[_ Old Earth _] Evolution is incompatible with the Bible

[cubedbee]

In a generation, the population doubles and you need to move half the people to a new galaxy.

Quath

When you say "you" you mean God. We haven't been able to get humans on another planet in our own solar system, and there's no way that we can even travel to another star with our current technology. God would either had to give us technolgy or supernaturally transported humans from planet to planet everytime a planet got full. Not to mention, small animals would fill each planet and consume all plant life well before humans could fill the planet. God would basically have to be continuously transporting animals from full planets to empty ones.

While I admit that his is well within God's power to do, I find it to be an extremely unlikely. I'm going to stick with my interpetation of Genesis.

 

[Featherbop]

By the time the people had to move from earth because of over population, I'm sure the humans would have developed the space travel abilities to make it to other planets. We could do it now in maybe, 20 years I think is close, and we are becoming a lot more crouded on earth...

 

[Quath]

By the time the people had to move from earth because of over population, I'm sure the humans would have developed the space travel abilities to make it to other planets. We could do it now in maybe, 20 years I think is close, and we are becoming a lot more crouded on earth...

I think Cubedbees point is that we grow too fast. In 20 years, the population would double. So we would have to send 10 billion people off earth every 20 years. If they go on a 100 year trip, there would be about 300 billion people on the ships from the mating onboard the ship. If each planet can hold 10 billion, they could drop off 10 billion and the other 290 billion would head out further into space.

So either humans would have to stop reproducing or we would need instantaneous travel.

Quath

 

[Guest]

blue, everyone but you knows that I am right on this issue. I have no need to continue arguing with you. God could not have intended both sex/reproduction and immortality when he created us. Since he did create us to reproduce, he did not create us to live forever. Once again, you are saying that your narrowminded interpretation of the Scriptures is the only correct one, regardless of the logical inconsistencies that interpetation brings. I have literally never seen you admit that you are wrong, and so it is useless for me to argue any further.

:B-fly: Sorry,but that just don't jive! I can be wrong plenty of times,I am human,but God is not ever wrong,amen.
I am not arguing with you,just giving my honest opinion as you are.
I believe you are the one in error because you believe way too much in what man says,or so it appears anyway.

 

[Featherbop]

By the time the people had to move from earth because of over population, I'm sure the humans would have developed the space travel abilities to make it to other planets. We could do it now in maybe, 20 years I think is close, and we are becoming a lot more crouded on earth...

I think Cubedbees point is that we grow too fast. In 20 years, the population would double. So we would have to send 10 billion people off earth every 20 years. If they go on a 100 year trip, there would be about 300 billion people on the ships from the mating onboard the ship. If each planet can hold 10 billion, they could drop off 10 billion and the other 290 billion would head out further into space.

So either humans would have to stop reproducing or we would need instantaneous travel.

Quath

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

By the time the people had to move from earth because of over population, I'm sure the humans would have developed the space travel abilities to make it to other planets. We could do it now in maybe, 20 years I think is close, and we are becoming a lot more crouded on earth...

I think Cubedbees point is that we grow too fast. In 20 years, the population would double. So we would have to send 10 billion people off earth every 20 years. If they go on a 100 year trip, there would be about 300 billion people on the ships from the mating onboard the ship. If each planet can hold 10 billion, they could drop off 10 billion and the other 290 billion would head out further into space.

So either humans would have to stop reproducing or we would need instantaneous travel.

Quath

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

You seem to have gone off on a tangent here. Besides, why can't we slow down our expanding population NOW?

 

[Quath]

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

So reproduction would end. No more new children. No new kittens. Everyone just grows older and older.

Quath

 

[Featherbop]

By the time the people had to move from earth because of over population, I'm sure the humans would have developed the space travel abilities to make it to other planets. We could do it now in maybe, 20 years I think is close, and we are becoming a lot more crouded on earth...

I think Cubedbees point is that we grow too fast. In 20 years, the population would double. So we would have to send 10 billion people off earth every 20 years. If they go on a 100 year trip, there would be about 300 billion people on the ships from the mating onboard the ship. If each planet can hold 10 billion, they could drop off 10 billion and the other 290 billion would head out further into space.

So either humans would have to stop reproducing or we would need instantaneous travel.

Quath

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

You seem to have gone off on a tangent here. Besides, why can't we slow down our expanding population NOW?

