Skip to comments.In The Beginning God, Not Darwin, Created
Posted on 10/11/2009 6:56:59 AM PDT by OneVike
click here to read article
I usually try to stay away from religious threads because I do not want to be a stumbling block to anyone. That being said, I like to say I was a Baptist back when Baptists still believed in dinosaurs and that the Bible was inspired but not every word of it was literally true.
For some people, they have to believe the Noah’s Ark story or they can not believe in Jesus. So while I disagree, I would rather someone believe in Jesus AND Noah’s Ark, then not believe in Jesus at all. Those whose faith is strong enough to separate the two are usually going to find their way out to different denominations and groups of believers.
That being said, I think God created us and evolution was one of his tools. I don’t think “life” is an accident, even at the amoeba level. IMHO science only confirms the non-accidental basis of life, but by and large it ain’t worth risking another person’s faith over by arguing it.
To believe in the 6-day creation and the devolution of man attributes a failure in design by God. God is perfect. Why would he create the evil in the world.
It's hard to wish to debate rationally when the stated premise
is that if one believes in evolution, one is an athiest.
Right off the bat, the broad-brush name calling leads to acrimony.
The piece was well written though. Thanks for posting it.
No. There is no failure in design. The design allowed for infinite variety within the creation. It works as it’s supposed to.
The design was perfect, but no design, no matter how perfect initially nor how perfect the designer, can remain perfect once corruption enters into the mix.
Evil entered the world with sin. God did not create it. With the capacity for choosing good, comes the capacity to reject it and choose *not good*. That is what evil is.
Corruption also entered the world with sin. That was man’s doing, not God’s.
He told man how to choose and what the consequences would be. Man could have learned the knowledge of good and evil by obeying God instead of disobeying Him.
A perfect design cannot be corrupted.
BTW, who created the corruption?
You have that backwards. They learned the knowledge of good and evil by disobeying God. Read your Bible!
17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die
1: Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
Serpents can talk and think! Who would have thunk it!
Discuss the issus all you want, but do not make it personal.
They still believe in dinosaurs, they just put saddles on them now.
I’m afraid if I must die for the cause, I must.
I fall on my sword, milady...
Don’t take it personal... I’m not the least bit worried about you.
I will do my best.
To consider just one one point, #5, I'll return to others later, in the comment about the Greek word “Aion” which at Matt. 28:20 is used for the Hebrew ‘olahm’.
“Aion”, according to the examples given in Thayer’s Greek/English Lexicon, indicates an indefinite time period marked by something peculiar to it, as in the “age of steam”, or as Matt. 28:20 uses the “aion” as the end of a system marked as Paul said at 2 Cor. 4:4, the influence and sway of Satan. Often “aion” is translated as “world” which carries a wrong idea.
So “aion” would not be an appropriate translation for a time period of definite duration however long.
Thanks for the ping!
What does the word “knowledge” as used there mean?
Which? Metmom's, mine or the Biblical?
[[Understood and accepted. I promise to never point out your typing skills if you promise to never - for the millionth time - make some lame joke about my screename reflecting upon my intellect. Truce?]]
Why would I start soemthign I’ve Never done in the past? I’ve never made fun of your screenname- you’re confusing me with others I’m afraid
Take your pick.
Why does it bother you that some people dont think its an appropriate subject for political activism?
No, the more appropriate question is why does this continue being ignored?
It’s an old tactic. Just amounts to alot of projection about attacks and so forth, you’re better served ignoring it and saving your time.
And yet again, cottshop says more in one paragraph than you’ve contributed.
Do not trust your spell checker. This advice is not just for witches and warlocks, but for everyone. The spell checker will insert words that are not your words. Beware ...
Another new word!
You've walked onto thin ice here.
I have pointed out on previous threads that Young Earth Creationism implies that Yahweh acts like Loki the Trickster. That is, the overwhelming evidence of the earth's old age is either real, or God is misleading us.
Secondly, if God "doesn't do wasteful," then life can't begin at conception--since many millions of zygotes are created but discarded from the womb before the mother even knows a conception has occurred.
