Should all christians believe in the 6 days creation?

[Cotjones]

News flash. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness..." (2 Tim 3:16) - a truth which that icon below your name, which icon reminds us how the blood of the One was shed by Whom we are saved, which icon supposedly represents our belief in His shed blood, in His salvation thereby, and in His Word which is a pretty strong counter to your claim...

But if it's technical you're talking - God didn't write ANY of the bible... directly. Many men did, over many centuries - but all were nevertheless inspired by God to write what they did - and in that sense, God did indeed "write" the whole of His Word to us.

Again I ask for the 3rd time to how we where God has ever said that the creation story was from him. Your verse is great but guess who decided what was scripture and what wasn't? The catholic church. No where does the bible or jesus dictate what is and is not to be included. Finally there is a gigantic difference between inspired and dictated. You must admit that you can't really know for sure what the bible means when it says inspired. A sad child might inspire me to create a n abstract painting. Does that accurate painting attempt to provide a literal depiction of the child? No and I don't claim it does. Neither does genesis claim to be an accurate account of the beginning of the universe.

 

[tackattack]

I have no problems believing the Bible. I also have no problems believing science. They're about 2 completely different subject. I don't use the Bible to explain science or vice versa. It doesn't hurt my faith at all to believe in an old earth view or evolution. In fact it's quite remarkable how complex and wonderful God made things, and I have no problem not limiting God's power. I also think it strengthens my faith to have a world view that doesn't have a lot of cognitive dissonance in it, the Holy Spirit really is clear with one voice. It has also got me more into reading God's word and helped me appreciate language. Some of you should check out Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.

 

[thesunisout]

I have no problems believing the Bible. I also have no problems believing science. They're about 2 completely different subject. I don't use the Bible to explain science or vice versa. It doesn't hurt my faith at all to believe in an old earth view or evolution. In fact it's quite remarkable how complex and wonderful God made things, and I have no problem not limiting God's power. I also think it strengthens my faith to have a world view that doesn't have a lot of cognitive dissonance in it, the Holy Spirit really is clear with one voice. It has also got me more into reading God's word and helped me appreciate language. Some of you should check out Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.

There is actually quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in believing in evolution and scripture, something the atheists understand perfectly well:

destroy adam and eve and original sin and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God and take away the meaning of His death

-american atheist association

That is why there has been such a concerted attack on Genesis 1-11 by the enemy. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? This is exactly why we have so many Christians walking away from the faith to become atheists. This is a tree that bears nothing but bad fruit, brother.

 

[thesunisout]

Again I ask for the 3rd time to how we where God has ever said that the creation story was from him. Your verse is great but guess who decided what was scripture and what wasn't? The catholic church. No where does the bible or jesus dictate what is and is not to be included. Finally there is a gigantic difference between inspired and dictated. You must admit that you can't really know for sure what the bible means when it says inspired. A sad child might inspire me to create a n abstract painting. Does that accurate painting attempt to provide a literal depiction of the child? No and I don't claim it does. Neither does genesis claim to be an accurate account of the beginning of the universe.

Jesus validated Genesis as inspired by God:

Matthew 19:4-6

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

 

[holyrokker]

destroy adam and eve and original sin and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God and take away the meaning of His death

-american atheist association

This is a "strawman"" argument. It's based on the false assumption that without "original sin" Christ's redemptive work was meaningless.

I contend that the very notion of "original sin" makes Christ's sacrifice meaningless.

"Original sin" could only be true if Adam were not an actual person. The doctrine makes Adam a symbol of humanity. It means that we are all born helpless victims, and it makes God an unjust tyrant in demanding "payment" for our "sin."

 

[Cotjones]

There is actually quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in believing in evolution and scripture, something the atheists understand perfectly well:

destroy adam and eve and original sin and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God and take away the meaning of His death

-american atheist association

That is why there has been such a concerted attack on Genesis 1-11 by the enemy. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? This is exactly why we have so many Christians walking away from the faith to become atheists. This is a tree that bears nothing but bad fruit, brother.

