Eve came from Adam, evolution does not allow this
- Thread starter dad
- Start date
ExTiff
Well-Known Member
- Oct 1, 2018
- 481
- 99
- 78
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Actually the earth is not a sphere, it is flattened at the poles and bulges at the Equator, the Earth is an oblate spheroid. And there are, as far as we know, not 9 planets in the solar system, there are 8,
Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune, though there may be a nineth very, very much further out which we cannot currently detect by any other means than mathematical calculations.
The fact that the bible does not specifically give us this information is indicative, I suggest, that God wants us to find out for ourselves. Something YECs don't seem very much interested in doing, judging from your knowledge of the number of planets in your own solar system and the shape of the earth you are living on.
As for your idea that the Bible 'tells us' things; it doesn't. We read things from it and interpret what we read. Much of what previous generations interpreted in the field of science, they interpreted wrongly. Some of it they got right. But flat earth and geocentric universe are but two major misconceptions which bible readers got seriously WRONG. Human nature being what it is though, there is still a 'Flat earth society' championing the cause of insisting the earth is FLAT, and there are still people who firmly believe, against all the factual evidence, that the earth is the centre of the universe.
C'est la vie.
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
We do know there were evenings and mornings. We do know God was there moving over the waters that were on earth. We do know that the day was both the evening and the morning. We do know these existed before the sun. We do know that God is not limited to physics in any way. In fact to try and figure out how the early wold was only by modern physics is impossible as well as foolish. Yet that is what demon science does religiously.
Spirysics, we could say, are the set of laws that govern the spiritual world, and physics the set of laws that govern the current physical world. Creation did not come about by physics. The light that was here and parted did not happen by modern physics. So of course we are not all knowing and the bible does not tell us everything about how God works or how creation happened. It does tell us enough to know demon science is not only wrong, but so very wrong that it could not be coincidence or innocent. Now the question is why you seem to side with science against the word of God.
We know plenty about light NOW and how day and night now work. That does not help to comprehend the light of creation week. In rejecting what the bible does say because of what you think it also does not say is rejection. Accepting what demon science says that opposes what the bible does say tells us what you chose to believe.
The spectrum is fine, not sure what that has to do with how God parted light in the first day of creation though!! Remember also that the spectrum we see on earth and this solar system exists here in our present time and space. You may not use it to tell us what the distant universe is like or what creation week was like, or what the past and future here are like! You may look at the spectrum through your toys here IN the fishbowl.
The quest for truth does not take the highway to hell actually. The bible says that man cannot possibly ever come to any knowledge of the truth without God. Demon science does not include God in any way and all it's claims of origins directly contradict and oppose God's! Yet you wholeheartedly embrace them and religiously defend them. Interesting. That reminds me of another kind of light from God, the kind that sheds light on darkness, exposing it.
You actually have no chance whatsoever at reaching the truth with demon science. None.
Actually, We are going to fire demon science and ban it forever soon. The only conclusion anyone will reach will be the truth of God, that will cover the earth as waters cover seas.
So now Scripture and belief seem like demons in your eyes. That signals advanced rejection syndrome.
So, not sin, but bible belief is the great plague of humanity. Got it. Your answer, get in bed with demon science. Thanks for the input, I guess.
He is here with us today as Jesus said He would be till the ends of the world. He also said His word was truth. Deon science opposes that truth.
That reminds me of something someone once said to the first woman! 'You will be wise if you eat that which God told you not to eat, and be like Him'.
Speaking of that first woman, that brings us back to the OP topic, how Eve did not get here like demon science claims!
They cannot analyse facts using lies and godless methodology, and wrong, ignorant assumptions to build models of the past, and arrive at the truth! They have sabotaged any possibility of finding it. A crazy man, stabbing his eyes with a fork and running toward a cliff has more chance of finding it than demon science. At least we could hope that the man would repent before the end.
He taught that He fulfilled Scripture and that it was from God and true as true can be. In that Scripture, echoing from book to book and cover to cover is how God created us and the world and heavens.
The droning sirens of demon science have played for too long in schools and the airwaves. Looking forward to change....
Upvote
0
Cis.jd
Well-Known Member
Yes, but as i've saying. Regardless of the Bible not saying it, that doesn't mean the scientific theory is wrong. The only way evolution can be proven wrong is by counter scientific evidence, but there isn't.
The Bible explains the Earth experiencing morning during the 1st day, but how is this naturally possible if the Earth is a tiled sphere, also what about planets like Jupiter - which experience days differently. Does this mean we reject these too?
Or they could have been in an initial biological state prior to evolution. This verse about how Eve came to be shows no reason to reject evolution.