Moses is the one who penned Genesis and was as well the one God elected to teach these unlearned newly free slaves out of Egypt. And IF Moses was going to be teaching them about how long Methuselah 'lived' and how that by Genesis 6 the Heavenly Father said I will shorten the time span of flesh living upon this earth. Then that would be by necessity mean the difference in what a day with the LORD means versus what a day means to flesh beings.
And that would also mean that Moses who penned Genesis 1:1 and 2 would have had to explain to these unlearned in the WORD that there had been two different floods for two totally different reasons.
The Bible does NOT say sin first took place with 'flesh' it say that 'the' Adam was the first flesh to sin.
We in these flesh bodies were NOT in flesh bodies when Satan rebelled. At Christ tells Nicodemus in John 3 that just to 'see' the kingdom of God one must be born from above. Christ did not say that all that are born in flesh would enter the kingdom of God but they would see it. As we are told in Revelation about those 7,000 that would be instantly killed at the return of Christ. Those are the ones who polluted the 'daughters' of 'the' Adam in Genesis 6 and those who the book of Jude among other places describe.
Those dinos left the evidence that this earth is millions upon millions of years old, else Noah would have been required to have built a bigger ship to house them when the polluted bloodline to Christ was removed from this earth.
Hardly evidence. Some people believe global warming and alot of the charade that is evolution are science, but that's not "evidence" that they're not mutually exclusive.
For all the liberal demands of "evidence" it makes me wonder why people should bother accomodating them.
In the least.
Only because you know it will have to be that way on the religion forum anyway.
“While I am a Bible believer, I see nothing in scripture that proves there was not a gap between Gen. 1:2 and Gen. 1:3...Plus, there is scripture that does bolster that idea...”
Nor is there any indication of the amount of time between “In the beginning...” and the earth as described in verse two, which simply says the earth was existing in a water covered state.
Nonetheless, what Scriptures would, as you say, bolster that idea?
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Really. How do you discuss religion when only one side is allowed to discuss it.
OTOH, it was your buddies that crossed the line with the personal attacks on this RELIGION thread.
I just moved to TX from CA this Sat so missed this thread until now. I’m also responding via iPhone so this is a short response.
I almost became an Astronomy major before I came to my senses and swiched to CompSci LOL. So I am (currently) an OEC. There is just too much evidence that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old. I’ve also really enjoyed Dr. Hugh Ross’ work of squaring Gen with scientific data.
But let me clear: I do not believe in evolution, and neither do any of the OEC folks that I know. Neither does Dr. Ross or any other OEC person I know personally. I do not appreciate being lumped in with the evo crowd.
Thanks for the ping.
I am pretty much in full agreement with your position. The Bible is a wonderful document, and explains many mysteries of life and this world for those who are open to its truth. However, the Bible doesn’t explain every detail of creation, and there are many matters the Lord has left for us to ponder ourselves. On some points though, I feel that the Bible is exceedingly clear, and to ignore the plain statements therein, in favor of the “wisdom” of the world is to turn one’s heart away from the truth the Lord has graced us with.
Once one starts down the path of attempting to ignore or explain away the historical narratives of the Bible in favor of man’s imperfect accounts, you will soon arrive at a quandary. If some of these passages, which are written in the particular style of Biblical history, may be rendered as parables or non-historical traditions, then how does one determine which, or indeed if any, of the other historical passages are to be taken as literal fact or not? If Genesis is not to be taken literally, then who can say that Exodus is historical? Likewise, if Exodus is not historical, then perhaps the stories of Judges are simply parables as well.
Even for Biblical events where we have extra-Biblical writings, or archaelogical evidence for corroboration, it seems universal that the Bible explains these events in much greater detail than any other source. To toss out the validity of the Bible as a historical document therefore effectively leaves us in the dark about nearly all of the events recorded therein, including, most significantly, the life and work of the Saviour. The enemies of truth know this well, and they have used it to their advantage, especially in recent history, as they have attempted to gradually undermine faith in the accuracy of the Word even amongst believers.