Correction. "There is quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in YOUR belief of scripture and science."

For us that interpret the language of the Bible as symbolic and purposeful there is far less. Reality and the Universe is God's work. In a way his silhouette can be seen in nature. When we put our understanding of scripture up to a comparison with nature and find that they don't mix. We examine our certainty of science and our interpretation of the scripture. In most cases throughout history it has been the case that our interpretations were at fault, not the sciences. Think Galileo, Benjamin Franklin, or the Salem Witch Trials. This is do to the collaborative and truth seeking nature of science the Bible actually praises.

Some people get their jollies off of creating a fantasy world from twisting words of the Bible and then they surround themselves with people who do the same. I ask you, what chance do they possibly have at knowing the truth?

Do you believe that christian scientists who allow their children to die refusing medical treatment, are any less convicted and vindicated in their faith than you are? It is estimated that among these communities 80% of the children who die of diseases could have been spared by medical science. Faith alone will get you nowhere. Wisdom and direction in your faith is of paramount importance.

 

[holyrokker]

Correction. "There is quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in YOUR belief of scripture and science."

For us that interpret the language of the Bible as symbolic and purposeful there is far less. Reality and the Universe is God's work. In a way his silhouette can be seen in nature. When we put our understanding of scripture up to a comparison with nature and find that they don't mix. We examine our certainty of science and our interpretation of the scripture. In most cases throughout history it has been the case that our interpretations were at fault, not the sciences. Think Galileo, Benjamin Franklin, or the Salem Witch Trials. This is do to the collaborative and truth seeking nature of science the Bible actually praises.

Some people get their jollies off of creating a fantasy world from twisting words of the Bible and then they surround themselves with people who do the same. I ask you, what chance do they possibly have at knowing the truth?

Do you believe that christian scientists who allow their children to die refusing medical treatment, are any less convicted and vindicated in their faith than you are? It is estimated that among these communities 80% of the children who die of diseases could have been spared by medical science. Faith alone will get you nowhere. Wisdom and direction in your faith is of paramount importance.

Very good post!

 

[thesunisout]

This is a "strawman"" argument. It's based on the false assumption that without "original sin" Christ's redemptive work was meaningless.

I contend that the very notion of "original sin" makes Christ's sacrifice meaningless.

"Original sin" could only be true if Adam were not an actual person. The doctrine makes Adam a symbol of humanity. It means that we are all born helpless victims, and it makes God an unjust tyrant in demanding "payment" for our "sin."

You contend against scripture:

Romans 5:18

Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

1 Corinthians 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Scripture is very plain that death came into the world because of sin:

Romans 5:12

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Also, that the wages of sin is death and that death is the enemy:

Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 Corinthians 15:26

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death

The bible is very clear; there was no death before the fall of man. Yet, in your scenerio death is not the enemy. You believe that death is the means that God created everything, which completely contradicts scripture at every point. Your incredulity about how God does things is not evidence, it is a fallacy called "argument from incredulity. You choose simply to willfully ignore what scripture says to accomodate evolutionary theory.

 

[thesunisout]

Correction. "There is quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in YOUR belief of scripture and science."
For us that interpret the language of the Bible as symbolic and purposeful there is far less. Reality and the Universe is God's work. In a way his silhouette can be seen in nature. When we put our understanding of scripture up to a comparison with nature and find that they don't mix. We examine our certainty of science and our interpretation of the scripture. In most cases throughout history it has been the case that our interpretations were at fault, not the sciences. Think Galileo, Benjamin Franklin, or the Salem Witch Trials. This is do to the collaborative and truth seeking nature of science the Bible actually praises.

1 Timothy 6:20

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called

Colossians 2:8

See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ

You interpret the bible as literal where it suits you, such as that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and rose from the dead, and that He performed many miracles. You pick and choose where you apply literal and symbolic interpretation to accomodate the theories of fallen men. You place mans word above Gods word. Scripture says let God be true and every man a liar. It also says trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. When you trust the Lord first then He guides you to the truth, and not before then. If you did that you would find that scripture and true science are not opposed.

