Adam and Evolution: A Reconciliation

[JacksBratt]

One thing I am disappointed about, though, are the creationists insisting that we who believe in evolution lack faith and are not saved..

I have never made such a claim. I have no doubt that people can believe in evolution and still be saved.



I also believe that those who believe in evolution have infinitely more faith than I. You would have to.

My questions remain.

If God used evolution...... why tell us that He did it in such a way? Why say that He made the first human woman from a rib of the first man? Why say "there was evening, there was morning, the first day.... the second day, the third day???

Am I supposed to believe that it would have been too scientific and too hard to comprehend if He had said that He made the first organism and through time and times and times and times time times too numerous to count ( insert biblical explanation of billions of years) through small and constant changes, He observed as His world was formed?

Is that so over the top egg headish for simple shepherds??? I doubt it.

If the Genesis six days of creation is well withing the powers of our awesome and omnipotent God... why tell us that He did it in six days.....if He didn't?

At the very basic level of logic..... without throwing out evolution based on the fact it is spawned and strongly perpetuated by atheists, but with the very basic of simple logic 101..

God could do it that way and He SAID He did it that way......

The only reason any Christian believes otherwise is for one reason and one reason only...... some men said it wasn't correct.

I'll stick with the word of God over any "logic" of men.

 

[EpiscipalMe]

I have never made such a claim. I have no doubt that people can believe in evolution and still be saved.



I also believe that those who believe in evolution have infinitely more faith than I. You would have to.

My questions remain.

If God used evolution...... why tell us that He did it in such a way? Why say that He made the first human woman from a rib of the first man? Why say "there was evening, there was morning, the first day.... the second day, the third day???

Am I supposed to believe that it would have been too scientific and too hard to comprehend if He had said that He made the first organism and through time and times and times and times time times too numerous to count ( insert biblical explanation of billions of years) through small and constant changes, He observed as His world was formed?

Is that so over the top egg headish for simple shepherds??? I doubt it.

If the Genesis six days of creation is well withing the powers of our awesome and omnipotent God... why tell us that He did it in six days.....if He didn't?

At the very basic level of logic..... without throwing out evolution based on the fact it is spawned and strongly perpetuated by atheists, but with the very basic of simple logic 101..

God could do it that way and He SAID He did it that way......

The only reason any Christian believes otherwise is for one reason and one reason only...... some men said it wasn't correct.

I'll stick with the word of God over any "logic" of men.

I never said you specifically questioned my salvation, but several others have.

I have explained numerous times why I think Genesis is written the way it is, and, yes, I think a scientific explanation was too advanced for the audience and also unnecessary to teach the lesson.

The reason I believe in evolution is that scientists have weighed the evidence, inhsve studied it, and I believe it.

In addition, my faith is stronger since I know longer feel the need to struggle between a literal interpretation of the Bible and what science tells me. I feel that this is the Holy Spirit guiding me.

 

[dqhall]

However, one cannot provide a single passage of Scripture to validate that opinion. The Fourth Commandment makes specific reference to the six day creation. Should there only be nine commandments?

Which of us quoted His actual words?
Oh, yes. That was me.
I don't know of a single Biblical authority who contends that Christ did not believe in the Scriptures as written. Can you produce one?
Jesus actually quoted Genesis 2 when describing what God intended for marriage. If Adam and Ever were not the first couple, then why would Jesus say they were? He also said, "From the beginning." If the world were millions of years old, it wouldn't be the beginning, would it?

What you are promoting has no Biblical authority.

Jesus did not agree with the commandment to rest on the seventh day. He worked on the seventh day and said his father was working on the seventh day.

John 5:16 (WEB) So, because Jesus was doing these things on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders began to persecute him. 17 In his defense Jesus said to them, “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working.” 18 For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

 

[KWCrazy]

Jesus did not agree with the commandment to rest on the seventh day. He worked on the seventh day and said his father was working on the seventh day.

Of course He believed in it. It simply never applied to Him. Further, it showed the pharisees that doing the work of the Father on the Sabbath is perfectly acceptable. Preach away.

 

[dqhall]

And I could ask you how blood and blood vessels can survive in a T-Rex thigh bone for 200 million years intact .. Or how a fresh hatched snail carbon dates over 2000 yrs , or explanation of the life cycle of the guinea worm and don't even try to get me to buy your theory of how cells came into being from anything but supernatural call to being ..

The science of C-14 dating is confirmed as science by C-14 analysis correlated by tree ring dating of sequences of logs going back thousands of years. Early C-14 dating was fraught with error. As time went on C-14 became more accurate. It is possible some samples may be misread, but a lab analysis of a large number of specimens may be used as evidence. Outliers were ignored. The current Carbon 14 dating is greatly improved. Some of the finest universities in the world have been involved in the research.

ORAU - Calibration

 

[EpiscipalMe]

Of course He believed in it. It simply never applied to Him. Further, it showed the pharisees that doing the work of the Father on the Sabbath is perfectly acceptable. Preach away.

