Adam, Eve, and Evolution

Mercy Shown

Active Member
Jan 18, 2019
169
65
64
Boonsboro
✟40,652.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That matters not under my models. Science does not claim absolute truths. It is always open to revision with new evidence.
Maybe science does, but humans are highly affected by confirmation bias, and scientists are human. Remember, the Piltdown man was presented to the world as fact. By the time "science" is exhibited to the public, particularly biology, it is always stated as fact.

Even in astronomy, we can see this happen. Is the Oort cloud real, or is it an invention to explain why there should be no loose comets roaming the galaxy after 4.5 billion years?

"Widely accepted" and "Consensus" has increasingly crept in to replace the scientific method. Currently, "science" has replaced apocalyptic religions in predicting the end of the world. Just review its predictions from the 1960s until today.
 
Upvote 0

Mercy Shown

Active Member
Jan 18, 2019
169
65
64
Boonsboro
✟40,652.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It is not an illusion. Both frameworks of time are physically real.



That matters not under my models. Science does not claim absolute truths. It is always open to revision with new evidence.


Right.

I speculate out of curiosity to reconcile (vertical) biblical creation and (horizontal) science. They are two different perspectives.
Both require faith.
 
Upvote 0

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
3,496
777
Toronto
Visit site
✟83,577.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Maybe science does, but humans are highly affected by confirmation bias, and scientists are human. Remember, the Piltdown man was presented to the world as fact. By the time "science" is exhibited to the public, particularly biology, it is always stated as fact.
By science, I mean the scientific approach. I do not mean any particular scientist or groups of scientists.

Scientists have been arguing about the age of the universe for decades and still arguing.
 
Upvote 0

tonychanyt

24/7 Christian
Oct 2, 2011
3,496
777
Toronto
Visit site
✟83,577.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Were talking about a hypothetical ancestor of Adam. His grandma for example.
Genesis 3:20
Adam named his wife Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.

How do you understand the above verse?
 
Upvote 0

Jipsah

Blood Drinker
Aug 17, 2005
12,416
3,710
70
Franklin, Tennessee
✟221,422.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
what I believe and the biologists believe are all faith-based.
Nope. Biology, like any actual science, must be based on empoirical evidence if it's to be considered science at all,
Can someone believe in evolution and still be Christian? That is a question only God can answer.
No, I'll answer it right now, and the answer is "yes". If you don't believe that God could use evolution aif it suits His evend, then that's simply your opinion, held in opposition to observed fact.
From a theological perspective, believing in macroevolution reduces God to being only a super being because he loses his omnipotence.
Baloney. What you're saying is that you can't believe that God used evolution for His purposes, and therefore no one else should. Your opinion in the matter is worth the price charged.

It also throws a monkey wrench into His being a logical entity
Really? If He created the lifeforms He created to evolve then that's illigocal? Sez who?
since He used predation, violence, self-centeredness, and death to create a being; He then commands to love even its enemies. So Christianity becomes somewhat of a haphazard, illogical religion at best.
Trying to figure out where you're going with that. Are you denying the existence of predation, violence, self-centeredness, and death, or that God created the beings, or that He told His beings to love their enemies.

And yeah, Christianity does teach us to behave in contrdiction to our own natural tendencies. Surely you've noticed that.
It also turns Christ into somewhat of a rube who just fell off the turn-up truck because He believed in all of the major events of the Old Testament
I take it that you assume that our Lord has the same limited view of His creation that you do. New Flash: It is, after all, His Creation. created to His specs. If you can't fathom what He's up to, maybe it's due to you not knowing as much as He does. Radical concept, innit?
, even saying that From the beginning God created male and female. You would think that the person who through all things were created would have been aware of evolution.
Or that He intentionally set things up to work that way. Maybe He should asked your opinion on th subject first...
It also makes one wonder where in the bible did God stop lying to us
About what?
, if He even had anything to do with the formation of the bible.
Agan, without have evn asked for your opinion. Unacceptable!
So as you can see theologically, evolution does a pretty mean broadside to the bible
Better take that up with the Creator, then.
Since the bible claims that through one man (Adam), sin entered the world, and through one man (Jesus), sin was defeated. But if men have been clubbing each other since Luci walked the earth, that becomes fiction, which renders the cross meaningless.
I'm sorry, what? Are you denying the existence of sin, our Lord's triumph over it, or both?
Biblically based Christian theology and macroevolution are binary choices under boolean logic rules.
I'm sorry, but that's simple gibberish.
 
Upvote 0