Can you be Christian and believe in evolution?

[Job 33:6]

Because God came in relationship with humanity through Adam. And then mankind thereafter became accountable for sin. And Adam sinned, and therefore we all sinned.

When it says that sin entered the world, think of the world as humanity. Sin entered humanity through one man.

‭‭Romans 5:13 (adjusted for clarity)
[12] So then, just as sin entered the world (when people became accountable for their sins) through one man (Adam at the fall) and death through sin, and so death spread to all people (the broken relationship with God) because all sinned (we sin because Adam first sinned)– [13] for before the law was given, sin was in the world (people sinned), but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law (people were not yet accountable before Adams relationship with God).

If you read it like this, it's consistent.

‭‭from the faith life study Bible
Romans 5:13 (FSB): 5:13 Paul states that the law did not introduce sin into the world; rather, it identified the sin that Adam had introduced.

 

[Job 33:6]

‭‭from the faith life study Bible
Romans 5:13 (FSB): 5:13 Paul states that the law did not introduce sin into the world; rather, it identified the sin that Adam had introduced.

@olgamc you would probably like logos Bible software. It's free. You can download it on Windows or use it for free through the web-apolication. And it comes with the faithlife study Bible and logos Bible study software to help navigate these complicated topics.

 

[olgamc]

Ok. Let me start from a different perspective. What came first, God or ancient near east theology? Adam and Eve knew God, correct? If Adam and Eve passed the knowledge of creation down to their kids and they to their kids and so on, could the message have gotten distorted over time but still contained some truth? Like the 7 day construction, and waters separating waters and expanse in the sky? If Moses is setting the record straight, he would still have all these elements.

Now let's look at Hebrew words.

Well, the waters above the raqia is a common ancient near east cosmological concept.

We see this here:
‭‭Genesis 1:6-7 NRSVUE‬‬
[6] And God said, “Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” [7] So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so.

What is translated as "dome" here is "raqia" - an expanse or a separation.

The primordial landmass in the sea is another common concept. It's just referred to as the primordial mound in Egyptian texts. It can be seen here:

‭‭Genesis 1:9-10 NRSVUE‬‬
[9] And God said, “Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.” And it was so. [10] God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

Right, this seems to point to continental drift.

Stars embedded inside the solid expanse was common in Babylonian and Egyptian cosmology. It can be seen here:

‭‭Genesis 1:14 NRSVUE‬‬
[14] And God said, “Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years,

Let there be lights (from the word or: to be or become light) in the expanse (from raqa) of the heavens/sky - nothing here to indicate words "embedded" or "solid". Unless you take the word in to mean literally in as opposed to appearing in or visible in.

Birds do not fly inside the expanse, they fly in front of it because it has a solid roof:

‭‭Genesis 1:20 NRSVUE‬‬
[20] And God said, “Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.”

and let the birds fly above the earth in the open (penei, from panah - to turn or to face, can also mean open or empty) expanse (rekia, from raqa) of the heavens/sky.

You can check the Hebrew on Genesis 1:20, it literally says that birds fly above the earth across the face of the dome of the heavens.

Where do you get your translations? I use this: Genesis 1:20 Lexicon: Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens."

Babylonian and Egyptian texts also have kings made in their god's image and "let us make" is common in enuma Elish.

‭‭Genesis 1:26 NRSVUE‬‬
[26] Then God said, “Let us make humans in our image, according to our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over the cattle and over all the wild animals of the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.”

That is a hint at trinity. Interestingly, from what I've been told, Hebrew does not have a royal "we".

Ancient near east temple texts also involve 7-day construction events and inaugurations. And pagan gods rest in their temples on the 7th day.

‭‭Genesis 2:3 NRSVUE‬‬
[3] So God blessed the seventh day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work that he had done in creation.

So, this is all ancient near east context, through and through. From the very beginning.

Or it did happen in 7 days (or periods) and they stole the idea.

‭‭Genesis 7:11 NRSVUE‬‬
[11] In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened.

‭‭Genesis 8:2 NRSVUE‬‬
[2] the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed, the rain from the heavens was restrained,

Windows of heaven open and close to release and restrain the waters above.