Or he was criticizing the Pharisees for being overly legalistic rather than focusing on what is truly important in matters of faith.

 

[Halbhh]

I have never made such a claim. I have no doubt that people can believe in evolution and still be saved.



I also believe that those who believe in evolution have infinitely more faith than I. You would have to.

My questions remain.

If God used evolution...... why tell us that He did it in such a way? Why say that He made the first human woman from a rib of the first man? Why say "there was evening, there was morning, the first day.... the second day, the third day???

Am I supposed to believe that it would have been too scientific and too hard to comprehend if He had said that He made the first organism and through time and times and times and times time times too numerous to count ( insert biblical explanation of billions of years) through small and constant changes, He observed as His world was formed?

Is that so over the top egg headish for simple shepherds??? I doubt it.

If the Genesis six days of creation is well withing the powers of our awesome and omnipotent God... why tell us that He did it in six days.....if He didn't?

At the very basic level of logic..... without throwing out evolution based on the fact it is spawned and strongly perpetuated by atheists, but with the very basic of simple logic 101..

God could do it that way and He SAID He did it that way......

The only reason any Christian believes otherwise is for one reason and one reason only...... some men said it wasn't correct.

I'll stick with the word of God over any "logic" of men.

Why not make the text merely history? Because that would be much less meaningful.

For example, the reason Eve is from a rib of Adam is that their bond is deeper than skin. She was a rib to him, protecting his heart.

God could have made her from breath, mud, grass, marrow, whatever He wished....

Woman is like a rib to man in marriage.

To read, forget all preconception, and listen to the words. Be the student, be the one listening. Let God do the talking.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

Folks, any flaming of others needs to stop.

The flaming rule includes:

• Stating or implying that another Christian member, or group of members, are not Christian is not allowed.

​

 

[4x4toy]

Of course. To learn you must listen. That means we must put doctrines aside and read to learn. Then we get the deeper messages in scripture, which are never trivial, never about mere time periods. What is the real message? We have to forget the doctrine, and hear the Word.

It's like that verse -- faith comes by hearing. And hearing by the Word.

We each, all, need to stop talking when we are reading the Word, and be a listener.

Thanx for your input but God has numbers, times and time periods noted and relevant all through his Word from the beginning of time to the end of time ..

 

[4x4toy]

Why not make the text merely history? Because that would be much less meaningful.

For example, the reason Eve is from a rib of Adam is that their bond is deeper than skin. She was a rib to him, protecting his heart.

God could have made her from breadth, mud, grass, marrow, whatever He wished....

Woman is like a rib to man in marriage.

To read, forget all preconception, and listen to the words. Be the student, be the one listening. Let God do the talking.

I bet Adam was raising cain (no pun) with her while they were busy making their fig leaf underwear ..
Then when she asked ''how does this look'' Adam probably said ''you might wanna try one of those elephant ear leaves to cover all that''

 

[HeLeadethMe]

I did not mean by God....but by society and other men and women....

I meant "birds of a feather" savy?

I would be concerned if the theology that I followed had every atheist in it's camp.

Jesus said children of this world are sometimes wiser than the children of light......it's why you hear all too often about Christians letting their child die instead of getting them medical care, that sort of blindness.

 

[4x4toy]

Jesus said children of this world are sometimes wiser than the children of light......it's why you hear all too often about Christians letting their child die instead of getting them medical care, that sort of blindness.

Luke was a Doctor, right ? What is your scripture source ?

 

[Norbert L]

This is my own speculative framework for reconciling the evidence for evolution with the biblical truth of an historical Adam and Eve. This is just a brief sketch of the position, I plan to greatly develop this view in a proper essay when I get the time.

First off, what does the science tell us about human origins? Anatomically modern homo sapien sapiens emerged approximately 150-200,000 years ago, the human population was never at any time less than a few thousand individuals, and there is such a thing as a chromosomal Adam and a mitochondrial Eve from whom all individuals are descended. As Dr. Craig has pointed out, there are indications these days that this "Adam" and "Eve" may have been contemporaneous. My framework operates on the presupposition of the truth of this premise but is not inextricably bound to it.

Now that we have the basic scientific premeses out of the way, we need to establish the basic theological framework upon which this model is based. ..

This is a rough sketch of my model, which i hope to refine and further develop. I would greatly appreciate thoughts and constructive criticism. Thank you.

I believe there are problems within your framework. How can you anatomically show that these creatures are to Adam and Eve as the horse is to the donkey today? No one can because dead bones don't reproduce with living creatures. If we look at genetics the best conclusion it observably shows is that living intelligence can intervene and manipulate organic material. We still don't know how to take inorganic material and turn that into a single living cell.