Some people get their jollies off of creating a fantasy world from twisting words of the Bible and then they surround themselves with people who do the same. I ask you, what chance do they possibly have at knowing the truth?

Those who submit themselves to the guidence of the Holy Spirit will be the ones who come to know the truth, because the Spirit leads into all truth.

Do you believe that christian scientists who allow their children to die refusing medical treatment, are any less convicted and vindicated in their faith than you are? It is estimated that among these communities 80% of the children who die of diseases could have been spared by medical science. Faith alone will get you nowhere. Wisdom and direction in your faith is of paramount importance.

Without faith it is impossible to please God, and the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. People put their faith into all sorts of things which are false; that has no bearing on the truth, or whether my faith in scripture is justified. Your argument is simply fallacious, and there is wisdom in trusting scripture, because it is the inspired word of God.

 

[Christownsme]

I think when the bible is silent on whether it occured in 6 literal days or over 6 figurative days, we ought not speculate.

 

[thesunisout]

I think when the bible is silent on whether it occured in 6 literal days or over 6 figurative days, we ought not speculate.

That's the thing, that scripture is not silent about it:

Exodus 20:9-11

Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.

For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

It doesn't say six years, or six thousand years, or six million years, it says six days. It says God did all of His work in six days, and rested on the seventh, and He expected the jews to do the same. It could not be more clear.

 

[holyrokker]

You contend against scripture:

Romans 5:18

Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

1 Corinthians 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

Scripture is very plain that death came into the world because of sin:

Romans 5:12

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Also, that the wages of sin is death and that death is the enemy:

Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 Corinthians 15:26

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death

The actual context of those verses cited do not teach the abhorrent doctrine of "original sin". But that's another matter, perhaps best discussed in a different thread.

You believe that death is the means that God created everything, which completely contradicts scripture at every point. Your incredulity about how God does things is not evidence, it is a fallacy called "argument from incredulity. You choose simply to willfully ignore what scripture says to accomodate evolutionary theory.

Please do not assume to know what I "believe" on the matter. Also, please do not accuse me of willful ignorance of the Scripture. You do not know me.

 

[thesunisout]

The actual context of those verses cited do not teach the abhorrent doctrine of "original sin". But that's another matter, perhaps best discussed in a different thread.

Please do not assume to know what I "believe" on the matter. Also, please do not accuse me of willful ignorance of the Scripture. You do not know me.

I assumed you were advocating for theistic evolution; correct me if I am wrong. If not, I retract my statements. Original sin means that we are all born with a corrupt, sinful nature, tending towards depravity, which we inherited from Adam. That is very plain from scripture. If you disagree with it, provide some evidence from scripture to support your case.

 

[holyrokker]

I assumed you were advocating for theistic evolution; correct me if I am wrong. If not, I retract my statements. Original sin means that we are all born with a corrupt, sinful nature, tending towards depravity, which we inherited from Adam. That is very plain from scripture. If you disagree with it, provide some evidence from scripture to support your case.

Thank you for your kindness.

As for the doctrine of "original sin". My earlier response was directed at the following quote:

destroy adam and eve and original sin and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God and take away the meaning of His death

-american atheist association

I call it a "strawman" argument, because Jesus didn't die for Adam's sin, nor to "remedy" original sin.

I find no place in Scripture that clearly teaches this doctrine.

I'll be glad to discuss it in a different thread.

 

[tackattack]

There is actually quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in believing in evolution and scripture, something the atheists understand perfectly well:

destroy adam and eve and original sin and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the Son of God and take away the meaning of His death

-american atheist association

That is why there has been such a concerted attack on Genesis 1-11 by the enemy. If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do? This is exactly why we have so many Christians walking away from the faith to become atheists. This is a tree that bears nothing but bad fruit, brother.

