Did God Create Fossils?

[FreakOnALeash]

You all reject the Word of God because of what "science" tells you. You know what science also tells us? That resurrection is impossible. If you reject the resurrection of Jesus then you are not a Christian I hate to say.

But Hey, dude c'mon..... He was never 'REALLLY' dead now was he? NO. Either because because A. There is no God..... OR....... If you take what that bible book says even God himself admits he was also Jesus (according to some forms of Christianity anyway) so if that was the case then he could never of 'REALLLY' been dead now could he. How would he have 'resurrected' himself? As you put it 'yourself' and I quote......

"That resurrection is impossible."

So if it's impossible then he was Never dead or Never alive, I'm just saying......

Anyways my main point is NO God did NOT create fossils they are the natural result of 'Evolution'

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Forgot about this post... Nowhere in Genesis does God create using millions of years of death and mutation: You insert that into the text because you don't want to believe what it plainly teaches.

But... but... but
That is what is happening.. now... and for as far back as any history or records states... it is a part of the world and nature that God created. Faith is not the denial of what is. What is is what God created. The scripture cannot be wrong.. but it can be misunderstood. If what is contradicts the interpretation... well. That is not faith. It is something else.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

But Hey, dude c'mon..... He was never 'REALLLY' dead now was he? NO. Either because because A. There is no God..... OR....... If you take what that bible book says even God himself admits he was also Jesus (according to some forms of Christianity anyway) so if that was the case then he could never of 'REALLLY' been dead now could he. How would he have 'resurrected' himself? As you put it 'yourself' and I quote......

"That resurrection is impossible."

So if it's impossible then he was Never dead or Never alive, I'm just saying......

Anyways my main point is NO God did NOT create fossils they are the natural result of 'Evolution'

Quite right. And as far as I am concerned... nothing in nature contradicts scripture.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

But... but... but
That is what is happening.. now... and for as far back as any history or records states... it is a part of the world and nature that God created. Faith is not the denial of what is. What is is what God created. The scripture cannot be wrong.. but it can be misunderstood. If what is contradicts the interpretation... well. That is not faith. It is something else.

There is a difference between variation within a kind and macroevolution.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

But Hey, dude c'mon..... He was never 'REALLLY' dead now was he? NO. Either because because A. There is no God..... OR....... If you take what that bible book says even God himself admits he was also Jesus (according to some forms of Christianity anyway) so if that was the case then he could never of 'REALLLY' been dead now could he. How would he have 'resurrected' himself? As you put it 'yourself' and I quote......

"That resurrection is impossible."

So if it's impossible then he was Never dead or Never alive, I'm just saying......

Anyways my main point is NO God did NOT create fossils they are the natural result of 'Evolution'

Do you believe the in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus or not?

 

[ClothedInGrace]

But... but... but
That is what is happening.. now... and for as far back as any history or records states... it is a part of the world and nature that God created. Faith is not the denial of what is. What is is what God created. The scripture cannot be wrong.. but it can be misunderstood. If what is contradicts the interpretation... well. That is not faith. It is something else.

 

[alexandriaisburning]

Well, you can call it presuppositions, but I call it plain english. For in six days God created the heavens and the earth and all that is in them. Then He has given us testimony of the genealogies from Adam to Abraham. All spelled out in pretty plain english to me. I guess some might say that I'm understanding the words with some presuppostions, but I also checked with Miriam Webster and they agree that I'm defining and understanding the words correctly.

But this is a delusion! "Plain english" is irrelevant, for the ancient writers (and readers) of the creation narratives did not share your modern, Western biases toward historicity. We are trained from birth to view historicity and verifiability as the arbiters of truth; and so this indoctrination dictates how we interpret Scripture. When we read a narrative that even presents some manner of being "historical", we immediately apply the glaze of historical criticism and find an interpretation that fits our starting assumptions about how such things should be interpreted. Since we are conditioned to reject the mythological and allegorical, we are to interpret the creation accounts as "literal history", never considering even for a moment that the ancients might have viewed these narratives in a completely different light that we do. We can't tolerate the notion that these stories could be religious mythology, nor that they could be borne out of a shared mythology of the ANE. NO! Scripture must meet our modern, historical/critical standards, after all!

But in so doing, we do immense violence to the Scriptures, to our shame.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

There is a difference between variation within a kind and macroevolution.

That is where "guided" evolution comes in. God certainly does step in and does what He wants. It is not free running. Viruses mutate and change sometimes thousands of times over a period of days. Only one or two may be viable. God enabled them and all creatures to do that in order to survive changing climates and environments. It is built in and absolutely genius. What a magnificent creator who did this! No human could ever devise or even conceive such a creation that auto adapts to ensure continued survival. This is to His credit and glory. In not way could this ever detract from his Power and Wisdom!

 

[ClothedInGrace]

That is where "guided" evolution comes in. God certainly does step in and does what He wants. It is not free running. Viruses mutate and change sometimes thousands of times over a period of days. Only one or two may be viable. God enabled them and all creatures to do that in order to survive changing climates and environments. It is built in and absolutely genius. What a magnificent creator who did this! No human could ever devise or even conceive such a creation that auto adapts to ensure continued survival. This is to His credit and glory. In not way could this ever detract from his Power and Wisdom!

