You can't worship Jesus, and believe in evolution (Theistic Evolution)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Origamimaster81

New Member
May 14, 2015
3
2
27
✟7,633.00
Faith
Christian
Theistic Evolution is an unfeasible theory because it is silly to believe in the true holy God of the Bible and believe the Bible, but say that he produced us over billions of years and that the 6 days God states he created us were a billion years each. First of all, this must be some other God you're believing in because last I knew, the Christian God doesn't need time. Why would he wait for us to evolve when he could just create us as man and woman? See John 2, God made good wine from the SIX (referencing the days he created the world) jars of water. The wine was aged and ready to drink! Jesus did not have to wait for it to ferment because he doesn't need to! Also: How old was Adam when he died? Genesis 5:5 reads "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died." If one single Genesis 1 day equals one billion years, as theistic evolution demands, and Adam lived through at least half of day six, all of day seven and 930 more years, then how old was Adam when he died? Was he, let's say, 1 billion 500 million 930 years old? Or did he die at the age 930? You can't have both! You can't have long periods of time (day-age, theistic evolution, progressive creationism) and the Bible. Either Adam was 930 years old when he died or you can throw out Genesis 1:1 through 5:5! There was no pre-Adamic race of wicked people living in the "gap" between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, there were no stars, heat, sun, or atmosphere. The universe was not yet created. Not only could they have not existed without light/heat, but sin and wickedness, decay and death did not enter the universe until the fall of Adam. Romans 5:12: Wherefore, as by one man (Adam) sin entered the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. Before the Fall, everything in God's creation was very good. "And God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day" (Genesis 1:31). Could "very good" from our Holy God's perspective include a history of death, suffering, and decay in the supposed pre-Adamic fossil record before sin and death entered through Adam's sin? I don't think so. Also, what could God possibly be talking about in Acts 3:18-21 where He states that Jesus will come back to restore all things for times of refreshing? The idea seems to be in Acts that the curse will be removed and an "Edenic" earth will result. If there has always been death, decay, and suffering on earth, even before the Fall of Adam, then how could we possibly gain any kind of understanding of Acts 3? If Jesus comes back to restore earth to its original pre-Adamic sin death and decay? Not likely! Also, did you know that thorns are present in some of the oldest rock layers? If you believe in Theistic Evolution, (old earth) you have a problem! If thorns are a result of the Fall and the Fall happened about 6,000 years ago, and these fossils are believed to be millions of years older than man's appearance on earth. Resulting from Adam's sin God said: "...cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee..." (Genesis 3:17b-18a) Did thorns come into existence 6,000 years ago as God says? Or millions of years ago as evolution teaches? Make up your mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not_By_Chance

CalvinSays

TULIPS>ROSES
Jun 4, 2015
4
0
Chicago, IL
✟15,114.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
I'd just like to point out in your argument that Adam lived to be 930 AFTER death entered into the world through sin. Even the most ardent Creationist theologian understands that 930 means how many years AFTER Adam and Eve left Eden that Adam lived.
 
Upvote 0

ALoveDivine

Saved By Grace
Jun 25, 2010
972
228
Detroit, MI
✟11,327.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
The overwhelming majority of Christians throughout the world accept evolution. This includes the two oldest traditions, Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, as well as large numbers of Protestants. Literalist hermeneutics aside, have you objectively studied any of the scientific evidence for evolution by natural selection?

The evidence is overwhelming and utterly irrefutable. We can trace aspects of biological evolution through deciphered genomes. We have 100% incontrovertible dna evidence to prove biological evolution. To deny it and hold to young earth creationism is to either be ignorant of the evidence or to bury your head in the sand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ada Lovelace
Upvote 0

random person

1 COR. 10:11; HEB. 1:2; HEB. 9:26,28; 1 PET. 1:20
Dec 10, 2013
3,646
262
Riverside California
✟14,087.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Democrat
Of course you can. Of course you can.

It comes with the realization that the first two chapters of Genesis is not a genuine scientific article and that plants do not predate the sun, the stars, moon and its tides.

It very simple actually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ada Lovelace
Upvote 0

elopez

Well-Known Member
Oct 11, 2010
2,503
92
Lansing, MI
✟18,206.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Theistic Evolution is an unfeasible theory because it is silly to believe in the true holy God of the Bible and believe the Bible, but say that he produced us over billions of years and that the 6 days God states he created us were a billion years each.
I think it's silly that you believe you can tell people they can't worship Jesus if they believe in evolution. Would Jesus say that? I honestly cannot imagine so...

TE doesn't adhere to the idea that each day of the 6 is billions of years. That is the gap theory, which differs from TE, and not just in that respect.

First of all, this must be some other God you're believing in because last I knew, the Christian God doesn't need time. Why would he wait for us to evolve when he could just create us as man and woman? See John 2, God made good wine from the SIX (referencing the days he created the world) jars of water. The wine was aged and ready to drink! Jesus did not have to wait for it to ferment because he doesn't need to!
You answered your own question here without even realizing it. First, you said God is not bound to time. Then asked why He waited. Well, if God is not subject to time, He is not waiting.

I read over John 2:6, as well as a few commentaries, and couldn't find much on the meaning you're implying of the 6 jugs. Only thing I got was that said jugs were common and used for baths.

