Something I need to get off my chest about the whole creation/evolution thing.

[graceandpeace]

Genesis 1 is a hymn, not a historical account. It has stanzas, for heavens sake. It is just as poetic as the psalms. Moreover, the point of Genesis 1 is to make clear that even though there are realms and rulers (the sun ruling over the sky, the fish ruling over the sea, etc) which are laid out in a very parallel fashion, God is the ruler over them all. The point of the poem is to make clear that we are to worship God, not the sun, in contrast to what all the surrounding nations were doing. To insist that it is a science book is to miss the point.

I trust that God created the earth. I do not agree with your interpretation of Genesis 1 in that I do not think it is meant to answer the question of HOW, but rather WHY.

^this!

 

[Colter]

I posted this on another site, but thought it would fit here as well.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I feel like some stuff really needs to be said about this, because we as a church as a whole keep wanting to follow the "well we need to agree to disagree" concept on this issue, and its not some small issue like the color of the carpet that we need to just push to the side.Thats not how the bible tells of to treat false teaching (and the fact is, both sides can't be right, which means at least one is false teaching). This is as big issue, and I'll explain why.

Ultimately, this is NOT an issue on if god created the earth in 7 days vs millions of years. This is not an issue that just has to do with "is science right", its not just an issue of "well, thats just an interpretation of the bible", its an issue of trust.

Do you trust Yahweh?

We have two sides of this. On the on one side, we have the word of God. It says that the earth was created in 6 days by God(on the 7th he rested).

On the other side we have "science". Saying, well frankly science says a whole lot of different stuff, but very few theory's say the earth was created in 6 days by god. A popular theory is Evolution, so thats what I'm going to focus on.

You have to pick a side. But before we get down to it we need to get something straight. Science, is only our attempt at understanding the world around us. Most of what we know, is probably wrong if history shows us anything. I mean, at one point in the last hundred years we were lobotomizing people (destroying part of their brain) to "heal" mental illness, but we could also look at something much more modern. Just in the few years I was in school the model of the atom changed several times. We are always finding out new things, but every time we learn something new we are probably also finding something we thought to be true to actually be false. This is growth, I love science, however personally, I don't believe it should be looked at for the answer to the "big questions" (how did we get here, what is the meaning of life, ect.), but rather the practical uses (the computer I'm typing this on, my phone, tv, the microwave, improvements in medicine and food production, ect.)

Now,so what we have, is science and God. You can only put your trust in one. You can't say "well, I'm going to believe that science is ok on this one and god is wrong". No. You are putting your trust in humans, over GOD the creator of the universe.

When you say your are a christian and you tell me you believe in evolution, it tells me something immediately, you do not trust god. You can argue with me all you want but the fact is the bible says everything was made in 6, not through millions of years. Seriously, take a look at your life. Do you read your bible every day? Do you spend time in prayer (and actual prayer, not just a quick little one minute diddy before you go to bed or something, but do you actually set time aside every day for prayer). I'm going to hazard a guess that the answer is no, because if you did you would grow closer to god and you would trust him, rather than man.

The choice is yours, you can trust in the creator of the universe, a god perfectly just and full of love, for you, so much that he DIED for you, a god who is perfect. OR you can trust in mans attempt to understand the world around us. However you can't put your trust in both.

Genesis 2:4

> This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.

The Bible books don't claim to be written by God, church government came up with that idea in order to establish authority and control thought.

All religions make fetishes out of the writings of their past.

The Bible books are about the Living Word, they are not the word themselves.

Certainly Paul never dreamed that his simple letters of correspondence would one day be converted into the Word by the church. He would shudder to think that his word were equilibrated with Christ's words. The same goes for the rest of the apostles who were at times baffled by Jesus. Suddenly their words were petrified into divine utterances.

God is Living, his Word in our hearts today are relevant to today.

 

[Gunny]

Many, many years ago, I heard the phrase: "Let the word of God be true and every man a liar".

Amen.

 

[Jig]

Genesis 1 is a hymn, not a historical account. It has stanzas, for heavens sake. It is just as poetic as the psalms. Moreover, the point of Genesis 1 is to make clear that even though there are realms and rulers (the sun ruling over the sky, the fish ruling over the sea, etc) which are laid out in a very parallel fashion, God is the ruler over them all. The point of the poem is to make clear that we are to worship God, not the sun, in contrast to what all the surrounding nations were doing. To insist that it is a science book is to miss the point.

I trust that God created the earth. I do not agree with your interpretation of Genesis 1 in that I do not think it is meant to answer the question of HOW, but rather WHY.

At which chapter and verse in Genesis does "real" history begin?

 

[Targaryen]

At which chapter and verse in Genesis does "real" history begin?

Genesis 1:1....just not the way a literalist would view the prose as.

Melethiel did say as much.

 

[Jig]

Genesis 1:1....just not the way a literalist would view the prose as.

Melethiel did say as much.

At which chapter and verse in Genesis does "literal" history begin?

 

[Melethiel]

Somewhere along the way. Genesis, like many ancient documents, blends seamlessly from what we today would consider legend to what we today would consider history. For example, the Primary Chronicle, a medieval document of the Rus, includes what are pretty obviously legends in the exact same style as what is more clearly history. They just didnt make that distinction until the modern era. So I cant give you a chapter and verse (which are arbitrary distinctions not original to the text anyway) because the whole book is a mismash of legend and history.

Note that I am nowhere saying that just because something is legend that it is untrue or uninspired.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

The theory of evolution of false for one reason, it denies creationism.

Seriously, Darwin was very confused. And His followers are as well. They actually thought that we came from primates.

 

[Melethiel]

We didnt just come from primates. We are primates. That doesnt change the fact that God created. He could easily have used evolution as a tool.

 

[PaladinValer]

Somewhere along the way. Genesis, like many ancient documents, blends seamlessly from what we today would consider legend to what we today would consider history. For example, the Primary Chronicle, a medieval document of the Rus, includes what are pretty obviously legends in the exact same style as what is more clearly history.

A great example and a fascinating read. I wonder if I still have a copy from my college days...

They just didnt make that distinction until the modern era. So I cant give you a chapter and verse (which are arbitrary distinctions not original to the text anyway) because the whole book is a mismash of legend and history.

Note that I am nowhere saying that just because something is legend that it is untrue or uninspired.

Correct in every way. A myth, properly defined, is a story that teaches truth, be it moral or religious.

The theory of evolution of false for one reason, it denies creationism.

Fallacy of False Dilemma. As other posters have shown, evolution explains how and creation explains why for the same phenomenon.

Seriously, Darwin was very confused. And His followers are as well. They actually thought that we came from primates.

Sorry, but your opinion is wrong. Learn what evolution actually theorizes before posting such Straw Men. Humans are primates; evolution doesn't suggest otherwise in the slightest.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Ok, im just making this stuff up.

 

[miamited]

Hi anewman,

Just thought I'd take a minute to offer support. You are correct. Refusal to accept what God has told us is the truth, is refusal to trust God. This same phenomenon can be seen throughout the history of Israel, but sadly, it is the nature of man to follow his own desires and knowledge.

Complete and unswerving trust in our Creator is a very, very rare thing these days and, of course, the Scriptures seem to imply that it will become even less and less so as we journey on to the day of judgment.

God bless you and may He comfort you and give you wisdom.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Restoresmysoul]

The only thing that is actually evolving is the theory itself.

 

[ViaCrucis]

We didnt just come from primates. We are primates. That doesnt change the fact that God created. He could easily have used evolution as a tool.

I like to say in these discussions that I am an ape created in the image of God.

That is what makes our particular sort of ape (homo sapiens) distinct from the rest of our primate kin--chimps, orangutans, gorillas, etc. The Imagio Dei.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

The only thing that is actually evolving is the theory itself.

That's how science works. Science works because it continually changes to better account for observed phenomena.

That isn't a flaw, that's a feature.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[miamited]

Ok, im just making this stuff up.

Hi RMS,

No, you didn't make that drawing up. That's the work of someone else's imagination. That picture has been touted in science books for decades as the natural progression of the evolution of man. It's a great picture, but understand that there is no supporting evidence for it. It is merely a drawing that an evolutionist drew at some point to show how he, and those who believed that the theory of evolution was the answer to how man became man, understood it to have happened. It's just a drawing my friend.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Restoresmysoul]

That's how science works. Science works because it continually changes to better account for observed phenomena.

That isn't a flaw, that's a feature.

-CryptoLutheran

Darwin himself admits that his theory isn't sound if we dont find evidence in the fossil record. And we have not found any, in all this time we have not found any evidence at all.

We can prove that different species of birds can interbreed and create new kinds of birds, and most animals can do this. However this is not the theory of evolution is it?

 

[Restoresmysoul]

Hi RMS,

No, you didn't make that drawing up. That's the work of someone else's imagination. That picture has been touted in science books for decades as the natural progression of the evolution of man. It's a great picture, but understand that there is no supporting evidence for it. It is merely a drawing that an evolutionist drew at some point to show how he, and those who believed that the theory of evolution was the answer to how man became man, understood it to have happened. It's just a drawing my friend.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

And its what evolutionists actually believed at one time. And some still do.

 

[Restoresmysoul]

The truth is that Science actually disproves evolution. The science of genetics proves it to be a bad theory. Genetic code cannot evolve past what the code itself allows. Just look at genetics and you will see how absurd evolution really is.







This guy is a reputable creationist and scientist.

 

[seeingeyes]

To define "trusting God" as an intellectual belief that affects basically nothing other than what youtube videos one might choose to watch is utterly lacking.

Lay down your life for the sheep and I'll follow you. Whether it's for 6000 years or 14 billion makes zero difference to me.