Theistic Evolution

stevevw · Feb 22, 2019

JacksBratt said:
That is the general consensus. You would only need one breeding pair of a certain kind... Which held the DNA for that kind and allowed this species to produce the multi variations of that kind.

Just look at all the breeds of dogs there are.. Wolves, foxes, coyotes, German shepherds, coli's..... Yet all are Canine.

How would this be any more possible than every single living being, type, kind, species, plant and animal... coming from one single-celled organism?

Christ, when talking to His disciples about where He was going, stated:

John 14:2 King James Version (KJV)
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

I draw your attention to the "If it were not so, I would have told you" portion.

I believe that God's word tells us what we need to know. It is:

2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

So, why would it not tell us of this epic story of morphing and dying over millions of years as the one single celled being sprouted forth all others?

Why would He tell us that He formed Adam... the first man.. with no woman, with His own hands and breathed life into him.. And then, go to the extent of describing how the very first female woman was created.. after the man, from the man?

Even if you stretched it to the breaking point for all animals, plants and sea creatures..... You are never going to get man coming from apes....

So, you have to ask yourself.. Do you believe the Bible.. or the notes of some man in a white lab coat?
Do you believe the biblical account of the gospel... but toss the creation?

Do you stand on the wisdom of man... or the Words of God?

Romans 1:22 King James Version (KJV)
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

1 Corinthians 2:5 King James Version (KJV)
5 That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.

1 Corinthians 3:19 King James Version (KJV)
19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

Obviously not all the bible is literal as there are things in there cannot be taken literally such as
Isaiah 55:12, “the trees will clap their hands.” Or Genesis 2:17, “you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Or when
Jesus said to poke out your eye or cut off your foot if it causes you to sin and Jesus saying that he was bread to eat him.

So if we say that there were 100 kinds of animals, maybe 100 kinds of sea creatures, plants and insects. There may be more or less. But throughout history and today, they say that 99% of all species have died. We have millions of species today. So this shows there is a great capacity for living things to change even if we say they all came from original kinds that had the genetic info, to begin with. For me, there is not too much difference between this and some versions of theistic evolution.

Some believe there were certain types of creatures, to begin with, but evolution took over and produced everything we see. The number of creatures, to begin with, may vary for different versions. It is just that some have taken this idea back to one universal living thing and even for this there can be different versions. Some may say the original organism was similar to the traditional evolutionary model and others may say that the original organism had the code for all life in it that was somehow compressed similar to information on a computer file being compressed.

Evolution uses existing genetic info and varies this so in some ways it is similar to what creationists believe. If you look at the dog examples and compare a tiny Chihuahua to a great Dane or Saint Bernard there is a big difference. You could say there is not as much difference to say a bear or a cat, ferret, Mear Cats, Racoons, Bandicoots, Skunks et. Not saying they are all related but you can see that there is not a lot of variation between a lot of animals and the same with plants, trees, insects etc. All living things share common DNA and there are common developmental modules that form life so it is easy to see how they are all related.

The Barbarian · Feb 22, 2019

stevevw said: ↑
AS a young earth creationists how do you think the vast variety of life came about. Was there a creation of a set number of certain kinds that maybe represented each species or genera or maybe family and from these all the variety we see was produced.

JacksBratt said:
That is the general consensus. You would only need one breeding pair of a certain kind... Which held the DNA for that kind and allowed this species to produce the multi variations of that kind.

Just look at all the breeds of dogs there are.. Wolves, foxes, coyotes, German shepherds, coli's..... Yet all are Canine.

This idea would put humans and chimpanzees in the same kind. Is that what you want?

The Barbarian · Feb 22, 2019

stevevw said:
Evolution uses existing genetic info and varies this so in some ways it is similar to what creationists believe. If you look at the dog examples and compare a tiny Chihuahua to a great Dane or Saint Bernard there is a big difference. You could say there is not as much difference to say a bear or a cat, ferret, Mear Cats, Racoons, Bandicoots, Skunks et.

You could say it, but you'd be wrong. Demonstrably so. It's been tested.

JacksBratt · Feb 22, 2019

stevevw said:
Obviously not all the bible is literal as there are things in there cannot be taken literally such as
Isaiah 55:12, “the trees will clap their hands.” Or Genesis 2:17, “you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Or when
Jesus said to poke out your eye or cut off your foot if it causes you to sin and Jesus saying that he was bread to eat him.