Fair enough, "windows of the heavens" could be a figure of speech or a play on words. Just like when God says that Abel's blood is crying to Him from the ground and earth opened it's mouth to receive Abel's blood.

Genesis 7:11 fountains or springs - it says in Genesis 2:6 that streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. Sure, why not, geysers exist.
Windows of the heavens - va·'a·rub·bot from the word arab: to lie in wait. Open - also set free, allowed, break forth. So is this a play on words? That which was lying in wait was set free?

 

[olgamc]

‭‭from the faith life study Bible
Romans 5:13 (FSB): 5:13 Paul states that the law did not introduce sin into the world; rather, it identified the sin that Adam had introduced.

Ok, let's put evolution aside for a minute. You say Bible is a book of theology, right? Let's look at theology.

What you are saying here is that it wasn't sin that was introduced but accountability. Which would mean that sin already existed, that's what you are saying, right? That Adam's grandma was sinful but not accountable? Because if, as you say, all of Genesis 2 comes after all of Genesis 1, and sin already existed in Genesis 1 without accountability (think of that for a second - sin exists and accountability doesn't), and God looks at it and says "this is very good" and blesses the people He had made. How can that be?

As opposed to: God makes the world, including Adam and Eve but not Adam's grandma. Adam and Eve have not sinned, they are so far perfect and sinless. God looks at the people he made and says "this is very good" and blesses them to multiply. Then Adam and Eve sin. Then God closes the garden of Eden, so the commandment about fruit no longer applies. So now between Adam and Noah we have a population of people who are sinful but not accountable. God sees that all they think about is evil and wipes them out with the flood. Then we have a period from Noah to Moses, when God finally gives the law to show them what sin is.

Romans 5:12-14 talks about that period: "12 Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—13 To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14 Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come."

 

[olgamc]

@olgamc you would probably like logos Bible software. It's free. You can download it on Windows or use it for free through the web-apolication. And it comes with the faithlife study Bible and logos Bible study software to help navigate these complicated topics.

Thank you for the reference. But yes exactly. The law did not introduce sin - it identified sin that already existed.

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok. Let me start from a different perspective. What came first, God or ancient near east theology? Adam and Eve knew God, correct? If Adam and Eve passed the knowledge of creation down to their kids and they to their kids and so on, could the message have gotten distorted over time but still contained some truth? Like the 7 day construction, and waters separating waters and expanse in the sky? If Moses is setting the record straight, he would still have all these elements.

Hm? Genesis is just describing ancient near east cosmology and it's describing a temple construction. Theologically it's accurate but these things aren't scientific.

I mean think about it, Genesis 7:11 and 8:2 describe Windows opening and closing to release and restrain water.

This isn't something that anyone should be mixing up with scientific accuracy or science at all.

Now let's look at Hebrew words.

What is translated as "dome" here is "raqia" - an expanse or a separation.

Yes, and thus expanse includes a solid sky holding up an ocean above.

Right, this seems to point to continental drift.

Ancient Egyptians did not know anything about continental drift. They were just describing a primordial mound. A piece of land surrounded by water.

Let there be lights (from the word or: to be or become light) in the expanse (from raqa) of the heavens/sky - nothing here to indicate words "embedded" or "solid". Unless you take the word in to mean literally in as opposed to appearing in or visible in.

The text says that there are waters above the firmament, and the stars are set in the firmament. The stars are not set above the firmament.

See, you're trying to make the text say things that it doesn't say. If it says that the stars are in the expanse, then it is what it is. And waters above are above the expanse and above the stars.

and let the birds fly above the earth in the open (penei, from panah - to turn or to face, can also mean open or empty) expanse (rekia, from raqa) of the heavens/sky.

No. Here is strong's concordance. You'll need to be able to use this if you want to navigate the topic properly:

And birds, let fly, above, the earth, across, the face, of the firmament, of the sky.

The text is the same as when the spirit hovers over the face of the deep. It means that the birds are flying not in the firmament of the sky, rather they are flying in front of it.

