Results 1 - 6 of 6
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Creation vs Evolutionists | 2 Pet 2:1 | Jensen | 16696 | ||
The Genesis record is not credible, unless you are a Bible believing Christian or an Orthodox Jew. The record is "credible" if you have a Biblical worldview. It is not "credible" if you have an Evolution worldview. Both views are supported by the evidence of modern science. Creation, and a young Earth, actually have most of the scientific evidence on it's side. Creation, like Evolution, is a theory since no one was there when it(either?) happened. The incessant attacks are made simply because people do not want God. If there really is a God then He may hold me accountable for my life. So it is easier to not believe in a Creator. So perhaps your question should be "Why should I believe the Bible to be true?" Genesis is the foundational book of the Bible. If there was no Adam, there is no need for a Jesus. But we know that, according to the Bible, Adam lived less than 12,000 years ago-not millions and billions. So either Adam existed, and was a real honest to goodness man, or he did not exist at all. Either Jesus died for our sins, and rose from the dead, or He did not. The Bible says that sin entered the world through one man, Adam. Do you believe that? If you do not, then you will also tend to believe in Evolutionary Theory. I would be happy to try to explain in greater detail the scientific evidence for Creation and a young Earth if you are interested. I know that I have given a brief answer and that it may fall short of what you were looking for. Take heart-you will have other replies. In the Creator's Service, Jim |
||||||
2 | quick response on creation vs evolution | 2 Pet 2:1 | hvnscry | 121861 | ||
This is a long time after the original thread, but I had a couple points I wanted to discuss: "But we know that, according to the Bible, Adam lived less than 12,000 years ago-not millions and billions." I'd like to know where this came from actually. To my knowledge, the Bible does not establish a firm date as to the time of creation, nor even an accurate range of time in which Adam and Eve would have lived. I have my own opinions, but I make no claim that they are biblically supported or correct. "Do you believe that? If you do not, then you will also tend to believe in Evolutionary Theory." The way I am understanding what you are saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that Evolutionary Theory and rejection of the claims in the Bible about creation go hand in hand. Further, it seems that (by your view) one could not hold an Evolutionist view and continue to believe what is said in the bible. This, I firmly believe, is false. But, you may notice, I have not shared what my personal opinions are on this matter, nor will I. I believe that, as long as we are seeking to understand what the Bible tells us, and the issue at hand does not directly affect our salvation, then the loose ends will become clear in the end - when we are with our Father and Creator. |
||||||
3 | quick response on creation vs evolution | 2 Pet 2:1 | following him | 121866 | ||
This comes from acounting for the ages given in the geneologies found in the book of Gen. They are not completely actuate becausee of possible omissions. But they should be close. If you believe that the Bible was inspired by God but say that evolution is a reality then you are saying that God is a liar because Gen 1:1 says "In the begining God created the heavens and the earth." not evolution. How can you have faith in a God who starts out His inspired word with a lie. If you desire actual evidence for an early creation by God of the earth Go to the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) web site. They have many, many, many articles that give specific evidence. |
||||||
4 | quick response on creation vs evolution | 2 Pet 2:1 | hvnscry | 121976 | ||
Yet you do not take into the account of a "Guided Evolution"? "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" does not say anything about HOW he did it. And as far as the geneologies argument, it means nothing - a geneology to the Israelites does not mean what a geneology means to you or me. For that matter, neither do many of the uses of numbers you can find in the Old Testament. It was a completely different culture. Anyways, all I was pointing out is that I think you are making a mistake by not allowing for the possibility of God's omnipotence actually being completely omnipotent by making the young earth claim and discounting all others. | ||||||
5 | quick response on creation vs evolution | 2 Pet 2:1 | Hank | 121983 | ||
hvnscry: Along with user "following him" I recommend the icr.org web site to anyone who is interested in the creationism/evolution issue from biblical and scientific perspectives. I see many problems with the "guided evolution" idea that are inconsistenct with the creation account in Genesis. To name but two: [1] It is inconsistent with the six days of creation. In order to subscribe to the "guided evolution" theory, one must read into "day" in Genesis a meaning other than a 24-hour day. Thus we begin the interpretation of Genesis by saying that the words used in the text don't really mean what they say. One is immediately faced with the task of trying to explain away the narrative by ascribing to it allegorical or symbolical meanings. Yes, Scripture does contain symbolical language, but when it does, it is generally quite obvious from the context. [2] The largest problem with "guided evolution" lies in the story of the fall of man in Eden. This event is absolutely foundational to all of Scripture. If man (Adam) evolved from lower forms of life, at what point did this evolving creature become fully a man capable of disobedience and accountable to God? ....... I've studied this issue a great deal and have come to a firm conviction that what God says plainly in Genesis about creation is the way it was. For me at least, it takes less faith and less explaining to believe the biblical account of creation than the theory of evolution, whether Darwin's theory or the hybrid "guided evolution" theory. ...... Please do visit the icr.org web site. I believe you will really enjoy exploring it. ....... Evolution is a theory, nothing more. In all the years since "Origin of Species" was published, the theory has never "evolved" into scientific fact. What bothers me most about the evolutionists is not so much their espousal of the theory but their insistence on teaching it as scientific fact. Now I'm not indicating that you are doing this. ....... A word about Bible geneologies. In view of the great number of geneologies that God's word contains, including two of our Lord in the New Testament, in Matthew and Luke, I would not at all second the statement that "the geneologies argument means nothing." I don't believe the Bible contains anything that means nothing. 2 Timothy 3:16. --Hank | ||||||
6 | quick response on creation vs evolution | 2 Pet 2:1 | hvnscry | 122106 | ||
My friends, consider: in response to [1], this has been debated before, and no argument that I have been presented with has persuaded anyone one way or the other - this continues to other areas of the Bible as well (Primarily, I am considering Song of Solomon, and the Psalms, but there are many others). As for [2], nothing is lost (in my opinion, after studying the argument, and it's opposition) by claiming a guided evolution as far as original sin goes. Who of us is to say that God could not have created a spot where man was finally "in his image" enough that he could choose between good and evil? Further, I understand your position about Darwin's theory being simply a theory, and I embrace it. To extend that, Darwin never meant for the "Origin" to be an attack on Christianity at all - it was only after extreme prejudice and persecution that he turned from his faith. On Bible geneologies, I agree - I did not say that they mean nothing. My point was this: we are not in a position to base any kind of accurate measurement of a historical timeline based on ages and numbers - especially not to "discover" when the creation occured. Too many numbers meant too many different things to a culture completely foreign to ours. That was my point, not that anything in the Bible was meaningless. Finally, my brothers and sisters, I think my position has been misevaluated. If you remember, I never told you of my position (of which I have quite firm beliefs, and very rational support for those beliefs), and I will not now, for that would defeat the position I am presenting to you. The point is this: it is irrational and divisive to be so opinionated and stubborn that you are unwilling to listen to and consider the position of other, very intelligent, very loving, well-trained believers in the same God whom we all follow. I ask simply that you be willing to listen to your brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus, and not think less of them because they disagree with you, not to argue with them simply because you feel that your position has been violated. I ask that you embrace them, and their beliefs - it is only if they are sinning which you have the right to confront them. The belief in a "guided evolution" where God is the original creator of the heavens and the earth, is not a heresy, and can be biblically supported. I pray that our "...love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that [we] may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless until the day of Christ..." In the name of our Lord and Savior. |
||||||