Also: How old was Adam when he died? Genesis 5:5 reads "And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died." If one single Genesis 1 day equals one billion years, as theistic evolution demands, and Adam lived through at least half of day six, all of day seven and 930 more years, then how old was Adam when he died? Was he, let's say, 1 billion 500 million 930 years old? Or did he die at the age 930?
Again, TE doesn't demand 1 day equals a billion years. TE simply demands that God used evolution as means to create, and that it happened on an evolutionary timeline, which happens to put the age of the earth almost 2 billion years less than what you're purporting it to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SarahsKnight
Upvote 0

gpldisciple

Disciple
Sep 2, 2014
217
74
67
Chico, CA USA
✟740.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Constitution
I always enjoy debating the subject of evolution.

Time does not exist for God, He is at the beginning, the end and everywhere in between.

There is no evidence of the evolution of species, zero proof one species evolved into another. http://www.sciohio.org/evolfact.htm
The evidence does however point to the fact the universe if billions of years old, billions of what man sees as years.
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟31,520.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
There is no evidence of the evolution of species, zero proof one species evolved into another. http://www.sciohio.org/evolfact.htm

Until you remove the blinkers and look at it. What an outstandingly outdated and inaccurate essay you linked to. Filled with outright falsehoods as well as misleading innuendos and just plain old ignorance. Next time try a biology text on evolution, instead.
 
  • Like
Reactions: theFijian
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Armoured

So is America great again yet?
Site Supporter
Aug 31, 2013
34,358
14,061
✟234,967.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The "theory" of evolution is just that. Darwin himself said his theory was never proven.
As I stated there is zero evidence of a single trans-species evolution. Unless of course we look at pond scum and today's liberals...LOL
Well, actually, there are dozens of observed speciation events....LOL
 
Upvote 0

gpldisciple

Disciple
Sep 2, 2014
217
74
67
Chico, CA USA
✟740.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Constitution
There is none a single example of trans-species evolution, only small changes within a species over long periods of time. Evolution does not work that way. It cannot "jump" like that that would make the phylogeny of the new species paraphyletic, if that actually happened it would prove evolution wrong.
 
Upvote 0

Armoured

So is America great again yet?
Site Supporter
Aug 31, 2013
34,358
14,061
✟234,967.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
There is none a single example of trans-species evolution, only small changes within a species over long periods of time. Evolution does not work that way. It cannot "jump" like that that would make the phylogeny of the new species paraphyletic, if that actually happened it would prove evolution wrong.
If you think it would prove evolution wrong, why do you think there not being any proves evolution wrong?
 
Upvote 0

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟31,520.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
There is none a single example of trans-species evolution, only small changes within a species over long periods of time. Evolution does not work that way. It cannot "jump" like that that would make the phylogeny of the new species paraphyletic, if that actually happened it would prove evolution wrong.

I question your understanding of the following terms as used in science:
theory
species
speciation
paraphyletic

What on earth is "trans-species evolution" supposed to be?
How does it differ from phyletic speciation and cladistic speciation?
What about speciation via hybridization?

Are you aware that cladistic speciation has been produced in laboratories? Won't be long before kids are showing off their new species at science fairs.
Phyletic speciation is a matter of nomenclature to recognize that a species has accumulated enough differences from an ancestor to warrant a new name.
Neither requires any sort of "jump" from one part of the phylogenetic tree to another.

I expect that "trans-species evolution" is a straw-man concept of something that no scientist would expect to happen in real evolution.

As for theory, in science, a theory ranks above facts, because it is the explanation of why facts are what they are. It is not a guess waiting to be proven (that would be a hypothesis), but the fruit of years of observation, experiment and testing against the facts.

You can't make the phylogeny of a species paraphyletic. The only difference between a monophyletic clade and a paraphyletic clade is that the first includes all descendants of a particular ancestor and the latter does not.
Let us use mammals as an example:
A phylogeny that includes all mammal species and their common ancestor is monophyletic.
A phylogeny that includes all terrestrial mammals and their common ancestor, but not marine mammals is paraphyletic--because it does not include all descendants of the common ancestor of all terrestrial mammals.
A phylogeny of only marine mammals (whales, dolphins, seals, sea lions, walruses) is polyphyletic, because they have no common ancestor that is also a marine mammal. And while whales and dolphins are most closely related to the hippopotamus and its relatives, the other marine mammals are most closely related to bears and their relatives. So the only common ancestor of all marine mammals is the common ancestor of all mammals--both marine and terrestrial.

Note that no form of speciation will take a new species out of a monophyletic clade of which its ancestor is a part. Nor can it make a monophyletic clade paraphyletic unless for some reason you choose not to include the new species as a descendant of its own ancestor.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟31,520.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
Speciation is a requirement for the YEC model. Keep in mind no mutations are required for speciation.

Some speciations are due to mutation. Others simply to separation of populations into distinct breeding groups. The importance of speciation is that any new mutations which do occur in one breeding group are no longer shared with the other. Over time each accumulates a different set of mutations and so they become separate species with different genomes and different character traits. And each of these now distinct species may speciate again, so generating still more new species over time.

In effect, speciation is the origin of new "kinds".
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

-57

Well-Known Member
Sep 5, 2015
8,699
1,957
✟70,048.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Some speciations are due to mutation. Others simply to separation of populations into distinct breeding groups. The importance of speciation is that any new mutations which do occur in one breeding group are no longer shared with the other. Over time each accumulates a different set of mutations and so they become separate species with different genomes and different character traits. And each of these now distinct species may speciate again, so generating still more new species over time.

In effect, speciation is the origin of new "kinds".

Mutations don't have the ability to "Over time each accumulates" as you put it. There isn't enough beneficial mutations while at the same time there are to many places for a mutation to occur. For what you need to happen is to have a number of so-called beneficial mutations occurring in just the right place at just the right time in the offspring of an animal developing a new trait.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.