Where do you get your translations? I use this: Genesis 1:20 Lexicon: Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens."

That is a hint at trinity. Interestingly, from what I've been told, Hebrew does not have a royal "we".

No, just stop . Check the hebrew. If you aren't using a strong's concordance to check the Hebrew, then you're not following the text.

Or it did happen in 7 days (or periods) and they stole the idea.

ANE 7-day texts predate Genesis by centuries.

Fair enough, "windows of the heavens" could be a figure of speech or a play on words. Just like when God says that Abel's blood is crying to Him from the ground and earth opened it's mouth to receive Abel's blood.

Genesis 7:11 fountains or springs - it says in Genesis 2:6 that streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground. Sure, why not, geysers exist.
Windows of the heavens - va·'a·rub·bot from the word arab: to lie in wait. Open - also set free, allowed, break forth. So is this a play on words? That which was lying in wait was set free?

It's ancient near east cosmology. You're wrestling with me rather than just letting the text say what it says.

Trust me. If you just let the text say what it says, your life will become much easier and Genesis will make a lot more sense.

 

[olgamc]

What are you doing, you clearly know the verse is about humans not all mammals in general don't you?

I am not doing anything, just answering your questions. But I don't know what you are getting it. You said how could Adam say "a man shall leave his father and mother" if he didn't know what a father and mother was. I am just saying, why do you think he didn't know what a father and mother was?

How does it imply he didn't have parents?

It doesn't. It also doesn't imply that he did. This verse has nothing to do with Adam's parents.

Romans talks about the law, do you know the first law that was given to man?. Was everyone after based on it?.

Read Romans carefully or read my conversation with Job 33:6.

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok, let's put evolution aside for a minute. You say Bible is a book of theology, right? Let's look at theology.

What you are saying here is that it wasn't sin that was introduced but accountability. Which would mean that sin already existed, that's what you are saying, right? That Adam's grandma was sinful but not accountable? Because if, as you say, all of Genesis 2 comes after all of Genesis 1, and sin already existed in Genesis 1 without accountability (think of that for a second - sin exists and accountability doesn't), and God looks at it and says "this is very good" and blesses the people He had made. How can that be?

Again "very good" is about God establishing order to the cosmos. And it was good. God moves the watery deep out of the way. God has chosen His people.

Remember, when God blessed mankind, what is the first thing he instructs them to do?

Did you watch this video yet on the terms "subdue" and "rule" ?

As opposed to: God makes the world, including Adam and Eve but not Adam's grandma. Adam and Eve have not sinned, they are so far perfect and sinless. God looks at the people he made and says "this is very good" and blesses them to multiply. Then Adam and Eve sin. Then God closes the garden of Eden, so the commandment about fruit no longer applies. So now between Adam and Noah we have a population of people who are sinful but not accountable. God sees that all they think about is evil and wipes them out with the flood. Then we have a period from Noah to Moses, when God finally gives the law to show them what sin is.

You're reading the Bible like a 21st century American, not like an ancient isrealite.

 

[Dan1988]

The truth is I have never read or heard a word of what Charles Darwin said. You are resorting to making up false statements about me because you don't know me, see below is another.

you don't have too, because i already do

Some are blinded and some are not I agree.

Quote me as saying God is a liar,

It is worse than believing in evolution when you make up lies about people.

I'm simply saying one cannot believe in some theory which contradicts what God said. We either believe what God said or we don't. How can we hold to two sides which are opposed to each other

 

[Job 33:6]

Hm? Genesis is just describing ancient near east cosmology and it's describing a temple construction. Theologically it's accurate but these things aren't scientific.

I mean think about it, Genesis 7:11 and 8:2 describe Windows opening and closing to release and restrain water.

This isn't something that anyone should be mixing up with scientific accuracy or science at all.


Yes, and thus expanse includes a solid sky holding up an ocean above.

Ancient Egyptians did not know anything about continental drift. They were just describing a primordial mound. A piece of land surrounded by water.



The text says that there are waters above the firmament, and the stars are set in the firmament. The stars are not set above the firmament.