Yes, how genius for God's Word to say that He created life when in fact He changed creatures (where they came from, who knows) slightly through mutation and death over millions of years. Human beings were not created in God's Image, but we were mutated from apes! Theistic evolution sickens me.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

But this is a delusion! "Plain english" is irrelevant, for the ancient writers (and readers) of the creation narratives did not share your modern, Western biases toward historicity. We are trained from birth to view historicity and verifiability as the arbiters of truth; and so this indoctrination dictates how we interpret Scripture. When we read a narrative that even presents some manner of being "historical", we immediately apply the glaze of historical criticism and find an interpretation that fits our starting assumptions about how such things should be interpreted. Since we are conditioned to reject the mythological and allegorical, we are to interpret the creation accounts as "literal history", never considering even for a moment that the ancients might have viewed these narratives in a completely different light that we do. We can't tolerate the notion that these stories could be religious mythology, nor that they could be borne out of a shared mythology of the ANE. NO! Scripture must meet our modern, historical/critical standards, after all!

But in so doing, we do immense violence to the Scriptures, to our shame.

"No! Scripture can't be literal because being literal is a modern concept!" Whatever man.

 

[stephen583]

That's not an addition to the Bible: That's a translation.

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my father only" (Matthew 24:36, KJV).

The NIV, NLT, ESV, NAS, ISV and ERV add the words, "nor the Son" after "not the angels of heaven".

That appears to me like quite a liberal use of the concept of "translation",.. It almost sounds like "interpretation" to me, and suggests Jesus was something less than divine. It almost seems to suggest, Jesus was a man, like any other man, doesn't it ?! At least some might read it that way.

I think adding those words goes way beyond translation.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

"But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my father only" (Matthew 24:36, KJV).

The NIV, NLT, ESV, NAS, ISV and ERV add the words, "nor the Son" after "not the angels of heaven".

That appears to me like quite a liberal use of the concept of "translation",.. It almost sounds like "interpretation" to me, and suggests Jesus was something less than divine. It almost seems to suggest, Jesus was a man, like any other man, doesn't it ?! At least some might read it that way.

I think adding those words goes way beyond translation.

It didn't add those words because they are there in the Greek. It is the same word used to describe Jesus as the Son of God, but it could simply mean the sons of men. Again, it is a translation issue.

 

[stephen583]

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life".. (Revelation 22:19 KJV).

Clearly the Scripture indicates here , whether by preaching a different prophecy, changing the wording through a different interpretive transliteration, or deliberately subverting the meaning of the prophecy by changing the printed words, it is possible for man to corrupt the Word of God.

There are many more warnings by the Apostles about how the Word of God should be properly handled and administered in the New Testament, but I'm not going to be tedious and list them all here. Suffice to say, these warnings would not be necessary if the Word of God was inviolate. Clearly, it is not.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life".. (Revelation 22:19 KJV).

Clearly the Scripture indicates here , whether by preaching a different prophecy, changing the wording through a different interpretive transliteration, or deliberately subverting the meaning of the prophecy by changing the printed words, it is possible for man to corrupt the Word of God.

There are many more warnings by the Apostles about how the Word of God should be properly handled and administered in the New Testament, but I'm not going to be tedious and list them all here. Suffice to say, these warnings would not be necessary if the Word of God was inviolate.

There are plenty of bad Bible translations, but that doesn't mean the Hebrew and Greek scriptures we have are corrupted. You just need to get your hands on a good translation.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Yes, how genius for God's Word to say that He created life when in fact He changed creatures (where they came from, who knows) slightly through mutation and death over millions of years. Human beings were not created in God's Image, but we were mutated from apes! Theistic evolution sickens me.

I do not necessarily think God created man from apes... but being sickened or not being sickened is not the deciding factor.
God created all life from the dirt of the ground. Whether it came through the evolutionary progress of dirt > ape > man or directly from dirt > man, what is the difference (as far as being sickened that is)? Either way it all came forth from dirt.

For instance, here God empowers the ground to bring forth plant life:

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So... in these verses, what brought forth the grass, herbs, and trees? God told the earth to do it, and it did. He created them, but He empowered His proxy "the earth" to do it."

And here:

Genesis 1:20-22
(20) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
(21) And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
(22) And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

So God created this life... but it plainly says that He empowered the seas to do it.
"the waters brought forth abundantly"

Again here:


Genesis 1:24-25
(24) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
(25) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So again, God enabled the earth to bring forth life. A "life factory" if you will. So it is not a stretch to say that God enabled the earth to bring forth life... that is exactly what the scripture says.

So I think it is unfair to claim that those who ascribe to guided evolution have no scriptural evidence for what they believe. I believe exactly what the Word says. God empowered the earth to bring forth life. The earth is doing that using the magnificent process of what some called guided evolution. There is nothing evil about it.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

I do not necessarily think God created man from apes... but being sickened or not being sickened is not the deciding factor.
God created all life from the dirt of the ground. Whether it came through the evolutionary progress of dirt > ape > man or directly from dirt > man, what is the difference (as far as being sickened that is)? Either way it all came forth from dirt.

