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!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
[_ Old Earth _] Did God Use Evolution
- Thread starter PillsburyDoughboy
- Start date
Barbarian
Member
Transcript from Kitzmiller vs. Dover:
(cross-examination by plaintiff's attorney, Behe is "A")
Q In fact, your definition of scientific theory is synonymous with hypothesis, correct?
A Partly -- it can be synonymous with hypothesis, it can also include the National Academy's definition. But in fact, the scientific community uses the word "theory" in many times as synonymous with the word "hypothesis," other times it uses the word as a synonym for the definition reached by the National Academy, and at other times it uses it in other ways.
Q But the way you are using it is synonymous with the definition of hypothesis?
A No, I would disagree. It can be used to cover hypotheses, but it can also include ideas that are in fact well substantiated and so on. So while it does include ideas that are synonymous or in fact are hypotheses, it also includes stronger senses of that term.
Q And using your definition, intelligent design is a scientific theory, correct?
A Yes.
Q Under that same definition astrology is a scientific theory under your definition, correct?
A Under my definition, a scientific theory is a proposed explanation which focuses or points to physical, observable data and logical inferences. There are many things throughout the history of science which we now think to be incorrect which nonetheless would fit that -- which would fit that definition. Yes, astrology is in fact one, and so is the ether theory of the propagation of light, and many other -- many other theories as well.
Q The ether theory of light has been discarded, correct?
A That is correct.
Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
A Yes, that's correct. And let me explain under my definition of the word "theory," it is -- a sense of the word "theory" does not include the theory being true, it means a proposition based on physical evidence to explain some facts by logical inferences. There have been many theories throughout the history of science which looked good at the time which further progress has shown to be incorrect. Nonetheless, we can't go back and say that because they were incorrect they were not theories. So many many things that we now realized to be incorrect, incorrect theories, are nonetheless theories.
(cross-examination by plaintiff's attorney, Behe is "A")
Q In fact, your definition of scientific theory is synonymous with hypothesis, correct?
A Partly -- it can be synonymous with hypothesis, it can also include the National Academy's definition. But in fact, the scientific community uses the word "theory" in many times as synonymous with the word "hypothesis," other times it uses the word as a synonym for the definition reached by the National Academy, and at other times it uses it in other ways.
Q But the way you are using it is synonymous with the definition of hypothesis?
A No, I would disagree. It can be used to cover hypotheses, but it can also include ideas that are in fact well substantiated and so on. So while it does include ideas that are synonymous or in fact are hypotheses, it also includes stronger senses of that term.
Q And using your definition, intelligent design is a scientific theory, correct?
A Yes.
Q Under that same definition astrology is a scientific theory under your definition, correct?
A Under my definition, a scientific theory is a proposed explanation which focuses or points to physical, observable data and logical inferences. There are many things throughout the history of science which we now think to be incorrect which nonetheless would fit that -- which would fit that definition. Yes, astrology is in fact one, and so is the ether theory of the propagation of light, and many other -- many other theories as well.
Q The ether theory of light has been discarded, correct?
A That is correct.
Q But you are clear, under your definition, the definition that sweeps in intelligent design, astrology is also a scientific theory, correct?
A Yes, that's correct. And let me explain under my definition of the word "theory," it is -- a sense of the word "theory" does not include the theory being true, it means a proposition based on physical evidence to explain some facts by logical inferences. There have been many theories throughout the history of science which looked good at the time which further progress has shown to be incorrect. Nonetheless, we can't go back and say that because they were incorrect they were not theories. So many many things that we now realized to be incorrect, incorrect theories, are nonetheless theories.
Faith Hope Love
Member
Hey! So this is my very fist post in this forum...anyways I just wanted to answer the original question 
Did God use evolution? I say no. Why? See evolution has some problems...even if God was still there in the begining to start the whole processes. The other problem would be that since evolution still had problems, God would have created earth and it would not have been perfect. Which creates lots of problems.
The problems with evolution are mainly the fossil links. Why? Because we have yet to find one transitional fossil link. Simply as that. Since we have never found one evolution has suffered. I see some people say that there are. Okay. Fine. Just because someone says it doesn't make it true. If you actually find a fossil not just an article then, yes, you have a substaintail arguement. Since there is suppose to be so many I would suspect this to not be much of a problem. lol. Why would someone say that there are fossil links? People say this for money. There are have been places where people made missing links and then they sold them. Even if it was a rappid change, there is no sudden change in the fossil records.