We could, but the majority of humans would be unwilling to do it. I remember a website prominting human extinction by stopping reproduction. But, anyway, I'm doing my part.

 

[Featherbop]

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

So reproduction would end. No more new children. No new kittens. Everyone just grows older and older.

Quath

Yep. You're catching on fast.

 

[Guest]

I think by then, humans would stop reproducing. Who needs 300 billion people? Wouldn't they see that it'd be too much to take care of?

So reproduction would end. No more new children. No new kittens. Everyone just grows older and older.

Quath

:B-fly: I doubt that time would be what it is today,and age would not be what it is now. Sin destroys life,it cannot help life in any way.
God has been here forever. The Holy Angels are great in number.
With all generations put together,God will have a great amount of saints
when they are all raised back up and are alive again. They sleep now,but they will one day rise from their sleep and rejoice,amen.

I believe what you mean to say,is there wouldn't be any unwanted babies,or any accidental pregnancies.
The seed of the wicked will be destroyed.
The only way the offspring of the wicked can be saved today is if they
get saved through the blood of Jesus,and turn away from the wickedness.
A wicked and evil generation always wants a sign.
God is not willing that any should perish,yet he knows many will.
why will the wicked perish? The wicked will perish because of their evil.
God is holy,and everyone was made by a holy creator. When sin came into the world it began to do major damage to life.
If you were made by a Holy maker,but you do evil,you do major harm to yourself and to all forms of life.
people have literally abused plants,the rivers,oceans and lakes. People have abused the air,and animals. People have abused everything there is
under the sun,and they wonder whats going on?
The folly of the secular mind is: "I have Rights"
the unsaved believes he or she has the right to call God into question.
The truth is,you have no right ! You are not above God!
You came into this world with nothing and if you die unsaved,thats how you'll leave it too!!!
Every vitamin and mineral you need to live is found in the earth in large
amounts,but only trace amounts are found in water.
We are made exactly as the bible says,and sin caused death to happen just like the word says it did,amen.

 

[Mr. Neil]

We are made exactly as the bible says, and sin caused death to happen just like the word says it did, amen.

Interesting you should say that. Let's consult some Bible verses and talk about the Garden of Eden, death, and sin.

Genesis 2:5 - "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."

That's interesting. Plants on earth before the sin that caused death. You may not find that strange, but that's why I'm here. I'm here to help. Let's read a little further, and we find that God makes this garden for Adam and Eve to live in harmony with all of the animals. And I'm sure you're among those who think that all of the animals were vegetarians until well after the flood. I could make an issue about animals with sharp teeth, but that's not where I'm going with this.
So all of the animals are eating of the plants. They eat of the grass and of the leaves and of the fruit. Funny that one would not consider the cosumption of the living material of plants as death. After all, it was a living material when the animal bit into it, so I think it's fair to call it death when that plant material is eaten and digested.
But there's a more pressing issue at stake here. The soil. The garden grows in soil, right? Well, do you know what soil is? Among the usual clays, minerals, and silicates, you have a very important component of soil: decaying organic material.
You see, in order to have the soil in which the Garden of Eden could reside, you would need the decaying material of dead things to provide the valuable neutrients that enable plants to grow.

 

[BenjaminTC]

Don't forget all the plant cells that died when they were eaten by the herbivors.

 

[mh13]

Don't forget all the plant cells that died when they were eaten by the herbivors.

Plants are not alive in a Biblical sense. Plants are simply a self replicating food source

 

[BenjaminTC]

The folly of the secular mind is: "I have Rights"
the unsaved believes he or she has the right to call God into question. The truth is,you have no right ! You are not above God!

But if god is real, shouldn't he be able to stand up to scrutiny? Scientists welcome criticism and scrutiny into their theories and laws; that is how they uphold their beliefs. If the belief passes the test, we can believe it. The religious uphold their beliefs by denying any scrutiny at all so it cannot be questioned.

Every vitamin and mineral you need to live is found in the earth in large amounts,but only trace amounts are found in water.

Your point? Is this proof that we're not meant to live underwater? I'm confused.

We are made exactly as the bible says,and sin caused death to happen just like the word says it did,amen.

Yes, its true we are humans, just as the bible says.

