evolution? the gap theory? age of the earth???

seremela06 · #11 10th July 2008, 06:31 PM

Originally Posted by Assyrian

Isaiah 64:8 But now, O LORD, you are our Father; we are the clay, and you are our potter; we are all the work of your hand.

God is the potter who made you and me. But if you ask your mum's obstetrician, God did not actually use clay to make you. He used the biological processes he created and have been operating on earth over millions of years. If God as a potter does not exclude genetics and sexual reproduction that made you and me, it does not exclude evolution either. Evolution is simply how the potter made all the different forms of life.

i like this answer. always kind of wondered about the whole dirt thing...

hatsoff · #12 10th July 2008, 08:23 PM

Originally Posted by seremela06

could i please get your takes on some of these issues. i have read some good arguments about the age of the earth and i'd never heard of the gap theory until yesterday.

The age of the earth is about 4.54 billion years, with multiple lines of evidence agreeing on a broader range of 4.3-4.6 billion years. This evidence is complex, and to be honest I don't have a good enough background in geology to comment much on it. Therefore I will simply refer you to some online resources:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
http://facstaff.gpc.edu/~pgore/geology/geo102/age.htm
http://uh.edu/engines/epi144.htm

i really don't know too much about evolution. i am a christian, and i believe in creation, but perhaps creation followed by evolution in an older earth makes more sense?

Just to be clear, evolution is a topic of biology, whereas the age of the earth deals with geology and physics. So, the two issues have barely any useful connection.

That said, it is a proven fact that evolution does occur. Creationists have a problem with something called common descent, which is the idea that all modern life descended from a single population of common ancestors. Creationists also object to abiogenesis, which is a separate component to evolution, but which hypothesizes as to the origin of that very first population from which we all descended.

Because evolution is undeniable, most creationists try to differentiate between what they call microevolution and macroevolution.* Essentially, this is just a debate tactic aimed at making their case seem more plausible. In reality, most or all of the mechanisms by which evolution proceeds have been observed, either in nature or a laboratory.

*- Please note that those are real scientific terms with legitimate definitions, but when a creationist says "macroevolution" or "microevolution," he has something completely different in mind than a scientist does when he uses the same terms.

oldwiseguy · #13 12th July 2008, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by seremela06

could i please get your takes on some of these issues. i have read some good arguments about the age of the earth and i'd never heard of the gap theory until yesterday. i really don't know too much about evolution. i am a christian, and i believe in creation, but perhaps creation followed by evolution in an older earth makes more sense?

The gap theory is the belief that there is a great time span between verse 1 and verse 2 of Genesis 1.

verse 1: In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

This is a stand-alone statement referring to the very moment of the creation of the entire material universe including the earth. But notice that the "earth" is actually distinct from the rest of the universe. God has separated, or made a distinction here. He mentions the universe but then ends by focusing attention directly on the earth. So verse 1 could actually read:

In the beginning God created the universe, and also the earth.

In order to contemplate the meaning of verse 2 one has to decide whether the entire creation of verse 1 was complete and perfectly formed, or was a "work in progress" still at the time referred to by the statement. Verse 2 indicates either destruction, or, incompleteness. The original language allows for either interpretation.

Verse 2 either describes the original formation of the earth as a continuation of verse 1, or as the gappers believe, describes a renewing of the surface of the earth after being destroyed by one or many global cataclysms, as a new habitat specially created for modern man. If so verse 2 could rightly read:

And the earth became an empty wasteland, and was covered in darkness.

At this point you have to ask why this description? Why did God want us to view the creation process, and why did the process include a chaotic condition at any time during the creation? Even the potter's clay has a purposeful shape from beginning to end. It is never in the condition described in verse 2.

Some gapper's believe that a once perfect earth was inhabited by Lucifer and the angels as their first "estate" and "habitation" (Jude 1:6). Destruction(s) of the earth followed their rebellion. Verse 3 finds God beginning to restore the earth, which will culminate in the "restitution of all things".

owg

valuecard · #14 21st July 2008, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Drwhat

Hi seremela,
Yes the earth is way older than Orthodox teaching accounts for. The creation days were Aions, (Psalm 90:4 & 2 Peter 3:8).

Concering this aspect of the topic, how there are those who hold that the 7 days in genesis are actually 7 thousand years, the Lord spoke to me about this topic when i was driving about 2 years ago and all He said was "The age of adam", but man it clicked straight away, and what the revelation the Lord set of in me was this - Adam was created on the 6th day. If the days in Genesis are 1000 yrs each, then adams age would WELL exceed 1000 years. However it does not. The bible records adams age at the time of his death as being LESS than 1000 years which is concrete proof that the 7 days in genesis are literal days and not 1000 year periods

Ge 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Bless you guys

Phil