Now that was just one example but to save some time I am going to keep it at one example. But heres my point. Evolution isn't perfect. It has problems. Such as the fossil record. Yet God is perfect. Deuteronomy 32:4 says, "He is like a rock; what he does is perfect...God does no wrong..." My question would be how could a perfect God create something in a inperfect way? Either He didn't do it that way, or He is not who we think He is. Just a thought...but to say at least I believe He didn't do it that way, I believe earth was designed excatly how Genesis says it was
Did God use evolution? I say no. Why? See evolution has some problems...even if God was still there in the begining to start the whole processes. The other problem would be that since evolution still had problems, God would have created earth and it would not have been perfect. Which creates lots of problems.
The problems with evolution are mainly the fossil links. Why? Because we have yet to find one transitional fossil link. Simply as that. Since we have never found one evolution has suffered. I see some people say that there are. Okay. Fine. Just because someone says it doesn't make it true. If you actually find a fossil not just an article then, yes, you have a substaintail arguement. Since there is suppose to be so many I would suspect this to not be much of a problem. lol. Why would someone say that there are fossil links? People say this for money. There are have been places where people made missing links and then they sold them. Even if it was a rappid change, there is no sudden change in the fossil records.
Now that was just one example but to save some time I am going to keep it at one example. But heres my point. Evolution isn't perfect. It has problems. Such as the fossil record. Yet God is perfect. Deuteronomy 32:4 says, "He is like a rock; what he does is perfect...God does no wrong..." My question would be how could a perfect God create something in a inperfect way? Either He didn't do it that way, or He is not who we think He is. Just a thought...but to say at least I believe He didn't do it that way, I believe earth was designed excatly how Genesis says it was
Barbarian
Member
Not for a Christian. In our Bible, God says it's "very good," not perfect.
Let's test that belief. You name two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, and I'll see if I can find a transitional. Ready?
Here's your chance to show us. Name us any two of those groups, and we'll see what I can find.
I believe earth was designed excatly how Genesis says it was
It doesn't say it was designed. It wasn't made by some little demiurge; it was made by the Creator, not a "designer." And Genesis directly rules out the YE doctrine of "life ex nihilo."
freeway
Member
to answer some of Barbarian statement:
So along this line of thinking is Jesus less than perfect? but wait Jesus said He is the "good" Shepard. So I guess its how ever you want to interpret the word "good".. I believe when God was finished with the 6 days of creation and said it was "good" it was perfect. Death had not enter into the world until the fall of Adam....
We've done your test before and quite frankly it always comes up with your high hopes of fossils that you hope will bridge the transitional void, when in fact they are just extinct species..How many new species do they find each year 100's . so maybe you might just think these fossil are merely dead species...
Not sure but I think the poster is simply caring the line of thought "creation" Where in my bible does it rule out YE... if anything it rules out 4.5 billion years.. and so does the evidence.. sorry your evolution religion is full of holes.. or should I dead bodies.. God created me,, and He didn't use some mud hole for help...
Good in "good shepard" refers to good in the sense of "opposite of evil", methinks. There is no "perfect" on the scale from good to evil.freeway01 said:
Good as used in Genesis however refers to quality of manufacturing, so to speak. This is completely separate from the good-evil scale.
Besides, how can something that is truly perfect fall from grace? Such a blunder requires imperfection. Perfection is a quality that i'd only ascribe to God Himself.
Well, you may interprete it to be a separate extinct species. But that still leaves you to explain why the ToE could successfully predict where (in which rock layer) a previously unknown species with a certain set of predicted species would be able to be found.
After all, the ToE makes predictions like "somewhere in rock layers of the ages X to Y fossils with the properties A, B and C can be found."
You may attribute it to luck for yourself, but do you deny that every time the ToE makes a succesful prediction, this is evidence in favor of the ToE?
Barbarian
Member
Barbarian, regarding God's word on creation:
Not for a Christian. In our Bible, God says it's "very good," not perfect.
Not for a Christian. Jesus was not created. He is God.
But belief does not change what is written. You should conform your beliefs to His word, not His word to your beliefs.
Barbarian regarding supposed absence of transitional fossils:
Let's test that belief. You name two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, and I'll see if I can find a transitional. Ready?