Is the gospel message, Christ's life, the miracles that He did... are they literal? How, do you know?

If you can tell that the gospel is true, the miracles are true.. and everything about Christ's miraculous and supernatural life are true... AND depend on it for your salvation..... Why then can you not discern between the truth of six days of creation and "clapping trees"?

stevevw said:
Evolution uses existing genetic info and varies this so in some ways it is similar to what creationists believe. If you look at the dog examples and compare a tiny Chihuahua to a great Dane or Saint Bernard there is a big difference. You could say there is not as much difference to say a bear or a cat, ferret, Mear Cats, Racoons, Bandicoots, Skunks et. Not saying they are all related but you can see that there is not a lot of variation between a lot of animals and the same with plants, trees, insects etc. All living things share common DNA and there are common developmental modules that form life so it is easy to see how they are all related.

Dogs are still dogs.

JacksBratt · Feb 22, 2019

The Barbarian said:
stevevw said: ↑
AS a young earth creationists how do you think the vast variety of life came about. Was there a creation of a set number of certain kinds that maybe represented each species or genera or maybe family and from these all the variety we see was produced.

God created all the animals and plants "according to their kind".

He made, or should I say formed, man with His own hands. Then, He made woman from one of this man's ribs...

There was no "previous generation" for humans. They were not the end of a chain of morphing. They were made specifically by God.

Not only that, but the breath you breath, to live, is the same breath that God breathed into Adam.. Adam gave it to Eve, with his rib.. and they gave it to every single human... an unbroken chain of life giving oxygen.

The breath you breath is a gift from the creator. It did not begin with an ape or chimp..

This idea would put humans and chimpanzees in the same kind. Is that what you want?[/QUOTE]
To say that we are that similar to chimps is nonsense.

JacksBratt · Feb 22, 2019

The Barbarian said:
This idea would put humans and chimpanzees in the same kind. Is that what you want?

Check this short vid:

The Barbarian · Feb 22, 2019

Barbarian observes:
This idea would put humans and chimpanzees in the same kind. Is that what you want?

JacksBratt said:
Check this short vid

Feel free to tell us about the best evidence the video has, showing that the genetic distance between humans and chimps is great than that between wolves and foxes.

What does it have?

JacksBratt · Feb 23, 2019

The Barbarian said:
Barbarian observes:
This idea would put humans and chimpanzees in the same kind. Is that what you want?

Feel free to tell us about the best evidence the video has, showing that the genetic distance between humans and chimps is great than that between wolves and foxes.

What does it have?

We also have similar DNA to a banana.... The video, presented by Rob, was created by evolutionists and explains a farce of how they arrive at misleading numbers.

This is all scientific drivel.....

The bible says..

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

It also says:

Genesis 2:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Why do we question the second one... yet take the first as "gospel"?

Because.. the first... is necessary for salvation.. to believe the miraculous life of Christ and all the supernatural events contained in it... Deny these... deny salvation.

However.. the second is denied because it conflicts with the Atheistic, Darwinian, Satanic evolution of mankind.

stevevw · Feb 23, 2019

The Barbarian said:
You could say it, but you'd be wrong. Demonstrably so. It's been tested.

Actually I was talking more in appearence than in genetics in responding to JacksBratt example of dogs. You could compare two dogs at the extreme ends of dog shapes such as the examples I used and they would be more different in looks to says a ferret, Meerkat and Asian Palm Civet which are not as related.

Ferret Meerkat Asian palm Civet

Ironically Ferrets belong to the same order as wolverines Caniformia (dog-like carnivores) and Meerkats are in Feliformia (catlike carnivores).

stevevw · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
Is the gospel message, Christ's life, the miracles that He did... are they literal? How, do you know?

If you can tell that the gospel is true, the miracles are true.. and everything about Christ's miraculous and supernatural life are true... AND depend on it for your salvation..... Why then can you not discern between the truth of six days of creation and "clapping trees"?

I know trees don't clap so this would have to be a figure of speech. I know the earth looks and acts older than 6000 years so this would also have to be a figure of speech.

Dogs are still dogs.

Yes but if we are going on shape because that seems to be the biggest contention then there are distantly related animals that look like each other which would be no more of a stretch to say they evolved from each other as dogs did. In fact a bear is suppose to be in the same line as the dog and some look more similar than some dogs do to each other.