The prominence of these beliefs on evolution amongst the faithful, I believe, are only one example of the fruit their work has borne. Amongst other claims, you will now find it fairly commonplace for those claiming to be Christian to believe that the Bible was simply an oral tradition for centuries or millenia before being written down. Knowing our modern civilization’s inherent distrust of “myths” and “legends”, what better way to cast the shadow of doubt on the Lord’s Word, than to convince people that instead of the most ancient example of literature, the Bible is just a collection of tribal stories, collated and edited at a much later date?
Likewise, how many Christians have been seduced by those who, under the guise of science, attempt to pick apart the Bible with subjective “literary analysis”? Their claims to be able to divine a diverse body of human authors, not only contradict the Bible’s own attributions, but by inference cast doubts on the very notion of divine inspiration itself.
Surely, we should all agree that matters of faith in our Lord Jesus and his redemptive accomplishment are the most important facts for Christians to agree on. There are many other points of contention amongst believers that we should not let overshadow that principle which unites us. Notwithtanding, I believe that in light of my observations above, every Christian should consider that the work of the enemy is not divided, but unified in their attempt to destroy the fundamental faith in the Word. Their work is doomed to failure of course, but that does not excuse us from being vigilant to speak out against the erroneous doctrines that they teach.
“To believe in the 6-day creation and the devolution of man attributes a failure in design by God. God is perfect. Why would he create the evil in the world.”
I can’t really agree with this statement. First of all, what man can know fully the purposes of God when he set about to make His creation? Unless one is sure that the Lord has revealed all of his plans and purposes, then how can one attribute a failing to God based on any observation of the creation, without knowing His intent? Perhaps evil itself serves a purpose of which God is aware, but of which you are simply ignorant?
Second, regarding the creation of evil, I believe it’s altogether too simplistic to say that God created evil. I believe the best definition of evil is disobedience to the will of God. God cannot disobey His own will, therefore, God cannot, by that definition, commit evil. Only a creation of God, with the ability to choose obedience or disobedience, could originate evil. If you wish to ascribe to God responsibility for creating the ability to choose evil, then I think you would be able to make a more sensible argument.
Thanks for the ping.
Are you referring to the serpent that talked?
Permit me to make a simplistic argument (that avoids a lot of complicated discussion): You either believe in God, or not.
Personally, though I tend to fall in with the YEC crowd, I believe there is room for debate on some of the points you are bringing up. The well-known 6,000 year chronology of the Bible only takes us back to Adam, the first man. Beyond that, we have a few paragraphs of Genesis, and some other assorted verses with which to try to patch together what occured before the era of man.
It seems obvious to me that the angels were created before man, yet I do not know exactly when this occurred. Yet, as Satan appears in the Garden, seemingly fulfilling the role of “the Accuser” in the earliest days of man, it seems sensible to believe his fall occured before the 6 days of creation, which I believe are literal days and not eras.
If there seems to be some history regarding God’s angelic creation that is not yet fully revealed to us, and if we can make a reasonable assumption from Scripture that some important events involved in that creation occured before the era of man, then I don’t see grounds to condemn anyone simply for speculating about the possibilities of previous creations or cataclysms.
However, I think, even if one theorizs some life may have existed before the Genesis creation event, that life must surely (excluding the angels) have been extinguished before the current creation. So, I believe those who attempt to use “gap theory” to give a more ancient lineage to man or beasts currently living, must be mistaken in that regard.
I wasn’t being specific, just observing that, in order for something to disobey God, I think he would logically have to first create something with the ability to choose to obey or disobey Him.
God created evil.
You’re misconstruing the argument. Creating something with the capacity for choice is not equivalent to the creation of the consequence of that choice. Had nothing chosen to disobey God, then evil would not exist.
James 1:14,15 explains the steps that lead to sin and death. And It doesn’t involve blaming God.