Why/how does Eve being the mother of all contradict evolution? We have bones of what humans looked like far back in BC, you can even see some of the difference in early AD Mongolia. Those Asians during the time of Gengis had skulls that where different in shape to the asians now, but we don't deny that asians today are descendents of the Asians during that time. So why can't this logic be also applied to Adam and eve? Please read up on evolution because this quote has shown you barely know anything about it.
And don't teach that the Bible is a science book.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Cis.jd
Well-Known Member
Evolution isn't impossible. You only reject evolution because of your lack of knowledge on it and your inability to accept that the Bible isn't a science-revealing book.
Just go back to my arguments about the 1st day and try to tie it in on your reasoning against Evolution (God making eve through adam).
Upvote
0
ExTiff
Well-Known Member
- Oct 1, 2018
- 481
- 99
- 78
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
Before you go any further, NO YOU DON'T know anything of the kind. Read the text again.
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, Gen.2:4.
And there were no 'waters' on earth until day 2, when God separated the waters above the firmament from those below it.
And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.
The 'waters' that God hovered over were not on earth. Earth was without form, and void. i.e. did not even exist in its present physical form.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. Gen.1:1-2.
All that existed at this point was a formless void filled with 'the waters'. Now it might be possible to speculate upon a scientific explanation of what the author, (God) might have meant by "The Waters", but your explantion of "The Waters" being oceans on a not yet existant void and formless planet simply does not receive any support from the text whatever and is flatly contradicted by Gen.1:6-10.
.
Upvote
0
Concerning people, they sometimes act like animals. That does not mean either that there are no people or that people are animals, or came from animals. In that same chapter we see this..
19 For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity.
So the comparison here is that both people and animals both die. Not that man is an animal, or came from an animal.
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
So how does One separate things that do not exist? Ha. The waters had to be here in order to get separated I would think. The 'deep' seems to have included waters.
I see Peter seemed to think water was here in the beginning.
2Pe 3:5 -For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
That verse does not allow for a big bang either by the way! The word of God created the heavens, not some hot soup.
By the way the chapter you cited is not a creation order, that was after the fact when it was all finished and done. The verse also talks about plants which were created NOT on day one so you are off target by a long shot.
That verse is AFTER the first day! Ha.
So we have God now separating waters on day two, so they must have been here.
Says you. But as we see in Scripture God was talking about the earth when He mentions His Spirit was moving here!!
2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Looking at an eyewitness account of the event it looks like there was plenty of water around at creation!
22 The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. 23 I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. 24 When there were no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water. 25 Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: 26 While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. 27 When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth: 28 When he established the clouds above: when he strengthened the fountains of the deep: 29 When he gave to the sea his decree, that the waters should not pass his commandment: when he appointed the foundations of the earth: 30 Then I was by him, as one brought up with him: and I was daily his delight, rejoicing always before him;
When I think of the first day and God hovering over the waters, that is before the waters were separated and the land appeared. So not sure why you claim I think it was 'oceans' in the modern sense? I don't think modern oceans really got here till after the flood when more water came to earth, an the great landmass was separated into continents we know today. By the way when I say after the flood, regarding the separating of the continents, I mean in the days of Peleg.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Actually, I totally disagree. We must stand against "theories" of mere men if and when they contradict biblical truth. Especially when they contradict plain text as the creation account is stated.
Men are mere mortals and we are here for a short time... then judged. How are we to contradict the words of the creator, who lives outside of time and space and created us?
That is like the paint on a canvas of a masterpiece arguing that it knows better than the artist that painted it.
True, but this does not mean that we deny things plainly stated.
How do you know what God intended with the Bible?
From what I read, the bible can be simple enough for a child and yet academics that study it are more and more intrigued, amazed and blessed by the layers, details and intelligence that is found throughout the text.
And that is the original manuscripts, not just the KJV or others.
Which is why He did nothing of the sort... I get ticked when I here someone stating, as an argument, "well, the bible isn't a science book".... Well it's not.. but neither are many books that contain scientific and historical facts in their pages...
The bible certainly does not divulge all the mysteries of science.. but when science contradicts the bible.... I am going to take the bible first.
The writers of the bible, or canon, were not mindful of all the things that they wrote. There are many things in the scriptures that have been found to be supported by science while the writer was not aware of such a thing.
Are we to believe that the things written in ancient days are only useful for those times? That today, we can shrug off biblical concepts because that was "then" and this is "now"?
Start doing that and it's a very slippery slope.
Again, we have to be careful stating that the bible has been contradicted and or refuted by any observation by any man.
For me, if the someone claims that they have observed something that proves the biblical account to be wrong... I will take it with a grain of salt.
That is just semantics. God made it clear to state "there was evening, there was morning, the first day...
There is no need for the sun or moon to be present for the length of time to be a day. That's like God forming a rock and saying this is one pound. Then making a scale to weigh it and when you put the rock on it...it weighs one pound...