In other words, you want to reject any transitionals that aren't still in existence. But the assertion was that there are no transitionals. If you want to argue that many transitional species once existed, but are not alive today, that would be rational and true.
Important new transitional fossils are found almost monthly.
Barbarian observes:
It doesn't say it was designed. It wasn't made by some little demiurge; it was made by the Creator, not a "designer." And Genesis directly rules out the YE doctrine of "life ex nihilo."
Then your Bible doesn't have Genesis 1:24
Not for a Christian. Nothing there about how long it actually took to create all things.
As you can see, you have a lot of misconceptions about what evolution is, and about what the Bible says. Let's talk about it.
Not for a Christian. In our Bible, God says it's "very good," not perfect.
Not for a Christian. Jesus was not created. He is God.
But belief does not change what is written. You should conform your beliefs to His word, not His word to your beliefs.
Barbarian regarding supposed absence of transitional fossils:
Let's test that belief. You name two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, and I'll see if I can find a transitional. Ready?
In other words, you want to reject any transitionals that aren't still in existence. But the assertion was that there are no transitionals. If you want to argue that many transitional species once existed, but are not alive today, that would be rational and true.
Important new transitional fossils are found almost monthly.
Barbarian observes:
It doesn't say it was designed. It wasn't made by some little demiurge; it was made by the Creator, not a "designer." And Genesis directly rules out the YE doctrine of "life ex nihilo."
Then your Bible doesn't have Genesis 1:24
Not for a Christian. Nothing there about how long it actually took to create all things.
As you can see, you have a lot of misconceptions about what evolution is, and about what the Bible says. Let's talk about it.
Faith Hope Love
Member
About, the whole God said it was good thing. (sorry I haven't quite figured out how to post quotes yet) It is up to you how you want to interpate good. Here is an explantion on why its perfect though.
Okay, so in the Bible its says God created the Heavens and the Earth. It was something God did. The Bible also says later on in Deuteronomy 32:4 that what God does is perfect. Everything God does is perfect, according to the Bible. He made the earth...and if He did, then its perfectly perfect :P
Transitional fossils? Links? I can just say there isn't any. I have not search every sqare inch of planet earth to disprove you. I will not either. Yet, evolutionist have search for years and many miles and have yet to find one. Anyways, I know people could say that they have found one. I could say I found one. Have I really found one? No. This is not that hard for other people to do either. lol.
One more thing. Someone said, "Even if no fossils were ever found Evolution would be a fact." How so? Either I missed something or someones got there facts wrong. See, if I were to propose and idea to you about a new scientific discovery where the major evidence was missing...and all that was left was speculation. Would you believe me?
I want to make one quick little point. Science can deal only with observables. Have you ever seen evolution take place? Has anyone else ever ruly seen evolution take place? Therefor, evolution is not science. But purely speculation. Now I can hear you saying, 'You didn't see God design earth either.' No I didn't, but intellegent desighn wasn't ment to be science. If that makes sense
Heres a verse that kinda goes along with this subject. Its from Job 37:16 and it says, "Do you know how the clouds hang in the sky? Do you know the miracles of God, who knows everything?'"
Okay, so in the Bible its says God created the Heavens and the Earth. It was something God did. The Bible also says later on in Deuteronomy 32:4 that what God does is perfect. Everything God does is perfect, according to the Bible. He made the earth...and if He did, then its perfectly perfect :P
Transitional fossils? Links? I can just say there isn't any. I have not search every sqare inch of planet earth to disprove you. I will not either. Yet, evolutionist have search for years and many miles and have yet to find one. Anyways, I know people could say that they have found one. I could say I found one. Have I really found one? No. This is not that hard for other people to do either. lol.
One more thing. Someone said, "Even if no fossils were ever found Evolution would be a fact." How so? Either I missed something or someones got there facts wrong. See, if I were to propose and idea to you about a new scientific discovery where the major evidence was missing...and all that was left was speculation. Would you believe me?
I want to make one quick little point. Science can deal only with observables. Have you ever seen evolution take place? Has anyone else ever ruly seen evolution take place? Therefor, evolution is not science. But purely speculation. Now I can hear you saying, 'You didn't see God design earth either.' No I didn't, but intellegent desighn wasn't ment to be science. If that makes sense
Heres a verse that kinda goes along with this subject. Its from Job 37:16 and it says, "Do you know how the clouds hang in the sky? Do you know the miracles of God, who knows everything?'"