See, you're trying to make the text say things that it doesn't say. If it says that the stars are in the expanse, then it is what it is. And waters above are above the expanse and above the stars.

No. Here is strong's concordance. You'll need to be able to use this if you want to navigate the topic properly:
View attachment 344327

And birds, let fly, above, the earth, across, the face, of the firmament, of the sky.

The text is the same as when the spirit hovers over the face of the deep. It means that the birds are flying not in the firmament of the sky, rather they are flying in front of it.


No, just stop . Check the hebrew. If you aren't using a strong's concordance to check the Hebrew, then you're not following the text.

ANE 7-day texts predate Genesis by centuries.

It's ancient near east cosmology. You're wrestling with me rather than just letting the text say what it says.

Trust me. If you just let the text say what it says, your life will become much easier and Genesis will make a lot more sense.

@olgamc
Also, you have to understand. For Genesis 1:20, English translators, they're going to try to make the Bible make sense to our modern sensibilities.

It doesn't really make much sense to us that birds would fly in front of a dome in the sky, and so translators, they're going to gloss over depending on what translation you use, and they're just going to say that the birds fly in the sky and that's that.

And that's why it's necessary either to read multiple translations, or to be able to check a concordance to see what actual Hebrew words are present. Because if you don't do these things, you won't be able to see behind the veil of English translation.

And I think it's great that you acknowledge that Job is describing an ancient cosmology, that's a great step forward. But you should understand that the Old Testament as a whole is written in a relatively similar cognitive environment.

That is to say that, you'll find Ancient cosmology described in Ezekiel and Isaiah, and Job, and the Psalms etc.

Genesis does not exist outside of this bubble, it's very firmly embedded in it.

And It's probably embedded in it far more than you might anticipate.

You should also be aware that Genesis 6 with the sons of God, that's also a narrative that is replicated in the book of Enoch and a narratives on the Mesopotamian of apkallu.

Exodus, The Book of Exodus overflows with ancient nearest context. Narratives of babies floating down the Nile.

Or notice, when Moses goes to Mount Sinai, he looks up and what does he see? Underneath God's feet is a pavement of sapphire stone.

This language, a sea of glass or a sapphire glass or sapphire stone, pavement etc, you'll find it in the book of Ezekiel, but it's also how the caananites described the raqia as well. As a glass-like dome, and God walked on it.

and they saw the God of Israel. Under his feet there was something like a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness.
Exodus 24:10


And you'll save yourself a lot of time if you just give this a shot.

I spent many years looking at this stuff, and I spent many years looking at the sciences as well. And I'm telling you, It would have been nice if somebody had told me this 10 years ago, it would have saved me a lot of time and effort.

 

[Dan1988]

Ok well, transitional fossils are evidence for evolution. So do you provide that as cash or check?

I'm excited, I'll give you cash or check. Now please show me the little shred of evidence you believe exists. The fact remains that transitional fossils don't exist. I've been searching through all the libraries, museums and everything on line and I came up with zero.

So I'm still waiting, I heard a lot of promises but nobody has come good yet. Do you even know what your looking for, every paleontologist is desperately looking for that missing link. All you need to do is look up a single example of a fossil which is in transition from one species to another. And you'll be $1.6 million richer if you find one.

 

[olgamc]

Hm? Genesis is just describing ancient near east cosmology and it's describing a temple construction. Theologically it's accurate but these things aren't scientific.

I mean think about it, Genesis 7:11 and 8:2 describe Windows opening and closing to release and restrain water.

This isn't something that anyone should be mixing up with scientific accuracy or science at all.


Yes, and thus expanse includes a solid sky holding up an ocean above.

Ancient Egyptians did not know anything about continental drift. They were just describing a primordial mound. A piece of land surrounded by water.



The text says that there are waters above the firmament, and the stars are set in the firmament. The stars are not set above the firmament.

See, you're trying to make the text say things that it doesn't say. If it says that the stars are in the expanse, then it is what it is. And waters above are above the expanse and above the stars.