It meaning is rather simple: to have an understanding of a thing by experience or involvement or to experience it in a different way. An example is the phrase, “Adam knew Eve, his wife.”, and the promise that their ‘eyes would be opened and they would KNOW good and bad like God’.
I believe < 100,000 years ago. I believe there are gaps in the geneology given in Genesis.
Compromise? Obviously the universe came into being somehow. Only one position (at most) can be true. If God did use a long-term evolutionary process, then that would not be a "compromise" position, it would be the correct one, and all other positions (godless chance, YEC, etc.) would be false.
Now back to my reasons for disagreeing with theistic evolutionists. I find it sad that any Christian who would claim to hold to the truths of the Scriptures, could then turn around and say that they question the most basic and foundational truths revealed in the Scriptures such as: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1.
Lame. Neither Darwinism nor theistic evolution have anything to do with creation of the universe.
Furthermore, to deny God created everything through Christ in a normal 6-day period is to question the very character and nature of God. It attributes to Him the evil, wasteful, chaotic, random, purposeless, death-filled processes of evolutionary "creation", that would make Him (God) the very Author and Sustainer of all that the theory of evolution demands.
Ridiculous. If God were directing it, it would not be random or purposeless, and to call the acts of God "evil" is blasphemous. This is pretty much where I quit reading.
Oh, I’m in agreement with you. Perhaps you could explain it to ColdWater though, as he seems to think “God created evil”.
I agree the closest 'date' we can affix with what information we are given is how long ago 'the' Adam was formed. But remember what we are told about 'the' Adam's forming, he was not alive until the 'breath of life' which means soul, was breathed into his nostrils. We are not told when 'the' Adam's soul/spirit was formed/created. And given what other writers penned, and Christ Himself said regarding the existence of the soul/spirit before it gets place at conception in the 'flesh', comes from 'above' and when the flesh dies the soul/spirit returns to the Maker that sent it.
It seems obvious to me that the angels were created before man, yet I do not know exactly when this occurred. Yet, as Satan appears in the Garden, seemingly fulfilling the role of the Accuser in the earliest days of man, it seems sensible to believe his fall occured before the 6 days of creation, which I believe are literal days and not eras.
No one can state with a certainty when 'Lucifer' was created, but as Ezekiel 28:-12- describes him to have been created in the full pattern of beauty. And Revelation 12:4 "And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven,......" is history that took place that led up to what we are told in Genesis 1:2. Paul references this time period in Ephesians 1:4 According as He hath chosen (election) us in Him *before* the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love. 5)Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.
So *before* the foundation of the world, which is actually a verb meaning 'casting down' - 'overthrow' some were chosen/elected as the word predestinated means foreordained.
Paul describes this 'predestination' in Romans 9:11-13, as Paul is not describing the flesh of Jacob and Esau but their soul/spirit before then were born in flesh.
If there seems to be some history regarding Gods angelic creation that is not yet fully revealed to us, and if we can make a reasonable assumption from Scripture that some important events involved in that creation occured before the era of man, then I dont see grounds to condemn anyone simply for speculating about the possibilities of previous creations or cataclysms.
I am reminded of the children fresh out of Egypt were afraid to see the face of the Heavenly Father because that to them meant they had died. And yet when the situation required the Heavenly Father sent 'messengers' to get His WORD to the flesh. One more example of the Heavenly Father telling us about what we cannot physically see unless He intends for us to see is found in IIKings 6:11-19 in particular verse 17 And Elisha prayed, and said, "LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see." And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.
However, I think, even if one theorizs some life may have existed before the Genesis creation event, that life must surely (excluding the angels) have been extinguished before the current creation. So, I believe those who attempt to use gap theory to give a more ancient lineage to man or beasts currently living, must be mistaken in that regard.
Personally the phrase 'gap theory', is not a term/phrase that comes to my mind in referencing 'time' before or even after Genesis 1:3. Over the years in my studying what the WORD instructs, I cannot find the Heavenly Father had any gaps. What I have found is that He planted the seeds of His truth through out the WORD, and none of it is a contradiction.