Faith Hope Love
Member
Apperently I forgot to say something in my last post.
@The Barbarian, lol I could not but help but notice that under your user name it says Christian Forum Pro...lol it made laugh. I don't know why, but I found it funny. ;)
Okay so you just want and example that is suppose to have a missing link? And you think you can find one? Okay I guess. Here I go! I assume you know that whales have cause problems amongst evolutionary biologist. Right? Well anyways, thats not the point...Evolution says that whales evolved from mammals that returned to water. Wheres the missing link from whales to mammals? A-Ha. I already know what you will say, butI shall let you say it. Cause I feel like it. It's just extremely basic science...O`ya theres another really basic one. Wheres the human ape link? I hope this is what you wanted...lol if not o`well.
Ya, what is your persepective on evolution? How do you personally deal with all the speculation? Do you place you faith in that fact that your great great great great great great great great grandpa was an ape? I know, I know, that is probably now excat number of great's, but I was making a point. Do you really believe that your realated to the ape in the zoo? Do you think that the ape could be your long lost relative? Sorry, I'm courious :P You know it just doesn't make sense. Do you just think that your long lost relative wants to stay in the zoo? Or is he gradually changing into your sisterinlaw? Sorry. This is just me asking random reather pointless questions. If you don't want you don't have to answer them. I think everyone already knows the answer...even if you give the answer
Have you ever read Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel? I think you might like it See, its about what this journalist finds out, as goes out to disprove creation! He just says what he finds. And yes, I think you should read it before I tell you what he finds out...lol :P
@The Barbarian, lol I could not but help but notice that under your user name it says Christian Forum Pro...lol it made laugh. I don't know why, but I found it funny. ;)
Okay so you just want and example that is suppose to have a missing link? And you think you can find one? Okay I guess. Here I go! I assume you know that whales have cause problems amongst evolutionary biologist. Right? Well anyways, thats not the point...Evolution says that whales evolved from mammals that returned to water. Wheres the missing link from whales to mammals? A-Ha. I already know what you will say, butI shall let you say it. Cause I feel like it. It's just extremely basic science...O`ya theres another really basic one. Wheres the human ape link? I hope this is what you wanted...lol if not o`well.
Ya, what is your persepective on evolution? How do you personally deal with all the speculation? Do you place you faith in that fact that your great great great great great great great great grandpa was an ape? I know, I know, that is probably now excat number of great's, but I was making a point. Do you really believe that your realated to the ape in the zoo? Do you think that the ape could be your long lost relative? Sorry, I'm courious :P You know it just doesn't make sense. Do you just think that your long lost relative wants to stay in the zoo? Or is he gradually changing into your sisterinlaw? Sorry. This is just me asking random reather pointless questions. If you don't want you don't have to answer them. I think everyone already knows the answer...even if you give the answer
Have you ever read Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel? I think you might like it
See, its about what this journalist finds out, as goes out to disprove creation! He just says what he finds. And yes, I think you should read it before I tell you what he finds out...lol :P
freeway
Member
More quotes from the barbarian as follows:
but first Hi barbarian:
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kindâ€; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good
Note::::: after there kind.. not need to change from a goat to a whale.. and then God said it was Good. I do believe that God creates perfection.. we screw it up..
Genesis 1:3 Then God said, “Let there be lightâ€; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day. See, I managed to find another verse in my bible.. Well I don't know, but sounds like a 24 hour period but I guess he could trick us and really meant a billion years...sarcasim intended..
but first Hi barbarian:
True 100% argreed...
again True 100% agreed, only to say "same at ya"...
Barb I know you believe you have all the transitional fossil at your disposal, but I look at the same evidence that you look at and attribute them to God's creation. You know species become extinct all the time...one case in mind the "world wide" flood...
No I am not arguing that transitional species "once upon a time" existed, but merely that this species "not" transitional just plainly died out... like the california grizzly
I do like how you played the month against the year to make it seem that much more "transitional" fossils are found, but again these are not and never will be the missing links.. dead dried up bones, that all..
lol..lol.. maybe that page is missing, oh look I've found Genesis 1:24
Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kindâ€; and it was so. 25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good
Note::::: after there kind.. not need to change from a goat to a whale.. and then God said it was Good. I do believe that God creates perfection.. we screw it up..
You keep saying not for a Christian as to be-little me.. sorry doesn't work...
