of mine, but I hope this does not turn into a discussion on versions. I started a thread about it once and it didn't quite turn out the way I had hoped.



Miril -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 10:06:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Locke

quote:

ORIGINAL: Miril

Remember, that we are fighting evil spirits not other people in the flesh. See what you can come up with. Read revelations.


Revelation. Singular. I'm sorry, it's just a pet peeve of mine. [:)]

I disagree about your statement about not worrying about offending everyone. Jesus taught that we should do everything in love.

quote:

Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails" (1 Cor. 13)


Speak the truth - yes, but in love. Speak your opinions, sure - but speak them in love... and don't be afraid to leave them open to discussion, as opposed to assuming that you are right. As I said, I was an old-earth Christian for a very long time, but study of the verses in question called me out of that.


Never said to not do it in love, in fact I was very clear that he should follow the word.[;)]

People are funny in the sense that they can unfortunately be offended when no offense was intended. Such is human nature.

If he begins to worry about what people think before following the Word, he will not be following the Word.

You can be full of love in a radical message, it is time to wake-up in love. Praise God.[:D]



Locke -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 10:40:24 PM)

Oh agreed - but within reason. "Disproving" young-earth theory helps no one though. Is that really something worth offending people over? The message of Christ is indeed radical, and can be offensive to those who don't understand it, but please don't confuse gospel with exegesis.

Jesus didn't go around ticking people off for the heck of it - there was real truth and importance behind his words. He was very gentle with his words when the time was appropriate for that.

quote:

People are funny in the sense that they can unfortunately be offended when no offense was intended. Such is human nature.


Absolutely - and since we are all writing for a human audience, human nature should be taken into consideration when writing for our audience. We have to decide - is it reasonable to believe that a number of people might take offense to this? If so, maybe a second look should be taken at it. Don't get me wrong, i'll offend abortionists any day of the week by telling them that they're responsible for mass murder, but i'm going to do it in a way that is logical and respectful so that they will understand my point of view instead of being offended and shut off any chance that I have of getting through to them.

quote:

If he begins to worry about what people think before following the Word, he will not be following the Word.


Absolutely. Thankfully, God gave us a multi-tasking brain capable of taking multiple variables into consideration at once.



evry1needsgod:

Discernment = "The act or process of exhibiting keen insight and good judgment." Basically, it means understanding that just because someone in the Bible says "eat of the fruit and ye shall be as gods" is not meant to be taken as biblical precedence for doing so. In biblical context, we find that it was in fact a lie of Satan.
Biblical context = exegesis.
Exegesis = analyzing scripture and interpreting it based on the audience, author, and the surrounding text. For instance, if you read Paul's words that "everything is permissible for me..." you might think that he's aloud to murder people. Proper biblical context shows us that the Ten Commandments already covered that subject rather thoroughly, and Paul didn't find it necessary to qualify his remarks. Furthermore, looking at surrounding verses seems to indicate that he was specifically talking about food anyway.

In response to your second paragraph - if God is unable to protect his word from AT LEAST one translation being accurate enough to do the job, then he is indeed weak and not the God of the Bible. He's either all-powerful or irrelevant, because his omnipotence is the foundation upon everything that Christianity is based on.



evry1needsgod -> RE: Science VS Evolution The Comic Strip (6/9/2008 11:00:52 PM)

Locke:
quote:


Discernment = "The act or process of exhibiting keen insight and good judgment." Basically, it means understanding that just because someone in the Bible says "eat of the fruit and ye shall be as gods" is not meant to be taken as biblical precedence for doing so. In biblical context, we find that it was in fact a lie of Satan.
Biblical context = exegesis.
Exegesis = analyzing scripture and interpreting it based on the audience, author, and the surrounding text. For instance, if you read Paul's words that "everything is permissible for me..." you might think that he's aloud to murder people. Proper biblical context shows us that the Ten Commandments already covered that subject rather thoroughly, and Paul didn't find it necessary to qualify his remarks. Furthermore, looking at surrounding verses seems to indicate that he was specifically talking about food anyway.


I totally agree with you, but what does " All things must be considered in a spirit of discernment and in its biblical context." have to do with me giving examples? Did you want me to list EVERY example that comes to my mind in hopes to discern it in context? If so, I do not wish to do that here, which is why I tried making my first statement - "You can also use this argument for a multitude of other Christian beliefs. " - very vague.

But since you replied to my one example, I'll bite. You said...

quote:

In response to your second paragraph - if God is unable to protect his word from AT LEAST one translation being accurate enough to do the job, then he is indeed weak and not the God of the Bible. He's either all-powerful or irrelevant, because his omnipotence is the foundation upon everything that Christianity is based on.


So do you agree with me that God's spoken words exist right now as we speak in a perfect form, without error or speck? Therefore, is it expedient for us as Christians to briefly study Biblical apologetics to come to a conclusion on which Biblical interpretation is perfect and those that are not? Is it expedient to search God's Word to see what He says about Scriptural preservation?



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI