Here's my problem, I believe in evolution, and it brings up doubts especially in the OT...

[justlookinla]

Well, if that is how you feel, what would you consider to be evidence then? As in, give an example of a hypothetical medium of information by which I can display evidence, that you would consider valid.

Numerous people claim to have evidence, based on the scientific method, for the 'how' of Darwinist evolution which produced humanity from an alleged single life form of long ago. The burden of proof is on them to offer the evidence for their claim, something not a single one of them have done.

If you claim to have this information, please post it. The burden is on you, not me, to support your claim.

 

[-57]

Isn't the Immaculate Conception supposed to take care of that?

There was no such thing as the Immaculate Conception.

 

[-57]

Given the DNA studies that have been done over the last few years...the fossil record is NOT even needed to show evolution. We know that ALL humans came from Africa, and adapted to their environment. We know the indigenous people here in the Western Hemisphere are related to the people of Asia, genetically. We know that having blue eyes is a genetic mutation that can be pinpointed in time. The study of plate tectonics tells us that at one time all the land was gathered into one mass and has broken up over millions of years. We also know that the Pacific Ocean is growing while the Atlantic is shrinking.

Why is it so hard to comprehend that the bible is not a science text? Understanding evolution does nothing to denigrate one's faith. Acknowledging the immensity and the beauty of what we see is seeing God in it. Understanding the "Big Bang" theory takes me back to the uncaused first cause...who caused that? I believe God did it. Understanding science does nothing to undermine my faith at all.

Understanding evolutionism...a faith in itself...undermines the reason why Jesus came as a Savior.
You say, no Adam. No Eve. No garden. No deception. No fall.

You say sin and death was not caused by one man.

You say man was not formed from the dust (1st Cor 15:47)....why do you filter your bible through science?
Don't you know science says when you are dead...you stay dead on day 3.

 

[Neogaia777]

It still doesn't change the fact that God could have "created" humanoid lifeforms, separate and in their own little pocket of the world, separate from what had evolved...

 

[-57]

It still doesn't change the fact that God could have "created" humanoid lifeforms, separate and in their own little pocket of the world, separate from what had evolved...

I suppose He could...after all He is God....BUT....that's NOT what the bible teaches.

 

[Hoghead1]

It doesn't follow at all that evolution undermines the notion that Jesus came as a savior, -57. However, one's interpretation of evolution is definitely connected with Christ. Granted, some evolutionary scientists are atheistic and coal upon evolution to back them up here. However, they are interpreting evolution to mean we are just random accidents in a universe which has no ultimate purpose. But is that an accurate understanding of the evolutionary process? There are major thinkers who have challenged this bleak picture. If evolution is purposeless in nature, why is their a definite direction? What does it seem to be moving upward, creating more and sensitive organisms? Why consider us a freak accident, alone and up against a universe otherwise composed of passive, inert, dead matter? In my why of thinking, evolution is telling us that a matter is alive, that the universe is a gigantic organism, not a machine. If so, the universe must have a mind, just as does any complex organism, and that means God. If the Incarnation is to be considered truly revelatory, then it has to represent God's general MO with the world and that means the universe can be thought of ass the body of God. You might try reading a major 20th-century thinker, Teilhard de Chardin. He introduces the concept of the Cosmic Christ and presents evolution as the hand by which God delivers us to himself. Bottom line: evolution does not necessitate one become an atheist, and could actually further develop your understanding of God's revelation through Christ.

 

[Hoghead1]

I don't follow your point, Neogaia. What's the point you are trying to make by saying God could have created over in some corner, separate from the rest? And why do you assume God could have? Fact is, he didn't , and I don't see why you don't want to stick to that fact. Offhand, I would disagree. I views the universe as an organism, and that means no process , not even the slightest, goes on independently of all the rest. Reality is like a spider's web; it is all interrelated and interconnected. So there really aren't any corners to go hide in, places totally separate from everything else.

 

[Not_By_Chance]

Understanding evolutionism...a faith in itself...undermines the reason why Jesus came as a Savior.
You say, no Adam. No Eve. No garden. No deception. No fall.

You say sin and death was not caused by one man.

You say man was not formed from the dust (1st Cor 15:47)....why do you filter your bible through science?
Don't you know science says when you are dead...you stay dead on day 3.

As you have clearly indicated above, there is no need to compromise one's trust in God's word in order to try to make it compatible with the evolution myth and its associated cruelties (survival of the fittest being just one). Articles such as this provide excellent information to show why one does not have to pick and choose which sections of the Holy Bible to believe and which to discard. Personally, I think that once you start to do that, you are putting yourself in danger of losing your faith, because you are giving man's ideas (and they are only ideas) priority over God's written word. It also sends out confusing messages to those who may be seeking answers. We need to take a non-compromising stand on the word of God, because if we really believe it to be the words of the Creator of the universe, then we can trust it to say what it means and mean what it says. If that goes against man's fallible ideas, e.g., evolution, the Big Bang, etc, then man's ideas must be wrong.