No. Here is strong's concordance. You'll need to be able to use this if you want to navigate the topic properly:
View attachment 344327

And birds, let fly, above, the earth, across, the face, of the firmament, of the sky.

The text is the same as when the spirit hovers over the face of the deep. It means that the birds are flying not in the firmament of the sky, rather they are flying in front of it.


No, just stop . Check the hebrew. If you aren't using a strong's concordance to check the Hebrew, then you're not following the text.

Yes, that's the one I use, and I click on the links to check out the words and roots of words. Do you?

ANE 7-day texts predate Genesis by centuries.

It's ancient near east cosmology. You're wrestling with me rather than just letting the text say what it says.

Trust me. If you just let the text say what it says, your life will become much easier and Genesis will make a lot more sense.

With all due respect, you are reading Genesis as if it was written by near east cosmologists. Your bias is clouding how you interpret the text. Try reading it as if it was inspired by God.

But setting that aside. What does this have to do with evolution and whether Adam had parents? You think Adam had parents. I explained many reasons why I think that is theologically wrong. I do not believe that God could have looked at humanity that was sinful and unaccountable, and declared it very good. The only other explanation is if Adam's parents were not humans. Which raises a host of moral issues. Also, you keep saying that God's relationship with humanity began with Adam. But look at chapter 1 - he blesses them. How is that not a relationship? So I don't know, I just can't make sense of what you are saying, there are too many contradictions and it's too complicated.

For me, Genesis was written by Moses inspired by God to remind people of their history. Not by near-east cosmologists. For me, God could not have called unaccountable sin very good. For me, sin entered the world through one man. Not accountability for sin, but actual sin. For me, God made a man special, unlike any animal, and so you are special and not an animal. For me God is so concerned with each and every one of us that He was willing to lose His own Son! And that's why I believe that He created us very deliberately and not left us to evolve from an ape through a random (or unintentional) process. But I might be wrong. Like Job was wrong. And you know what? God doesn't care!

 

[olgamc]

@olgamc
Also, you have to understand. For Genesis 1:20, English translators, they're going to try to make the Bible make sense to our modern sensibilities.

It doesn't really make much sense to us that birds would fly in front of a dome in the sky, and so translators, they're going to gloss over depending on what translation you use, and they're just going to say that the birds fly in the sky and that's that.

And that's why it's necessary either to read multiple translations, or to be able to check a concordance to see what actual Hebrew words are present. Because if you don't do these things, you won't be able to see behind the veil of English translation.

And I think it's great that you acknowledge that Job is describing an ancient cosmology, that's a great step forward. But you should understand that the Old Testament as a whole is written in a relatively similar cognitive environment.

That is to say that, you'll find Ancient cosmology described in Ezekiel and Isaiah, and Job, and the Psalms etc.

Genesis does not exist outside of this bubble, it's very firmly embedded in it.

And It's probably embedded in it far more than you might anticipate.

You should also be aware that Genesis 6 with the sons of God, that's also a narrative that is replicated in the book of Enoch and a narratives on the Mesopotamian of apkallu.

Exodus, The Book of Exodus overflows with ancient nearest context. Narratives of babies floating down the Nile.

Or notice, when Moses goes to Mount Sinai, he looks up and what does he see? Underneath God's feet is a pavement of sapphire stone.

This language, a sea of glass or a sapphire glass or sapphire stone, pavement etc, you'll find it in the book of Ezekiel, but it's also how the caananites described the raqia as well. As a glass-like dome, and God walked on it.

and they saw the God of Israel. Under his feet there was something like a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness.
Exodus 24:10


And you'll save yourself a lot of time if you just give this a shot.

I spent many years looking at this stuff, and I spent many years looking at the sciences as well. And I'm telling you, It would have been nice if somebody had told me this 10 years ago, it would have saved me a lot of time and effort.

Ok. Bottom line is, I looked up every Hebrew word in that passage and I still don't read it how you do. I am not going to insist that I am right and you are wrong as to whether Genesis describes an actual account of creation (even though it says so) or near-east cosmology. But the idea that Adam had parents theologically leads me in the wrong direction. So again I ask that we agree to disagree.