This is a cross German Shepherd/Akita/Corgi that looks remarkably like a bear.

So you could throw a bear into the dog kind of animal.

JacksBratt · Feb 23, 2019

stevevw said:
I know trees don't clap so this would have to be a figure of speech. I know the earth looks and acts older than 6000 years so this would also have to be a figure of speech.

I know that nobody can walk on water.. but.... Oh, look, Christ walking on water..

Seriously... You only accept the supernatural miraculous and mind bending parts of the bible.... if it is required of you..... for salvation.

Face it.. 99% of Christ's life would be held as myth, allegory, parable or some error due to "the broken phone call game".. IF it was not required to be true for the salvation of your soul.

stevevw said:
Yes but if we are going on shape because that seems to be the biggest contention then there are distantly related animals that look like each other which would be no more of a stretch to say they evolved from each other as dogs did. In fact a bear is suppose to be in the same line as the dog and some look more similar than some dogs do to each other.

This is a cross German Shepherd/Akita/Corgi that looks remarkably like a bear.

So you could throw a bear into the dog kind of animal.

It matters not... It's all semantics...

I know men, grown men, big burley man's men, Grizzly Adam's type men that drink lead and spit bullets type of men... Men that go out in freezing weather in shorts an T shirts men.....

Some of these men... will not hunt bear as when you skin them and hang them on the game pole... they look just like a skinned human.

Looks is nothing... God's word is truth.

The Barbarian · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
We also have similar DNA to a banana....

We also have similar DNA to a bacterium. In fact, we share as many genes with bacteria as we differ from them. All like on Earth is a kind. However...

We are closer in our DNA to chimpanzees than we are to any other animal. We are closer in our DNA to any other animal, than we are to bananas. We are closer in our DNA to bananas than we are to any prokaryote. They lied to you by telling you half the truth. What I have just told you is how scientists confirmed the phylogenies first realized by Linnaeus, who didn't even know about evolution.

The was the video tricked you was to include not just the genes, but the non-coding DNA, which does not code for our characteristics. It's an old trick, but if you don't know what it is, you're easy prey for frauds like Rob.

The bible says..

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

It also says:

Genesis 2:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Why do we question the second one...

Probably because you don't like it as it is, and want to make it a literal history instead of a parable.

Because.. the first... is necessary for salvation..

God tells you exactly what is necessary for salvation. And that particular miracle is not one of them. Listen to Him, instead of to your pride. Would you like to know what it is that will save you? He's very explicit about it.

However.. the second is denied by creationists, because it conflicts with the way they'd like it to be.

The Barbarian · Feb 23, 2019

stevevw said:
Actually I was talking more in appearence than in genetics in responding to JacksBratt example of dogs.

Yes, I see what you mean.

JacksBratt · Feb 23, 2019

The Barbarian said:
Probably because you don't like it as it is, and want to make it a literal history instead of a parable.

Actually, I like this:

Genesis 2:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Just as it is... as much as I take this:

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

Just as it is.... Because, this is the word of God and I will take it over the musings of men.... especially Darwinian, atheistic, evolutionists... I will definitely take the word of God... over their drivel.

The Barbarian said:
God tells you exactly what is necessary for salvation.

Oh, He tells us exactly what is necessary for salvation.... BUT... He tells us mythical parables and allegory about how He formed Adam and breathed life into him ... then made the very first female human from the rib of the very first male human.. that He formed from the dust.. .not from an ape...

I think that He told us "Exactly" what was truth.. on both accounts.

The Barbarian said:
He's very explicit about it.

Yes... He is.

The Barbarian · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
Actually, I like this:

Genesis 2:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Just as it is...

No, you don't. You want to convert it from a parable to a literal history, like this:

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

Because, this is the word of God and I will take it over the musings of creationists.

Oh, He tells us exactly what is necessary for salvation....

Yes, He does. Read Matthew 25.

BUT... He tells us mythical parables

You think Jesus was telling us "myths" when He spoke in parables? No wonder you want to modify His word in Genesis.

JacksBratt · Feb 23, 2019

The Barbarian said:
No, you don't. You want to convert it from a parable to a literal history, like this:

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

Because, this is the word of God and I will take it over the musings of creationists.

Yes, He does. Read Matthew 25.

You think Jesus was telling us "myths" when He spoke in parables? No wonder you want to modify His word in Genesis.

