Any Christians believe in macroevolution?

[Cabal]

The experts say the geneologies are literal and complete.

No, they aren't. They conflict as early on as Jesus' grandfather.

 

[Hespera]

We could make a list of things that the 'experts" get wrong but we'd never finish it.

 

[nebulaJP]

Actually, the idea of getting a 'soul' is not biblical. The bible states both humans and animals are souls (Gen 2;7, 2:19). Also the notion that people having an immaterial soul is simply not found anywhere in scripture. The bible speaks about a resurrection, not immortality of the soul.

OK so the afterlife would work like this: When a person dies, that person ceases to have consciousness (or the ability to think) at the moment of brain death. At the Resurrection (meaning a certain time in the Future), a new body is assembled for the person and it's only at that time that the person resumes having consciousness, yes? If so that solves the problem of: "At what point in our evolution did we get an immaterial soul that is capable of living on after the death of the body?" Thanks!

At some point, there was a point where the relationship between God and man broke down. There is good evidence that Adam could have been a neolithic farmer. Here is an intersting link:

I can appreciate the idea that the Adam and Eve story "is related figuratively in Scripture, that some mystical meaning may be indicated by it" but when Adam, Eve or Noah are mentioned in the Old or New Testaments I often get the impression that the author is a Literalist. In any of the following scriptures (NASB) does it appear to you that the author believes these stories from Genesis literally happened? If so, doesn't this mean they were misinformed? If the authors of the Bible were misinformed doesn't this call it's credibility into question in a significant way?

1 Chronicles 1:1-27
(Genealogy from Adam to Abraham)

Job 31:33

“Have I covered my transgressions like Adam, By hiding my iniquity in my bosom,

Hosea 6:7

But like Adam they have transgressed the covenant; There they have dealt treacherously against Me.

Romans 5:14

Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

1 Corinthians 15:22

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.

1 Corinthians 15:45

So also it is written, “The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING SOUL.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

1 Timothy 2:13

For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.

1 Timothy 2:14

And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.

Jude 1:14

It was also about these men that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, “ Behold, the Lord came with many thousands of His holy ones,

2 Corinthians 11:3

But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.

Isaiah 54:9

“For this is like the days of Noah to Me, When I swore that the waters of Noah Would not flood the earth again; So I have sworn that I will not be angry with you Nor will I rebuke you.

Ezekiel 14:14

even though these three men, Noah, Daniel and Job were in its midst, by their own righteousness they could only deliver themselves,” declares the Lord GOD.

Ezekiel 14:20

even though Noah, Daniel and Job were in its midst, as I live,” declares the Lord GOD, “they could not deliver either their son or their daughter. They would deliver only themselves by their righteousness.”

Matthew 24:37

For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah.

Matthew 24:38

For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,

Luke 17:26

And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:

Luke 17:27

they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.

Hebrews 11:7

By faith Noah, being warned by God about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.

1 Peter 3:20

who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.

2 Peter 2:5

and did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;

 

[Jazer]

No, they aren't. They conflict as early on as Jesus' grandfather.

People have spent their whole life to study the genealogies in the Bible. So I tend to put more credibility with the people who are experts in a subject. Compared to someone who wants to offer an opinion on something he knows nothing about. But that is just me, you can listen to whoever you want to listen to if they are qualifed or not. I know that atheists tend to listen to other atheists because it reinforces what they believe, even if they offer no evidence or proof for what they are saying.

 

[AV1611VET]

People have spent their whole life to study the genealogies in the Bible. So I tend to put more credibility with the people who are experts in a subject. Compared to someone who wants to offer an opinion on something he knows nothing about. But that is just me, you can listen to whoever you want to listen to if they are qualifed or not. I know that atheists tend to listen to other atheists because it reinforces what they believe, even if they offer no evidence or proof for what they are saying.

 

[Jazer]

What about other hominid species that buried their dead, wore clothes, used tools, had the ability of speech, cooked their food, etc.?

When we became a Christian we received the Holy Spirit of God and they say we are born again. In the Bible Adam was said to have the breath of life and he became a living soul. This is different from the man in Ch 1.

LORD 3068 God 430 formed 3335 man 120 [of] the dust 6083 of 4480 the ground 127, and breathed 5301 into his nostrils 639 the breath 5397 of life 2416; and man 120 became a living 2416 soul

Science tells us that Adam evolved from something before him. In the Bible beginning means first fruit, when a tree begins to produce. Be it grapes, olives or whatever the fruit is. The beginning is not when the seed is planted, not when the seed sprouts and takes root. The beginning is the firstfruit when the tree begins to produce and become productive. When the tree actually produces fruit.

To produce fruit is a big part of the NT. Trees that do not produce fruit are to be thrown into the fire. We are to have the fruit of the spirit: Love, Joy, Peace and so on. God is very patient waiting for us to produce fruit.

For some reason cooking food is a sore spot for the evolutionists on here. I have not figured out yet why they want to reject the theory of evolution when it comes to that aspect of it. Even after the resurrection Jesus ate some fish to show the disciples that he had a body and that he was not just a spirit. Then He told them to stay in "Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high." Luke 24

 

[nebulaJP]

Well, part of the problem is you're looking at the Bible as a singular book. It's not, it's dozens of books, that originally had no page or verse numbers. Each book stands on its own merits.

I believe Abraham was a real person. Seth and Noah may have existed or been based on real people, although I'm not sure I agree Seth was the son of the first 2 humans on Earth. There are many supposed historical figures we can't prove ever existed. We just don't have the evidence to claim an answer either way.