 

[Dan1988]

Thank your for the compliments, Dan. Your sincerity won't go unnoticed.

But yes, I'm VERY, VERY comfortable with my viewpoint, especially since I usually take a cue from Isaac Newton who said,

“If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” ... for me, that's about 1,000 Giants!​

​

…another of my favorite quotes

This well-known quote of Isaac Newton’s is a favorite of mine — not only because of its reflection on Newton and the great scientists before him, but because I see it as the very essence of education…. Seeing further… “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” – Sir...

www.science.edu

​

I'll just take this to mean that you haven't read much other than the Bible. That's ok. Everyone has to start somewhere.


I find some of your antics and empty rhetoric here on CF a bit disturbing for someone such as yourself who claims to be a fellow Christian.

I suggest you stop with all of the verbal cajoling of other Christians while you're behind. Better yet, maybe decide to simply be respectful of others and try to learn from them so they could either listen or possibly even learn from you instead of running them through with your mouth?????

I'm describing what I see around me and what I read in the Bible. I have never singled anyone out and applied anything to them personally. I state my position clearly, and I make reference to why I believe the things I say.

My view doesn't have to line up with yours. Everyone has their own opinion and belief system. You obviously don't agree with anything I believe and that's fine. You should assume I'm talking about you specifically when I talk about the world, it's a general observation . You are the one who knows if any of my observation of the world applies to you. I don't know you, so how can I be singling you out

 

[Job 33:6]

Yes, that's the one I use, and I click on the links to check out the words and roots of words. Do you?

Yes, to beat out or to spread out. That's what ancient isrealites would do to cast metal when they stretched and expanded it. What's your point?

With all due respect, you are reading Genesis as if it was written by near east cosmologists. Your bias is clouding how you interpret the text. Try reading it as if it was inspired by God.

I read the Bible in its context. Job says the sky has been stretched out hard as cast metal. That tells me that the Biblical authors held to an ancient view of a solid sky. You have acknowledged this but for some strange reason you think Genesis is unique from all the other books of the Bible that describe the same thing.

But setting that aside. What does this have to do with evolution and whether Adam had parents? You think Adam had parents. I explained many reasons why I think that is theologically wrong. I do not believe that God could have looked at humanity that was sinful and unaccountable, and declared it very good.

Because "very good" has nothing to do with morality. It's about function.

Remember that part in the Bible, in Genesis 1 where God said that something was not good? When it was not good, tell me, What exactly did that have to do with morality?

The only other explanation is if Adam's parents were not humans. Which raises a host of moral issues. Also, you keep saying that God's relationship with humanity began with Adam. But look at chapter 1 - he blesses them. How is that not a relationship? So I don't know, I just can't make sense of what you are saying, there are too many contradictions and it's too complicated.

People were blessed, but God never established any law or rule for them at that point. They can't sin where God has not established a law.

But of course in the garden, God explicitly instructs Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of wisdom, and they break that and they go against God's intention that was verbally and explicitly given to them.

"Very good" does not mean "morally perfect". That's not what the text says.

And it's "not good" when Adam was alone. And that has absolutely nothing to do with morality at all. So you should understand that when God says something is good or not good, it has nothing to do with morality.

. For me, sin entered the world through one man. Not accountability for sin, but actual sin.

‭‭Romans 5:13 NET‬‬
[13] for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law.

Paul says otherwise. Sin was in the world before accountability.

For me, God made a man special, unlike any animal, and so you are special and not an animal.

Imago dei says nothing of biology. I think mankind is special too, but I wouldn't deny that I'm a mammal for example.

. And you know what? God doesn't care!

Ok

 

[Job 33:6]

Ok. Bottom line is, I looked up every Hebrew word in that passage and I still don't read it how you do. I am not going to insist that I am right and you are wrong as to whether Genesis describes an actual account of creation (even though it says so) or near-east cosmology. But the idea that Adam had parents theologically leads me in the wrong direction. So again I ask that we agree to disagree.