From what I can tell, the conclusions reached within the Theory of Evolution are as much science fiction as numerous conclusions reached about the message within the Bible, which are likewise theories of myths. Basically whether it's understanding hard science or understanding the witness of the Bible, the common thing they both have are people who either teach pseudoscience or people who teach fables. To paraphrase something the apostle Paul wrote in 1 Tim 1:7, They want to be teachers of the law and science, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm.

All of these things are not somehow out of the way, they are only necessary to be out of the way in order to build confidence in a model that we can not be certain of. I believe there is something inside of our being that needs to be able to fully explain everything without truly understanding our present limitations in this need.

 

[4x4toy]

1 Timothy 1:3-11

 

[Alithis]

Unbelief is a most insidious sin.

If you can't take God at his word in one thing he states then you undermine everything he states.

 

[JacksBratt]

The science of C-14 dating is confirmed as science by C-14 analysis correlated by tree ring dating of sequences of logs going back thousands of years. Early C-14 dating was fraught with error. As time went on C-14 became more accurate. It is possible some samples may be misread, but a lab analysis of a large number of specimens may be used as evidence. Outliers were ignored. The current Carbon 14 dating is greatly improved. Some of the finest universities in the world have been involved in the research.

ORAU - Calibration

I work in a lab with all kinds of analytical instruments. Every one of them needs to have quality control and standards to run in order to calibrate the instrument.

There are no such things for C-14 dating. There are no standards, which would be a known sample with a known and certified date of even 100 thousand years, let alone 1 million. There are no blanks and there are know other means to calibrate the process.

Without these systems and standards in place..... the process is all based on theory, assumptions and speculation. The further out in time.......the greater the deviation from the real number....

The theory may be good. It may make sense...but.....it contradicts what God said......so.......I'm out.

 

[Job 33:6]

I work in a lab with all kinds of analytical instruments. Every one of them needs to have quality control and standards to run in order to calibrate the instrument.

There are no such things for C-14 dating. There are no standards, which would be a known sample with a known and certified date of even 100 thousand years, let alone 1 million. There are no blanks and there are know other means to calibrate the process.

Without these systems and standards in place..... the process is all based on theory, assumptions and speculation. The further out in time.......the greater the deviation from the real number....

The theory may be good. It may make sense...but.....it contradicts what God said......so.......I'm out.

I dont know what lab you work with, but I work with plenty who perform carbon dating, and have several forms of quality control samples. What laboratory doesnt use quality control samples?

 

[JacksBratt]

I have explained numerous times why I think Genesis is written the way it is, and, yes, I think a scientific explanation was too advanced for the audience and also unnecessary to teach the lesson.

I strongly disagree. The book of Enoch was written at the time before the flood. It is not canonical but it is an example of the literature and intellect of the people of the era, if nothing else.

It is totally erroneous to believe that the people of that time were unable to comprehend a concept that we teach to grade school children....

The reason I believe in evolution is that scientists have weighed the evidence, inhsve studied it, and I believe it.

Exactly... who... ya, scientists. They have weighed the evidence... how many are atheists? How many are going to ever say "hey, wait a minute, I just discovered something that is problematic with the evolutionary model.... and not get discredited and lose their grants, tenure, job, and livelihood.

This is why the bible cautions against the "wisdom of men". They will be shown to be fools.

And........I believe that!

In addition, my faith is stronger since I know longer feel the need to struggle between a literal interpretation of the Bible and what science tells me. I feel that this is the Holy Spirit guiding me.

Your faith is stronger because you have decided to believe the words and observations of men over the written word of God and no longer struggle with that indecision?

Your faith is stronger, in truth, because you have a belief in a concept that requires more faith.

 

[EpiscipalMe]

I strongly disagree. The book of Enoch was written at the time before the flood. It is not canonical but it is an example of the literature and intellect of the people of the era, if nothing else.

It is totally erroneous to believe that the people of that time were unable to comprehend a concept that we teach to grade school children....



Exactly... who... ya, scientists. They have weighed the evidence... how many are atheists? How many are going to ever say "hey, wait a minute, I just discovered something that is problematic with the evolutionary model.... and not get discredited and lose their grants, tenure, job, and livelihood.

This is why the bible cautions against the "wisdom of men". They will be shown to be fools.

And........I believe that!



Your faith is stronger because you have decided to believe the words and observations of men over the written word of God and no longer struggle with that indecision?

Your faith is stronger, in truth, because you have a belief in a concept that requires more faith.

Perhaps one day we can all ask God to give us the answer - allegory or literal.

Until then, agree to disagree.

 

[JacksBratt]

I dont know what lab you work with, but I work with plenty who perform carbon dating, and have several forms of quality control samples. What laboratory doesnt use quality control samples?

So, what standard do you use for an instrument to calibrate it for reading at 50 million years? Just where did you get this sample that is KNOWN to be that age...

I'll tell you.. the sample is presumed or came from some other "old" rocks........

It's not a known sample... its speculation based on assumption and extrapolation.

It would not pass as a certifiable standard in my lab....