 

[-57]

It doesn't follow at all that evolution undermines the notion that Jesus came as a savior, -57. However, one's interpretation of evolution is definitely connected with Christ. Granted, some evolutionary scientists are atheistic and coal upon evolution to back them up here. However, they are interpreting evolution to mean we are just random accidents in a universe which has no ultimate purpose. But is that an accurate understanding of the evolutionary process? There are major thinkers who have challenged this bleak picture. If evolution is purposeless in nature, why is their a definite direction? What does it seem to be moving upward, creating more and sensitive organisms? Why consider us a freak accident, alone and up against a universe otherwise composed of passive, inert, dead matter? In my why of thinking, evolution is telling us that a matter is alive, that the universe is a gigantic organism, not a machine. If so, the universe must have a mind, just as does any complex organism, and that means God. If the Incarnation is to be considered truly revelatory, then it has to represent God's general MO with the world and that means the universe can be thought of ass the body of God. You might try reading a major 20th-century thinker, Teilhard de Chardin. He introduces the concept of the Cosmic Christ and presents evolution as the hand by which God delivers us to himself. Bottom line: evolution does not necessitate one become an atheist, and could actually further develop your understanding of God's revelation through Christ.

Then why do we need Jesus? If evolution was directed by God and this God placed in our DNA the nature that we will choose against Him. Doesn't make sense. The account in Genesis tells us it was a choice. A bad choice. With your theology man simply evolved it. (directed by God)
As to Teilhard de Chardin..and the Cosmic Christ....No thanks. It's just a respreading of the lie in Genesis that you strangly seem to think was baby talk. Teilhard de Chardin are spreading the original lie....You can become the Cosmic Christ....A God.
Too much New Age. Definately not what a Protestant would hear from the pulpit on a Sunday Morning.

 

[lesliedellow]

Then why do we need Jesus? If evolution was directed by God and this God placed in our DNA the nature that we will choose against Him. Doesn't make sense. The account in Genesis tells us it was a choice. A bad choice. With your theology man simply evolved it. (directed by God)
As to Teilhard de Chardin..and the Cosmic Christ....No thanks. It's just a respreading of the lie in Genesis that you strangly seem to think was baby talk. Teilhard de Chardin are spreading the original lie....You can become the Cosmic Christ....A God.
Too much New Age. Definately not what a Protestant would hear from the pulpit on a Sunday Morning.

It makes not the slightest difference whether we evolved or were specially created. In both cases had the ability to rebel against God, and in both cases we chose to do so.

 

[-57]

It makes not the slightest difference whether we evolved or were specially created. In both cases had the ability to rebel against God, and in both cases we chose to do so.

Then Paul lied.

 

[lesliedellow]

Then Paul lied.

To quote John Walton, Paul was using Adam as an archetype.

 

[RDKirk]

My personal experiencial evidence stands on it's very own as enough proof for me

If this is true, why in the world are you letting anything else bother you?

You pore over the [Old Testament] Scriptures because you think you have eternal life in them, yet they testify about Me. And you are not willing to come to Me so that you may have life. --John 5-39

Jesus spoke to people who were absolute experts in the OT--far more than you or I will be--and they totally missed Jesus. Who were they actually worshiping? I don't know, but if it isn't Jesus it is not the God of the OT.

Jesus is the visible image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15) in whom the fullness of God dwells. When you look at Jesus, you see the Father (John 14:9). If you know Jesus, you know the Father (John 14:7).

Jesus clarified the OT image of God, which the people of that time simply did not understand, with the Sermon on the Mount. What He is saying is, to paraphrase, "This is what God looked like to the hard-hearted people of that day, but I'm telling you what God is really like."

There is no problem with having questions about "disputable things" (Romans 14:1). All things of creation are for physical observation; scripture is for the teaching of righteousness (2 Timothy 3:16), which cannot be shown through physical observation.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Then why do we need Jesus? If evolution was directed by God and this God placed in our DNA the nature that we will choose against Him. Doesn't make sense.

It's called "free will." Does it make sense regardless of how God gave it to us?

 

[-57]

To quote John Walton, Paul was using Adam as an archetype.

Considering we are all represented in Adam and Eve..perhaps there is a certain element of "archetype"....but other biblical references present Adam as historical and literal. Through the federal headship of one man Adam....sin and death entered into the world. Adams sin was not meant to symbolize or convey spiritual meaning. Adam and Eve had literal children, all of whom inherited the sin nature, and that nature was passed down to succeeding generations to this very day.

Your tie with the religion of evolutionism and John Walton would deny that.

 

[-57]

It's called "free will." Does it make sense regardless of how God gave it to us?

being an agnostic it probably doesn't mean much to you...but the bible tells us why we sin. Those that have faith in evolutionism must change the reason why the Word of God says we sin.

 

[TLK Valentine]

being an agnostic it probably doesn't mean much to you...but the bible tells us why we sin. Those that have faith in evolutionism must change the reason why the Word of God says we sin.

The Bible is the Word of God? Think carefully before you answer...

 

[Neogaia777]

If this is true, why in the world are you letting anything else bother you?

What bothers me is not being able to distinguish what I ran into through my experiences were holy, good presences, or unholy, bad presences, I think I experienced both, and my testimony is all about ready to explode in me so, I want to share it with others, and I wanna know if any people on here had had similar experiences, and I want to talk about them...

God Bless!

 

[PsychoSarah]

being an agnostic it probably doesn't mean much to you...but the bible tells us why we sin. Those that have faith in evolutionism must change the reason why the Word of God says we sin.

Why? Humans sinning had nothing to do with human origin, technically speaking.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Numerous people claim to have evidence, based on the scientific method, for the 'how' of Darwinist evolution which produced humanity from an alleged single life form of long ago. The burden of proof is on them to offer the evidence for their claim, something not a single one of them have done.

If you claim to have this information, please post it. The burden is on you, not me, to support your claim.

But you already know that I do not support the Universal ancestor idea in the first place, so why would I have to defend a component which I disagree with?