Like Dad was trying to say.... a day is a day is a day.... even if there was no sun or moon to help you measure it.... God said... It was a day.
Probably had two arms, two legs, ten fingers, ten toes just like all other humans... considering that they populated the earth.
What's you point?
Did you seriously just say that? After saying "Maybe"?
And where does it give any indication, in scripture, for such an event?
Yes, straight to the point. Six days and then a day of rest. This has been the pattern for our work week and many other events in the scriptures... God had a purpose right from the start.
I really don't get how you can take the exact words of scripture and argue their truth due to the musings of mere mortal men.
Upvote
0
Yes there are allegories, parables and similes in the bible... You think God started off with these?
I find that the bible is simple enough for a child to read and understand..
God started off simple and to the point. No confusion, and ended with a book of poetry, symbolism and metaphor which, if the first books of the bible are studied well... the revelation of Christ is more easily understood... Not the other way around.
Upvote
0
ExTiff
Well-Known Member
- Oct 1, 2018
- 481
- 99
- 78
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
So to you a "Land flowing with milk and honey", Ex.3:8, Ex.3:17, Ex.13:5, Ex.33:3, Lev.20:24, Num.13:27, Num.14:8, Num.16:13, Num.16:14, Deut.6:3, Deut.11:9, Deut.26:9, Deut.26:15, Deut.27:3, Deut.31:20, Josh.5:6, Isa.7:22, Jer.11:5, Jer.32:22, Ezek.20:6, Ezek.20:15, has milk and honey streams tumbling down the hillsides or do you perhaps read that one as a metaphor in order to avoid being laughed at by anyone who knows anything about cows and bees and where honey and milk actually come from.
In view of the fact that the trees set in 'the midst of the garden', are actually 'metaphorical trees', the clue is in their names, one imparting the "Knowledge of good and evil", (suggesting humanity's common predisposition to decide what is good or evil by the single criteria of "what will be of benefit to ME/my tribe/my nation, my ethnicity, my race/colour, etc"), rather than "What is right" in God's eyes; and the other imparting "Eternal Life", which we obviously never got a taste of, judging from the fact that everyone who has ever been born on this planet has already DIED or shall inevitably DIE, does it not seem likely to you that the other elements and characters in the 'legend' are also 'symbolic' and archetypes.
Go ahead, read the text as literal history if it pleases you to do so, believe it to be so, but don't start telling me I'm not 'saved' if I think your interpretation is wrong and resent your impertinent implication that, to be properly 'saved', I need to believe exactly as you do or that what I teach is the doctrine of demons.
Now I have given more time to this thread than it deserves. I do not intend wasting any more precious time in a futile attempt to explain to those who are convinced they already know better than me and arrogantly think themselves more 'saved' than I am.
By the way, have you heard the one about the dyslexic satanist?
He sold his soul to Santa.
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
because He wanted He disciples to understand but not those who are scoffers.
“And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why do you speak unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto YOU to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but unto them it is NOT given.” Matt 13:10-11
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
I believe that, in this universe, things constantly move from orgaization to chaos...... not from chaos to organization..
Evolution starts with nothing and ends up with everything. It also starts with chaos and ends with order.
This is not natural.
Upvote
0
ExTiff
Well-Known Member
- Oct 1, 2018
- 481
- 99
- 78
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
No insight whatever. So Jesus came to tell us the truth, and his main purpose was that we should believe in him, yet he deliberately made it difficult for anyone to understand whatever he was saying. Yeah, sure.
Go back and read it again asking for God to enlighten you before you blaspheme and insult the greatest teacher, (his own description of himself), the world has ever seen. John 13:13. Teachers don't deliberately hide stuff from the people they teach. That would make them a non-teacher. Your literalism has fooled you yet again into misunderstanding and twisting the scriptures to your own detrement.
Jesus wanted everyone to understand, that is WHY he used parables. But some people were so stupid they refused to believe the stories applied to THEM. They were dull witted, obstinate and ignorant. Matt.13:15. That was why they did not understand, not because Jesus deliberately witheld information from them. What kind of a 'teacher' worth his salt would ever do that?
.
Upvote
0
ExTiff
Well-Known Member
- Oct 1, 2018
- 481
- 99
- 78
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Anglican
- Marital Status
- Married
So you think that nothing can ever be improved upon then? That is a pretty pessimistic design philosophy. Evolution 'deselects' those that don't effectively exploit the opportunities provided by their environment and 'selects' those that most effectively exploit their environment, thus they get better at it until they are completely adapted to it. Destroy the environment and you destroy everthing that depends upon it for its survival. That is fundamental and not too difficult even for a toddler to understand. Everything is improving only while the environment provides opportunity. It was two sudden changes in environment that finally killed off the dinosaurs at the end of the Cretaceous, each devastating most of the species adapted to those environments.
.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Similar threads