Sorry, you lost me somewhere....
Are you saying that Mathew 14:25-26 is a parable?

Also, I was stating the scripture of Jesus walking on water. However, I could have used one of many supernatural events that encompass the life of Christ.. Right up to the end when He ascends to heaven covered by a cloud..

None of these are ever told as parables.. Yes, Christ spoke in parables, but He is clear of those times and they have certain criteria that put them in a category of parable.

My point was simple.... You take all the scripture... whatever it is... that is necessary and totally hold it as truth... in order for your salvation... yet... all other scripture that deviates from the evolutionary farce... is written off as allegorical, mythical or some other notion that is demotes it from being actual truth..

I have said it before.. if the supernatural events surrounding Christ's life, death burial and resurrection were not necessary for salvation... they would also be placed in the "myth" section.

You hold the gospel as such because the eternal destiny and salvation of your soul depends on it... otherwise.. it would just be another old "story".

The Barbarian · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
My point was simple.... You take all the scripture... whatever it is... that is necessary and totally hold it as truth

As long as you can interpret it your way.

JacksBratt · Feb 23, 2019

The Barbarian said:
As long as you can interpret it your way.

Oooooohh Kay....

Fred has six apples....

How do you interpret that?

Jesus died and rose on the third day...

How do you interpret that?

God formed Adam from the dust. God made Eve from Adam's rib.

I can see where it is confusing for you........

stevevw · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
I know that nobody can walk on water.. but.... Oh, look, Christ walking on water..

Seriously... You only accept the supernatural miraculous and mind bending parts of the bible.... if it is required of you..... for salvation.

Face it.. 99% of Christ's life would be held as myth, allegory, parable or some error due to "the broken phone call game".. IF it was not required to be true for the salvation of your soul.

For me I think a big difference here is that there were eyewitnesses that seen this and then either wrote this down directly or the authors spoke to those who seen it happen. Whereas there are no eyewitnesses of creation. It is a story that has come in a vision or revelation which can be open to more interpretation.

But even so, there is still a big degree of accepting supernatural events regardless of how you think it happened. Theistic evolution requires that God intervened and began the process. As mentioned for some evolution cannot happen unless there were some laws and codes put in place by God so evolution is reliant on guidance by God rather than just a chance, blind and random process.

For others, they believe that God actually intervened supernaturally on other occasions after initially beginning the process. So regardless of which version people believe there is still the intervention of God. But just as important is that God uses evolution to some degree to create life. You support a form of evolution that creates all the variations of dogs and birds and insects we see that were not there, to begin with which you say come from pre-existing genetic info. It is just that some take this back to an original universal ancestor but it is still based on the same principle.

It matters not... It's all semantics...

I know men, grown men, big burley man's men, Grizzly Adam's type men that drink lead and spit bullets type of men... Men that go out in freezing weather in shorts an T shirts men.....

Some of these men... will not hunt bear as when you skin them and hang them on the game pole... they look just like a skinned human.

Looks is nothing... God's word is truth.

I agree Gods word is truth but as we have seen not all the words in the bible are literal truth and are the perspective of a human trying to portray a vision or revelation of God or are explaining events in ancient times so they will see things through a lens that influences their descriptions. For example, when they said something occurred that involved the entire world how could they know what the entire world was. For them, it was as far as they could see or had heard of or it meant other things like a population. So when they talked about the whole world it is not taken literally as the entire circumference of the earth.

stevevw · Feb 23, 2019

JacksBratt said:
Actually, I like this:

Genesis 2:7 King James Version (KJV)
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Just as it is... as much as I take this:

Matthew 14:25-26 New International Version (NIV)

25 Shortly before dawn Jesus went out to them, walking on the lake. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the lake, they were terrified. “It’s a ghost,” they said, and cried out in fear.

Just as it is.... Because, this is the word of God

So what about when Jesus says

Matthew 18.9
And if your eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to enter life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into the fire of hell.

Theistic Evolution

inquisitive

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Searching for Truth

Searching for Truth

Searching for Truth

Crabby Old White Guy

Searching for Truth

inquisitive

inquisitive

Searching for Truth

Crabby Old White Guy

Crabby Old White Guy

Searching for Truth

Crabby Old White Guy

Searching for Truth

Crabby Old White Guy

Searching for Truth

inquisitive

inquisitive

Similar threads