Here's a question for you, on the accountability topic of humanity, if you don't think sin was in the world before the fall, then what do you call Satan deceiving Eve?

Sounds like sin to me.

When God commanded Adam and Eve to subdue and rule, he's calling on them to essentially carry out a military-esque conquest. Something involving an armed struggle.

Sin was present in the world (as in the environment) but it wasn't until Adam that mankind became accountable. And therefore we sin because Adam first sinned. And sin has therefore entered the world and we are now all subject to it's repercussions (the penalty of sin).

The penalty of sin is not imputed where there is no law or accountability.

Does a cat or a dog get punished by God when they pee on the floor or steal food off your plate? No. Because they're just animals. They aren't held accountable to sin.

 

[BeyondET]

. I am just saying, why do you think he didn't know what a father and mother was?

I don't,

It doesn't. It also doesn't imply that he did. This verse has nothing to do with Adam's parents.

Is it a limbo?, I agree it's about Adam and rather he left his parents and married a woman?. Or was it presto man and woman?. Did the nostrils come before the breath or at the same time?.

Was Eve from the same dna factory inside the bone of the rib where a lot of human dna is produced or the bone itself or something else like turned to soup and totally restructured like a butterfly?

Read Romans carefully or read my conversation with Job 33:6.

So it wasn't dirt or bone but clay? Interesting.

I have, or should I impede on your conversation about clay?.

 

[BeyondET]

I'm simply saying one cannot believe in some theory which contradicts what God said. We either believe what God said or we don't. How can we hold to two sides which are opposed to each other

Do you know the steps God created man from dirt or does scripture describe the process, took afew hours or minutes or seconds, possibly instantly, where's the contradiction located?

Certainly information for total rebuild is stored within living things like a human liver or lower rib. Why is it hard to believe God had been storing a human blueprint in a stem cell just like flat worms or animals that complete a total transformation from one animal to the next. Yet God couldn't keep something similar from igniting like until the nostrils where totally complete to which a soul could reside. The human brain is very complex and doesn't totally mature until well into the late twenties. Good reason to hold off til later years.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I'm describing what I see around me and what I read in the Bible. I have never singled anyone out and applied anything to them personally. I state my position clearly, and I make reference to why I believe the things I say.

My view doesn't have to line up with yours. Everyone has their own opinion and belief system. You obviously don't agree with anything I believe and that's fine. You should assume I'm talking about you specifically when I talk about the world, it's a general observation . You are the one who knows if any of my observation of the world applies to you. I don't know you, so how can I be singling you out

I didn't say your view HAS to line up with mine. And you're incorrect to say that I don't agree with anything you believe. You, as you've said, don't know that.

Maybe instead, just assume I'm a fellow Christian along side yourself, even if you and I don't see eye to eye on every aspect of the Bible. I'm sure that if we were to compare notes, we'd find some similarities in our respective views of faith since we both have our eyes on Jesus.

 

[Dan1988]

Do you know the steps God created man from dirt or does scripture describe the process, took afew hours or minutes or seconds, possibly instantly, where's the contradiction located?

Certainly information for total rebuild is stored within living things like a human liver or lower rib. Why is it hard to believe God had been storing a human blueprint in a stem cell just like flat worms or animals that complete a total transformation from one animal to the next. Yet God couldn't keep something similar from igniting like until the nostrils where totally complete to which a soul could reside. The human brain is very complex and doesn't totally mature until well into the late twenties. Good reason to hold off til later years.

I personally don't think that speculation about what method God used to create everything, is helpful. If God wanted us to know, He would have told us. He deliberately hid many such things from us and I believe He has a good reason for doing so.

Speculation can result in a wrong worldview, we have an abundance of things to learn about God. We can't even learn everything about the things He has revealed in on lifetime, let alone things He hid from us.

The world is full of people with different theories and ideas, we can easily get lost in the maze of differing opinions about every single subject. How does one, decide who possesses the truth. Some charlatans can be very good at their craft, they have been known to deceive very intelligent people.

The Bible says that God is not the author of confusion, so I believe the enemy causes all the confusion we see around us.