Barbarian
Member
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
[_ Old Earth _] Is evolutionism compatible with the Bible?
- Thread starter Cygnus
- Start date
Papa Zoom
CF Ambassador
Good. Now we await your exegete of Gen 1&2 as it relates to Evolution.
Barbarian
Member
That would be as silly as expecting an exegete of Genesis as it relates to protons. Why would you want Genesis to be a science text?
Papa Zoom asked for your exegesis of Genesis 1-2 as it relates to evolution.
Why would you want Genesis not to tell us how God made the world? An exegesis of these 2 chapters would tell us how God did it.
You are running away from the exegesis because you know it cannot support the evolutionary model you are promoting.
Oz
Barbarian
Member
Science isn't part of religion. How about you give me your exegesis of Genesis 1-2 as it relates to aromatic compounds?
It was His decision. You should be satisfied with that.
Seems to me, you're trying to put things into Genesis that aren't there. If He chose to not do it you should be satisified with it as it is. He told you what was important to your salvation. Accept His message as it is, and go on.
You are running away from that message because you want to put your own ideas into it.
You know Genesis cannot support chemistry, or physics, or solid-state electronics, or anything else in science. You chose to focus on evolution alone. Perhaps because chemistry, and physics and solid state electronics don't scare you.[/QUOTE]
Last edited:
Cygnus
Member
Evolutionism is chosen because that theory directly contradicts scripture.....chemistry, and physics and solid state electronics don't.
Barbarian
Member
It's your doctrine. If you don't like what "evolutionism" is, just change it. As you learned, evolutionary theory is completely consistent with scripture, just like other science.
Cygnus
Member
You've been asked several times.....how is forming Eve from Adams rib evolution?
Barbarian
Member
Parables aren't science. This is where you keep messing up.
Papa Zoom
CF Ambassador
hmmmm, I'm not so sure it's consistent with Scripture. I'd have to study and think on that one for a while.
I don't believe that we have an accurate picture of the evolution of animals. I don't believe we have ample evidence for the development of our diverse species. My view is that God interspersed special creation here and there for His purposes (Cambrian Explosion). I do know that we see how species evolve over time (change within a species) but I don't think we see concrete evidence of a change from species into a completely different species.
God is likely laughing at us knowing exactly how He did it all and also knowing that we're so off as to be out in left field. We like to speculate on such things and maybe we have some things right. Maybe we're on the right track. Or maybe we're just so off and we have no way of knowing it.
Cygnus
Member
Genesis isn't a parable...how do we know this? It's been explained to you before.....Paul would not write to Timothy and in that letter base a rule for the women to follow on a parable. Do we need to discuss this again?
Not_Now.Soon
Member
I think this would settle the matter more sufficiently. What is your interptations of Genesis 1-2. We're all dancing around the naritive of evolution because Genesis 1-2 speaks of God creating mankind and all of the earth in a different way then it's explained by either evolution or astromonical theories of the planet's birth.
With that in mind. Let address the elephant in the room. What is the parable of Genesis? What is it's interpretation? There are details that don't mesh up with it being a parable. At best it can be said that's something else. A myth perhaps. Except that other scripture goes back to verses in Genesis without correction, just supporting what it already says.
...before it's said again let me counter another point. This issue of Genesis verse evolution isn't an issue of our salvation. However if you or those arguing with you did not see this as important then it would not be given this much time discussing it.
Barbarian
Member
Jesus gave us rules to follow based on parables. You've merely assumed something that is false.
I don't think you'll ever accept it His way. But if you'd like to talk about it again, I'm a very patient guy.
Barbarian
Member
It's what St. Augustine found to be the greatest harm to our faith:
Often, a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances, … and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, which people see as ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn.
The shame is not so much that an ignorant person is laughed at, but rather that people outside the faith believe that we hold such opinions, and thus our teachings are rejected as ignorant and unlearned. If they find a Christian mistaken in a subject that they know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions as based on our teachings, how are they going to believe these teachings in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think these teachings are filled with fallacies about facts which they have learnt from experience and reason.
Reckless and presumptuous expounders of Scripture bring about much harm when they are caught in their mischievous false opinions by those not bound by our sacred texts. And even more so when they then try to defend their rash and obviously untrue statements by quoting a shower of words from Scripture and even recite from memory passages which they think will support their case ‘without understanding either what they are saying or what they assert with such assurance.’ (1 Timothy 1:7)
St. Augustine The Literal Meaning of Genesis
So long as YE creationists don't assert that their new doctrine is essential to Christian belief, it does no harm at all. But if it pushes away people who might have otherwise come to Him, that is a grave error and a cause for concern among all Christians.
Barbarian
Member
Complex living organisms predated the Cambrian explosion, which took millions of years. And those earlier organisms have characteristics of many of the Cambrian organisms. So that isn't consistent with science or scripture.
Most YE creationists have now admitted the fact of speciation. If I read Ozpen correctly, he is aware that speciation is a fact. The Institute for Creation Research has endorsed the idea that new species, genera, and families evolve.
Likely, we'll be surprised by a lot of things. But a few things like gravity, evolution, a round Earth, and so one, are very unlikely to be overturned. We still fill in gaps about evolution from time to time, just as we do about gravity and the Earth.
Barbarian
Member
Mostly "could be." But they aren't limited to things that could only happen naturally. That's just someone's attempt to put limits on God.
I'm still waiting for your exegesis of Genesis 1-2.
That's microevolution within species and NOT macroevolution of transition forms.
The microevolution is seen in the various species of grasshoppers that eat the roses in my front garden. But they are all of the species of grasshoppers.
Of the many varieties of dogs that have evolved, whether they be Alsatian or Chihuahua, this is microevolution. They are all from the species of dogs. Different breeds can mate and have offspring because they are from the species of dogs and microevolution takes place when they interbreed.
Oz
That is untrue.
Here is one scientists evaluation of why science is a religion: Top 10 Reasons Science Is Another Religion.
Oz