Genesis 1:3 Then God said, “Let there be lightâ€; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day. See, I managed to find another verse in my bible.. Well I don't know, but sounds like a 24 hour period but I guess he could trick us and really meant a billion years...sarcasim intended..
My misconceptions? sorry your the one that inplying we came from a mud hole. So yes indeed lets take about it and break out your bible and lets really see what it says... If your not afraid of true scriptures.
freeway
Member
Quotes from jwu;;;
methinks; that the good that is in God Jesus is "perfection". we try to minimize it with our finite minds, We can't see how in this world anything was ever perfect..
True, but never-the-less just because our bible uses the word good, we can not then jump to the conclusion that it was not perfect, God creates perfection.. no where in the bible will you find this not to be true.. good is merely a word used, but not to be measured by our standard. after all we where not there.
Ask Satan, He has the corner on this. Ask Adam and Eve they also may have some insight on the subject.
Don't even go there because we know that they find fossil miles apart and try to fit them together to further there agenda. This has been showed many times...
Oh boy show me where they make predictions that have panned out?
Barbarian
Member
So do I. The only difference is, I approve of the way He created them.
Sure. Most of the intermediates that once existed are now extinct. Doesn't mean that they didn't exist.
But there is neither evidence nor scriptural support for such a flood.
Barbarian observes:
In other words, you want to reject any transitionals that aren't still in existence. But the assertion was that there are no transitionals. If you want to argue that many transitional species once existed, but are not alive today, that would be rational and true.
So what's your definition of a transitional? Notice that there are transitionals only between groups said to be evolutionarily connected, but none for groups that are not. If you were right, there should be lots of those, too.
Barbarian observes:
Important new transitional fossils are found almost monthly.
Barbarian notes that a Bible that supports YE creationism, doesn't have Gen. 1:24
Yep. Directly rules out the YE doctrine of "life ex nihilo." He says that He did it by using nature.
Indeed. You just aren't ready to accept the way He did it.
Barbarian observes:
Not for a Christian. Nothing there about how long it actually took to create all things.
Nope. Lots of real Christians don't follow Christian doctrine in all things.
Unfortunately, there was no sun at that time to have a morning or evening. This is why ancient Christians like Augustine concluded that this could not have been literal history.
Barbarian observes:
As you can see, you have a lot of misconceptions about what evolution is, and about what the Bible says. Let's talk about it.
Yes.
No. We are creations of God. As C.S. Lewis said, you aren't a body; you have a body. You are a spirit.
As you see, Genesis rules out YE doctrine, and long before science became what it is, Christians pointed out that the creation week allegorical.
Faith Hope Love
Member
Wow here. I know what you mean. We are creations of God. We are created by God. The topic here is how, not if.
Now what gives you the right to go changing the scriptures? This time don't just say that were wrong, offer some substantial 'proof' that were wrong. See we can not discuss opinions. Arguing opinions is pointless. When you say we are wrong, offer something to back yourself up.
See? There are many questions unaswered in evolution. There are many more that are ignored. And there are thousands that have been answered and are against evolution, even though they use to be the proof for evolution
Now. I have been wondering do you believe in the Bible (@barbarian)? The entire Bible? You just interpate things differently? Like adding things...? Interpating things to mean different things then filling in the blanks? I suggest you look up the last few verses of Revelation. I think its like the last 5. If you don't have a Bible, you've obviously have internet access so you can look it up on the internet. I personally think it crushes this idea (God using evolution) :P
Ahem. Where in Genesis 1:24 does it say, "by nature"? Now...if we did evolve from some sort of animal, then why does God put us in charge? (Psalms 8:6-8) Anyways I guess your'e reffering to the 'by earth' part.
Okay heres I go again...another explanation. Genesis 3:19 says, ""for dust you are and to dust you will return." Try putting in apes for that sentance....for apes you are and to apes you will return. Nope. That doesn't make sense. Simple as that. It is an impossible interpation.
By earth, could just mean like...eating plants from earth. Therfor they are by earth...in a way other than created by earth
Now what gives you the right to go changing the scriptures? This time don't just say that were wrong, offer some substantial 'proof' that were wrong. See we can not discuss opinions. Arguing opinions is pointless. When you say we are wrong, offer something to back yourself up.