For instance, here God empowers the ground to bring forth plant life:

Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So... in these verses, what brought forth the grass, herbs, and trees? God told the earth to do it, and it did. He created them, but He empowered His proxy "the earth" to do it."

And here:

Genesis 1:20-22
(20) And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
(21) And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
(22) And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

So God created this life... but it plainly says that He empowered the seas to do it.
"the waters brought forth abundantly"

Again here:


Genesis 1:24-25
(24) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
(25) And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

So again, God enabled the earth to bring forth life. A "life factory" if you will. So it is not a stretch to say that God enabled the earth to bring forth life... that is exactly what the scripture says.

So I think it is unfair to claim that those who ascribe to guided evolution have no scriptural evidence for what they believe. I believe exactly what the Word says. God empowered the earth to bring forth life. The earth is doing that using the magnificent process of what some called guided evolution. There is nothing evil about it.

I'm sickened that people who call themselves Christian go to such lengths to fit evolution into the Bible.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Look at some of the other amazing translations of Gen 1:24
Every single version attribute the earth to the the actual agent that brought forth the live. Some even have God commanding the earth to do it:

ASV) And God said, Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind: and it was so.

(BBE) And God said, Let the earth give birth to all sorts of living things, cattle and all things moving on the earth, and beasts of the earth after their sort: and it was so.

(Brenton) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind, quadrupeds and reptiles and wild beasts of the earth according to their kind, and it was so.

(CEV) God said, "I command the earth to give life to all kinds of tame animals, wild animals, and reptiles." And that's what happened.

(Darby) And God said, Let the earth bring forth living souls after their kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth, after their kind. And it was so.

(DRB) And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done.

(ERV) Then God said, "Let the earth produce many kinds of living things. Let there be many different kinds of animals. Let there be large animals and small crawling animals of every kind. And let all these animals produce more animals." And all these things happened.

(ESV) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so.

(GNB) Then God commanded, "Let the earth produce all kinds of animal life: domestic and wild, large and small"---and it was done.

(GW) Then God said, "Let the earth produce every type of living creature: every type of domestic animal, crawling animal, and wild animal." And so it was.

(ISV) Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth each kind of living creature, each kind of livestock and crawling thing, and each kind of earth's animals!" And that is what happened:

(JPS) And God said: 'Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind.' And it was so.

(JUB) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living soul after its nature, beasts and serpents and animals of the earth after its nature; and it was so.

(KJV) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

(KJV+) And GodH430 said,H559 Let the earthH776 bring forthH3318 the livingH2416 creatureH5315 after his kind,H4327 cattle,H929 and creeping thing,H7431 and beastH2416 of the earthH776 after his kind:H4327 and it wasH1961 so.H3651

(KJV-BRG) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

(LEB) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kind: cattle and moving things, and wild animals according to their kind." And it was so.

(LITV) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the soul of life according to its kind: cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth, according to its kind. And it was so.

(MKJV) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth after its kind; and it was so.

(RV) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind: and it was so.

(TLV) Then God said, “Let the land bring forth living creatures according to their species—livestock, crawling creatures and wild animals, according to their species.” And it happened so.

(WEB) God said, “Let the earth produce living creatures after their kind, livestock, creeping things, and animals of the earth after their kind;” and it was so.

(WEBA) God said, “Let the earth produce living creatures after their kind, livestock, creeping things, and animals of the earth after their kind;” and it was so.

(Webster) And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and the creeping animal, and the beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

(YLT) And God saith, `Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after its kind:' and it is so.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I'm sickened that people who call themselves Christian go to such lengths to fit evolution into the Bible.

Well... you are ignoring a lot of verses. I am sorry I sicken you because I believe the exact words the Bible uses. Might want to check on that.

 

[ClothedInGrace]

Well... you are ignoring a lot of verses. I am sorry I sicken you because I believe the exact words the Bible uses. Might want to check on that.

God will hold you accountable.

 

[stephen583]

So I think it is unfair to claim that those who ascribe to guided evolution have no scriptural evidence for what they believe. I believe exactly what the Word says. God empowered the earth to bring forth life. The earth is doing that using the magnificent process of what some called guided evolution. There is nothing evil about it.

Someone asked in another thread, "Is there any way to stop 70% of our young people from leaving the church by the time they are teenagers" ?! Well for starters you might stop telling them evil scientists created dinosaur bones to discredit religion and any interpretation of the Bible that embraces the concept of evolution, or at least adaptation of species to their environment, is equally as false and evil.

Kids aren't stupid. They read. They watch the Discovery Channel and Animal Planet. They have computers. They are exposed to scientific information constantly. They are constantly subjected to peer pressure and ridicule. IMHO, throwing fundamentalist pseudoscience at them isn't any way to keep them in church. That kind of nonsense, is just making matters worse.

So the next time your kid asks you if science disagrees with the Bible, you might just say, "You know what".. "I read something on CF the other day about that". "Let's have a look at it".