I converse regularly with atheists, and they've yet to pose a convincing argument that my beliefs are irrational or illogical. The foundation is and should only be Jesus. I'm pretty sure Jesus agrees with that as well, but I can fish up the exact scripture if requested. When our foundation become Moses, David, Elijah, ourselves, Rudyard Kipling, our Pastor, our significant other or any other man/woman it's the start of failure. I also would say that we have so many people turning to atheism from Christianity, because of dogamatic and human doctrine that is inconsitant with their world view and reality. I don't fault Churches for it because the way is narrow. It saddens me, but maybe that's God's plan, who am I to know.

If you feel that evolution is a tree of bad fruit than I can respect that opinion. However, unless you want to show exactly where I have cognitive dissonance or disagree with scripture, I'll keep my view of reality as God presented and science verified.
God Bless,
Dave

 

[thesunisout]

I converse regularly with atheists, and they've yet to pose a convincing argument that my beliefs are irrational or illogical. The foundation is and should only be Jesus. I'm pretty sure Jesus agrees with that as well, but I can fish up the exact scripture if requested. When our foundation become Moses, David, Elijah, ourselves, Rudyard Kipling, our Pastor, our significant other or any other man/woman it's the start of failure. I also would say that we have so many people turning to atheism from Christianity, because of dogamatic and human doctrine that is inconsitant with their world view and reality. I don't fault Churches for it because the way is narrow. It saddens me, but maybe that's God's plan, who am I to know.

If you feel that evolution is a tree of bad fruit than I can respect that opinion. However, unless you want to show exactly where I have cognitive dissonance or disagree with scripture, I'll keep my view of reality as God presented and science verified.
God Bless,
Dave

I can see we fundamentally disagree here, but that's okay. Note, that I am very matter of fact in my argumentation, so please don't take it the wrong way. You are my cherished brother in Christ, end of story. That said, I'll present my argument:

Jesus is the foundation of our faith, but Jesus doesn't exist in a vacuum. The very reason Jesus came to Earth is because of what happened in Genesis. If you want to say that what happened in Genesis isn't true, then the purpose of His ministry, death and resurrection isn't true either. To make it work you have to gut Genesis and compromise quite a bit of scripture.

I speak to a lot of atheists as well and they all tell me the same thing. They don't believe the bible is true because evolution explains everything, and many of them are ex-christians. Consider this testimony:

Ph.D. Turns from Atheism to Christ - YouTube

You made the initial claim of cognitive dissonance, so I will ask you to support it too. Specifically, what the biblical mandate is to interpret scripture by the opinions of fallen men and the philosophies of the world system.

All I can find are scriptures which say we should do exactly the opposite. To let God be true and every man a liar:

1 Timothy 6:20

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

1 Corinthians 1:20

Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

I would also ask you this question: If you lived just a few decades previous, would you have agreed with the prevailing scientific theory that the Universe was eternal and had no beginning? Would you have reinterpreted the beginning out of Genesis because scientists said it didn't happen?

I will also give you two scriptures which flatly contradict theistic evolution:

Genesis 2:22

And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man

If theistic evolution is true, it cannot be true that God put Adam to sleep and then took one of his ribs and used it to fashion Eve.

Mark 10:6

But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female'

If theistic evolution is true, God did not make Adam and Eve at the beginning. Do you believe Jesus was unaware of how the Father created the world?

Scripture makes it clear that Adam and Eve were historical people, and that death entered the world through their sin.

Romans 5:12

Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

1 Timothy 2:14

For Adam was first formed, then Eve And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Theistic evolution denies their historicity, and it says that God actually used death to create everything. Scripture says death is the enemy:

1 Corinthians 15:26

The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death

It also says Satan is the one who held the power of death:

Hebrews 2:14

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil

Did God use the power of Satan to create the world? How did Satan get this power if it wasn't by the sin of man?