See? There are many questions unaswered in evolution. There are many more that are ignored. And there are thousands that have been answered and are against evolution, even though they use to be the proof for evolution
Now. I have been wondering do you believe in the Bible (@barbarian)? The entire Bible? You just interpate things differently? Like adding things...? Interpating things to mean different things then filling in the blanks? I suggest you look up the last few verses of Revelation. I think its like the last 5. If you don't have a Bible, you've obviously have internet access so you can look it up on the internet. I personally think it crushes this idea (God using evolution) :P
Ahem. Where in Genesis 1:24 does it say, "by nature"? Now...if we did evolve from some sort of animal, then why does God put us in charge? (Psalms 8:6-8) Anyways I guess your'e reffering to the 'by earth' part.
Okay heres I go again...another explanation. Genesis 3:19 says, ""for dust you are and to dust you will return." Try putting in apes for that sentance....for apes you are and to apes you will return. Nope. That doesn't make sense. Simple as that. It is an impossible interpation.
By earth, could just mean like...eating plants from earth. Therfor they are by earth...in a way other than created by earth
Faith Hope Love
Member
uh, are we not back at opinion? The fact you think that there fuzzy is your opinion I just had to point that out...lol
I just had to point that out...lol
jasoncran
Member
genesis 1:24 backs that up.Faith Hope Love said:uh, are we not back at opinion? The fact you think that there fuzzy is your opinion
so does the statement in the bible that the creation points toward God, when ev
olution points to nothing it did and it all happened by natural selection
to define fuzzy as in theologically fuzzy as in grey, you have to be creative with the words in the bible. ie the word eritz and the nt world (kosmos) of old. since the naturalistic science says the flood was local not world wide.
if the word for land is only local the John 3;16 should be interpreted as this
for god so loved the land known by the men in 30 b.c that he died for those inhabitants that he give his only begotten son.
that is what i meant by theological fuzzy.
freeway
Member
back to the opening post, Did God use evolution to well get us where we are today.
I think the one that would know better than anyone would be Jesus himself. In the book of Mark Jesus gives us a little glimpse of the creation day.. as follows
Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.
three things to note here.
First: He says creation, so that rules out the big bang theory, the expanse, or whatever the favor today is for how the universe came about.
second: Here Jesus is talking about marriage. He is saying from the beginning of creation, that male and female where created full upright spirit souls with the a complete body ready to run, no need for evolution to build upon, as if that was even possible..
third: Creation was done quickly, not over a time period of billions of years process, because Jesus says in the beginning and did not say after some time when God created male and female. But in the beginning as to the first days...grouping them or this occurrence together..... YE ... I don't see the billions of years evolution needs in order for us to fall for that religion..
I think the one that would know better than anyone would be Jesus himself. In the book of Mark Jesus gives us a little glimpse of the creation day.. as follows
Mark 10:6 But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.
three things to note here.
First: He says creation, so that rules out the big bang theory, the expanse, or whatever the favor today is for how the universe came about.
second: Here Jesus is talking about marriage. He is saying from the beginning of creation, that male and female where created full upright spirit souls with the a complete body ready to run, no need for evolution to build upon, as if that was even possible..
third: Creation was done quickly, not over a time period of billions of years process, because Jesus says in the beginning and did not say after some time when God created male and female. But in the beginning as to the first days...grouping them or this occurrence together..... YE ... I don't see the billions of years evolution needs in order for us to fall for that religion..
freeway
Member
quote from barbarian: talking about the days of creation,
Revelation 22: 3 No longer will there be a curse upon anything. For the throne of God and of the Lamb will be there, and his servants will worship him. 4 And they will see his face, and his name will be written on their foreheads. 5 And there will be no night there—no need for lamps or sun—for the Lord God will shine on them. And they will reign forever and ever.
This is just to show you God does not need to create the sun first, or last or what however we think it should or has to be done. Here God is telling his people there is no need for sun, for God will be their light,, umm interesting, do you not think so.. again.. your theory of evolution and billion of years needed for man to evolve just doesn't add up..
Revelation 22: 3 No longer will there be a curse upon anything. For the throne of God and of the Lamb will be there, and his servants will worship him. 4 And they will see his face, and his name will be written on their foreheads. 5 And there will be no night there—no need for lamps or sun—for the Lord God will shine on them. And they will reign forever and ever.
This is just to show you God does not need to create the sun first, or last or what however we think it should or has to be done. Here God is telling his people there is no need for sun, for God will be their light,, umm interesting, do you not think so.. again.. your theory of evolution and billion of years needed for man to evolve just doesn't add up..