Replies

"You seem to be endorsing a view that God could not possibly have been responsible for an evolutionary process that resulted in the cruelty and inefficiency we actually observe in nature"

He didnt say that. He was talking about fellowship with man, not the current state of nature. If God desired fellowship with man, then why go through the evolutionary process to produce man, when he could have easily created him instantly.

Evolution is incompatible with the Bible. It makes a mockery of Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross and mangles the Word of God. It totally ignores the fall of man and the nature of his soul. Evolution says that man evolved into who he is from some basic lifeform, yet the Bible states that man was created as man. Now through this one man, sin entered into the world. In evolution did this "man" evolve to a sinless nature then lose it. In evolution, was sin not around until this "man" suddenly evolved. What about his parent species? Are they free from this sin nature and unnaffected by Adam's fall.

The Bible clearly points to Adam as the man who brought in sin, and through him sin came into the world. Evolution spits in the face of this.

If you want to take evolution over the Bible, fine. But to say their compatible is to say 2 = 1.

JM

Why go through a six-day process to create man, when He could have done so instantly? Last I checked the Bible says that God created man from the dust of the earth. Why did God create man from dust? Presumably the dust is unnecessary, so why not just poof man out of thin air? Why does the idea that man was created from other life forms make a mockery of Jesus' sacrifice any more than the idea that man came from dust? Is dust so much more noble than other life forms? As far as the rest of your objections to evolution go, they hold no water as evolution isn't concerned with any of these religious ideas. Isn't it possible for God to have created man by the process of evolution, then man sinned and sin entered the world. Why is the origin of man's physical body at all important for any theological belief?

If God desired fellowship with man, then why go through the evolutionary process to produce man, when he could have easily created him instantly.

Time is meaningless to God. If it took 3 billion of years of what we call "evolution", then that is "instantly" in Gods eyes.

By definition, there can be no conflict between Gods word, and Gods creation. And Gods creation tells us that evolution occured.

Since humans always disagree on the meanings of the Bible, and there is such massive evidence to support sciences view of "how things are". I think that it's the "creationists" interpretation that is wrong.

"God desired fellowship with man, then why go through the evolutionary process to produce man, when he could have easily created him instantly?"

One could just as easily ask why God didn't create a man that would not have sinned, et al?

As God said to Job, "Where were you when I created the Heavens and the Earth?"

Dangerous game guessing why God does what He does. Equally dangerous to assume He works by what-we-call-logic.