Essentially, for these and other reasons, I believe theistic evolution compromises scripture to the point that it is incompatible with it. That no matter how much you spiritualize or poeticize Genesis and other passages, you can't make it work without unacceptable compromises. Neither do I believe that evolution from common descent is a credible theory.

 

[Assyrian]

You contend against scripture:

Romans 5:18
Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

Unless Paul was speaking figuratively when he was comparing Adam and Christ Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

1 Corinthians 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

If it says in Adam all die, that is present tense isn't it? Which means we are 'in Adam' now. But didn't Adam die and return to the earth from which he was take? How can we be in Adam now? Of course if Paul is still speaking figuratively and Adam, whose name means 'Man', is a metaphor for the whole human race, then Paul's use of the present tense makes perfect sense. The whole human race continues to sin, and when we sin we die.

Scripture is very plain that death came into the world because of sin:

Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Also, that the wages of sin is death and that death is the enemy:

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

1 Corinthians 15:26
The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death

The bible is very clear; there was no death before the fall of man.

Notice how this death Paul is talking about only affects humans? It is the wages we earn when we sin. If it is a death that affects human not animals then you have to ask if it is talking about physical death at all. You were dead in trespasses and sins Eph 2:1 Paul was writing to people still physically alive at the time, yet he says they were dead before they knew Christ. Sound like it is spiritual death that comes from sin, not physical death and certainly not a death that affects animals so there is nothing in these verse that suggest no animal could die before the fall.

Yet, in your scenerio death is not the enemy. You believe that death is the means that God created everything, which completely contradicts scripture at every point. Your incredulity about how God does things is not evidence, it is a fallacy called "argument from incredulity. You choose simply to willfully ignore what scripture says to accomodate evolutionary theory.

Just because death is an enemy now, does it mean it was always an enemy? Or does the bible teach us that the problem with death is sin 1Cor 15:56 The sting of death is sin. Satan wasn't an enemy of God when God created him either, yet he is an enemy of God now. Just because death is an enemy now, it doesn't mean it wasn't part of God's good creation.

That's the thing, that scripture is not silent about it:

Exodus 20:9-11
Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you.

For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.

It doesn't say six years, or six thousand years, or six million years, it says six days. It says God did all of His work in six days, and rested on the seventh, and He expected the jews to do the same. It could not be more clear.

Was Moses teaching six day creationism or was he using the six days in Genesis to teach Sabbath observance? Because it it is just an illustration to teach the Sabbath, then it doesn't have to be literal for that. Moses used a metaphorical description of the Exodus to teach Sabbath observance in the ten commandments in Deuteronomy.

Deut 5:12 "'Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORD your God commanded you.
13 Six days you shall labor and do all your work,
14 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant, or your ox or your donkey or any of your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.
15 You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

 

[Soothfish]

Shold all christians believe in the 6 days of creation?
Where do the millions of years come from?
Can this evolution belief inside the christian church damage
people's faith?
Bible-tube.com

No. The Hebrew word yowm does not necessarily mean a 24 hour day.

Evolution has been used as an excuse to devalue humanity but it doesn't require anyone to do this. Not anymore than the belief in Adam and Eve's fall should lead people to hate humanity.

 

[joecass]

why would god use evolution to bring us about when he can just create us?

there is a lot of evidence of a young earth. like dinosaurs. scientists has every convinced that dinosaurs are billion of years old. the only problem with that is in 1995 a christian scientists found soft tissue with cells in it on a dinosaur fossil. every one knows that soft tissue can't last that long.

also there is no proof evolution in the fossil records and there should be millions.

there is a lot more than that but that is what comes to my mind right now.

the words wisdom is foolishness to god. meaning science thinks thay have it all figured out but there not even close.

also the second law of thermodynamics the stars and the sun would have barnt out by now

 

[William II]

I'm a Christian, and I'm a firm supporter of science and evolution. They are absolutely NOT mutually exclusive. In fact, science leads to the existence of God.

Many people on this board REFUSE to listen to scientific reasoning. It's rather disheartening.