 

[Mr. Neil]

Plants are not alive in a Biblical sense. Plants are simply a self replicating food source

For future reference, define life in the Biblical sense, and then demonstrate how this Bibilcal usage of "alive" is inferred. Is there some kind of ancient Hebrew usage that you're basing this assertion on?

 

[mh13]

Plants are not alive in a Biblical sense. Plants are simply a self replicating food source

For future reference, define life in the Biblical sense.

To be alive in a Biblical sense you would have to have the breath of life (breathe air through your nostrils) and have blood. This is why I also believe that insects are not alive Biblically speaking

 

[ThinkerMan]

Plants are not alive in a Biblical sense. Plants are simply a self replicating food source

For future reference, define life in the Biblical sense.

To be alive in a Biblical sense you would have to have the breath of life (breathe air through your nostrils) and have blood. This is why I also believe that insects are not alive Biblically speaking

Wow, under this definition fish are not alive, nor are polywogs (until they turn into frogs). Where do the polywogs and frogs fit into this equation?

Also in-vetro babies would not be alive, since they breathe through the birth cord.

You named two criteria for being alive....are their any animals that have nostrils that do not have blood? I can't think of any.

Since you called it the "biblical sense", I would like to see the verse that substantiate this.

 

[Mr. Neil]

Okay, I had tried to edit my post before I got a reply, but that didn't happen. That's okay. I'll continue with what I was going to say...

You've hit on an interesting idea, but you've taken it in sort of a weird direction, and I'll demonstrate where you're wrong.
In Leviticus, the 11th chapter, God is talking about which animals may be eaten by humans. And I'm afraid that he does indeed mention the locust, the grasshopper, and the beetle. So, we know that according to ancient Hebrew, insects are animals.

In a strange way, you're sort of right about plants. In ancient Hebrew, plants weren't considered to be life, but not for the reason in which you've stated. They didn't consider plants to be alive, because unlike the animals, plants don't exhibit what they considered life-like beahavior. They didn't move or consume anything, seemingly. Animals were considered alive, therefore insects, in accordance with ancient Hebrew, were also considered alive.

You see, ancient Hebrews were actually ignorant of the fact that plants are living organisms. They thought plants were just part of the scenery, like rivers and rocks, and the evidence to support this can be found in the Bible. During the flood, God only has Noah save the animals. Why? Because the Old Testament writer of this tale didn't realize that plants were alive, too. He just assumed that you could drown plants for several months and they would just sprout again when the waters went away.
Well, they don't. Especially when you got flood waters whipping all the sediment around and making all the strata layers, as creationists commonly claim. There isn't a respectable botanist on the face of the Earth who would think that the plants could have survived that.
But the Hebrews... They didn't have botany. They just thought that plants weren't alive. They never thought about the plants when writing the tale of Noah's flood.

Simply enough, ancient Hebrews didn't consider plant life to be life, because they didn't know they were alive.

 

[mh13]

I'm not dogmatic about the insects and all not being alive in a biblical sense. This is speculation on my part because God didn't tell Noah to take insects onto the ark. Noah only had to take animals with the breath of life onto the ark.

But I am dogmatic on the plants because before the Fall there was no death and all animals and man were commanded to be vegetarian. So since plants don't have blood LEV 17:11 (i think it is) I see them as a food source only

 

[Guest]

Genesis 2:5 - "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground."

That's interesting. Plants on earth before the sin that caused death. You may not find that strange, but that's why I'm here. I'm here to help. Let's read a little further, and we find that God makes this garden for Adam and Eve to live in harmony with all of the animals. And I'm sure you're among those who think that all of the animals were vegetarians until well after the flood. I could make an issue about animals with sharp teeth, but that's not where I'm going with this.
( Mr. Neil)

:Fade-color Thats like saying that eating plants is murder .
Have you ever read The book of Isaiah?
Isaiah 65:25 The wolf and the Lamb shall feed together,and the Lion shall eat straw like the bullock:and dust shall be the serpents meat.They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my Holy Mountain,saith The LORD.
Isaiah 66:22,23,24

Isaiah 65: 20,to 24
If animals were made to eat meat,I believe they would still eat it during
the Millennial time period yet they do not.
Sin destroys life. We can see this by observing the world around us.
It is repeatable too. Time and time again when you see those locked in
sin,their lives are proof that sin causes destruction,pain and suffering.
By all definitions of science,we can test sin and come up with the same
observations and conclusions.
sin kills life!