OK, here's a question that only has to do with the book of Genesis. If the creation story of Adam and Eve and the flood story of Noah are both allegorical then why would you think the story of Abraham, found only a page after the Noah story in Genesis, is literal?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I believe in marcroevolution but not microevelotion. Microevolution is for the shortsighted.

 

[Split Rock]

So we're mutant copy errors, made in the image and likeness of God?

Since we are all mutants, yes. That is simple fact, whether you like it or not. We are not "copy errors," rather our DNA contains copy errors. That is also a fact, whether you like it or not. If you have a problem reconciling that with you being made in God's image, that is your own problem.

 

[Split Rock]

People have spent their whole life to study the genealogies in the Bible. So I tend to put more credibility with the people who are experts in a subject. Compared to someone who wants to offer an opinion on something he knows nothing about. But that is just me, you can listen to whoever you want to listen to if they are qualifed or not. I know that atheists tend to listen to other atheists because it reinforces what they believe, even if they offer no evidence or proof for what they are saying.

It is a simple fact that Matthew and Luke's geneologies differ, whether you like it or not.
Genealogy of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The genealogy of Jesus is described in two passages of the Gospels: Luke 3:23–38[1] and Matthew 1:1–17.[2]

Luke's genealogy goes back to Adam, through a minor son of David, Nathan and apparently again to Joseph.
Matthew's genealogy commences with Abraham and then from King David's son Solomon follows the legal line of the kings through Jeconiah, the king whose descendants were cursed, to Joseph, legal father of Jesus.
Both gospels state that Jesus was begotten not by Joseph, but by God, being born to Mary through a virgin birth. These lists are identical between Abraham and David, but they differ radically from that point onward.

The Catholic Encyclopedia (1913) states that aside from a general implication of her Davidic origin, there is no explicit Biblical record of Mary’s genealogy, but a number of extra-biblical sources, some relatively early, claim to provide her immediate ancestry, as well as an explanation for the divergence between Matthew and Luke.[3] The apparent contradiction of the two gospel genealogies has aroused controversy since ancient times, although modern scholars tend to view the genealogies as theological craftsmanship rather than historical fact.

 

[AV1611VET]

Since we are all mutants, yes.

Adam wasn't -- whether you like it or not.

We are not "copy errors," rather our DNA contains copy errors.

Adam's didn't -- whether you like it or not.

 

[Jazer]

Adam wasn't -- whether you like it or not.

Adam's didn't -- whether you like it or not.

Yeah, but how many did God have to start out with to find one perfect one?
Then from Adam it got narrowed down to Noah, from Noah it got narrowed down to Abraham.

He wanted to narrow it down to Moses, but Moses would not go along with it.

9 And the LORD said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and indeed it is a stiff-necked people! 10 Now therefore, let Me alone, that My wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them. And I will make of you a great nation.”

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The words "of all" is not in the origional Hebrew text. They were added because just the words "mother" and "living" does not make any sense. They were very liberal to add the word "all" when it was not in the origional Hebrew. We know that Eve was the mother of the Hebrew people. We have the geneologys, so we know exactly who she was the mother of. Science has their own Eve and that is different from the Eve in the Bible.
[FONT=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]. [/FONT]

Which Hebrew text are you referring to?
According to the KJV Concordance and the ISA Interlinear, "of all" is certainly in that verse

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Genesis 3:20 And the 'adam is calling name of his woman/wife, Eve/Chavvah, that she becomes mother of-all living/chay

Strong's Number H3605 matches the Hebrew כֹּל (kol), which occurs 26 times in 24 verses in the Hebrew concordance of the KJV
AV — every thing, all, whosoever, whatsoever, nothing, yet

3605 kol kole or (Jer. 33:8) kowl {kole}; from 3634; properly, the whole; hence, all, any or every (in the singular only, but often in a plural sense):--(in) all (manner, (ye)), altogether, any (manner), enough, every (one, place, thing), howsoever, as many as, (no-)thing, ought, whatsoever, (the) whole, whoso(-ever).

 

[Jazer]

We could make a list of things that the 'experts" get wrong but we'd never finish it.

If you made up a list of what doctors and science got wrong you would have the number one leading cause of death. Even simple things like not washing their hands can create a very high infant mortality rate.

 

[Jazer]

3605 kol kole or (Jer. 33:8) kowl {kole}; from 3634; properly, the whole; hence, all, any or every (in the singular only, but often in a plural sense):--(in) all (manner, (ye)), altogether, any (manner), enough, every (one, place, thing), howsoever, as many as, (no-)thing, ought, whatsoever, (the) whole, whoso(-ever).

Yes, there is a Hebrew word for "ALL" but it is not in this verse:

3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.

The KJV Bible with Strong's References / Definitions for Genesis 3

 

[Lillen]

Most species are according to the facts extinct, what makes you believe this will not continue?

 

[Hespera]

If you made up a list of what doctors and science got wrong you would have the number one leading cause of death. Even simple things like not washing their hands can create a very high infant mortality rate.

No, you would not.

It was those guys btw who figured out that hand washing is important.

 

[Jazer]

No, you would not.

It was those guys btw who figured out that hand washing is important.

Yep doctors are getting better at not killing people so fast. Of course the "guy" that discovered that got fired.

"Despite various publications of results where hand-washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands"

 

[Hespera]

Yep doctors are getting better at not killing people so fast. Of course the "guy" that discovered that got fired.

"Despite various publications of results where hand-washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands"

We all know that doctors make mistakes and we all except maybe you know that this is false:

If you made up a list of what doctors and science got wrong you would have the number one leading

 

[AV1611VET]

Even simple things like not washing their hands can create a very high infant mortality rate.

I can think of something worse than the washing of hands that causes a 'very high infant mortality rate'.