Eve came from Adam, evolution does not allow this

[JacksBratt]

But he didn't tell us everything exactly. For example, how did the other races like Chinese, Indians, Africans, Caucasians and all that happen? We know it happened some how out of Adam and Eve, but we don't have exact details on how scientifically.

So?

 

[JacksBratt]

It is just arrogance though to think that you alone have to faculty to decide what is real and what is not intended as literal in the Bible.

It's shear ignorance to state that you cannot tell between actual literal meaning of the bible and times when it is being figurative...

If you cannot discern between strait up "there was evening, there was morning".... six different and separate times.........

AND

"Jesus is the door" or "a land flowing with Milk and Honey"....

Seriously.

 

[-57]

Why did Jesus use parables instead of straight talking?
.

Why?

 

[-57]

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.
.

You are trying way to hard. Recognize when you have lost a point.

The Bible in no ways teaches evolutionism.

 

[-57]

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.

Your arguments have become empty.

the Bible clearly say Adam was created first then Eve from his rib. You need to show how that is possible with evolutionism or simply say the Bible is wrong.

 

[-57]

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).

All right, tell all of us how random mutations add up and cause the vast different morphological features we seen the animals today.

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

The Bible in no ways teaches evolutionism.

Of course it does not. Neither does it says anything about plate tectonics or continental drift because it is not a science book and the people writing it had no clue about evolution or plate tectonics but had an understanding of what an earthquake was.

Does this somehow mean that now when we actually understand the mechanics of the earthquake that information is somehow invalid because it was not mentioned in the Bible ?

 

[-57]

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.

I find it ironic how some people here reject Genesis and insert evolutionism....because their science says Genesis is false and evolutionism is true.....then preach a dead guy resurrected on day 3 where science says that also is impossible.

 

[-57]

Of course it does not. Neither does it says anything about plate tectonics or continental drift because it is not a science book and the people writing it had no clue about evolution or plate tectonics but had an understanding of what an earthquake was.

Does this somehow mean that now when we actually understand the mechanics of the earthquake that information is somehow invalid because it was not mentioned in the Bible ?

But it does tell us Man was formed from the dust the woman from mans rib. It doesn't have to be a science text book when the Bible explains that a method that was NOT evolutionism was used.

 

[JacksBratt]

Of course it does not. Neither does it says anything about plate tectonics or continental drift because it is not a science book and the people writing it had no clue about evolution or plate tectonics but had an understanding of what an earthquake was.

Does this somehow mean that now when we actually understand the mechanics of the earthquake that information is somehow invalid because it was not mentioned in the Bible ?

But it does tell us that God formed Adam with His own hands and made Eve from Adam's rib...

You cannot get around that.

It also says that there was no death before the fall.

You cannot get around that.

AND..

It clearly states "There was evening, there was morning, there was the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth days"..

You cannot get around that.


Evolution is apostate.

 

[-57]

Your problem is that you don't understand Genesis. You have turned it into a very old newspaper report on God making a man from mud pies and some persons eating fruit. You have stripped it of all its meaning apart from the statement of some dodgy historical facts that have little meaning in terms of human psychology, salvation history or indeed anything else important to a person living today.

You've been asked several times, in what stage of mans evolution did mankind fall?

Why will you not answer that question?

 

[-57]

But he didn't tell us everything exactly. For example, how did the other races like Chinese, Indians, Africans, Caucasians and all that happen? We know it happened some how out of Adam and Eve, but we don't have exact details on how scientifically.

I suppose the tower of babel was also a parable.

 

[ExTiff]

Why?

Read and learn.

 

[JacksBratt]

Read and learn.

You thought my last response to this was funny.

That doesn't surprise me... You don't take scripture as truth as a habit..

Check this out:

“I Speak in Parables So They WON’T Understand.”

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

Evolution is apostate.

That is just your interpretation of the genesis. There are plenty of Christian who believe in evolution.

Wiki

Evolution contradicts a literalistic interpretation of Genesis; however, according to Catholicism and most contemporary Protestant denominations, biblical literalism in the creation account is not mandatory. Christians have considered allegorical interpretations of Genesis since long before the development of Darwin's theory of evolution, or Hutton's principle of uniformitarianism. A notable example is St. Augustine (4th century), who, on theological grounds, argued that everything in the universe was created by God in the same instant, and not in six days as a plain reading of Genesis would require.[6] Modern theologians such as Meredith G. Kline and Henri Blocher have advocated what has become known as the literary framework interpretation of the days of Genesis.

 

[JacksBratt]

That is just your interpretation of the genesis. There are plenty of Christian who believe in evolution.

Truth.... not a democracy...

I could care less "how many" people believe anything...

The truth could not care and does not depend on how many people believe it... it will still be the truth.

How many people believe Christ was a real person?

How many people believe that Christ is the savior?

How many people believe there is a God?

How many people believe..........insert truth here..........?

Your point is void.

 

[ExTiff]

You've been asked several times, in what stage of mans evolution did mankind fall?

Why will you not answer that question?

Have you forgotten the answer already then?

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

The truth could not care and does not depend on how many people believe it... it will still be the truth.

Indeed. Precisely why it is nice that we have scientific methods of actually finding truth instead of taking viewpoint from different people`s holy books and traditions.

 

[-57]

That is just your interpretation of the genesis. There are plenty of Christian who believe in evolution.

Wiki

Evolution contradicts a literalistic interpretation of Genesis; however, according to Catholicism and most contemporary Protestant denominations, biblical literalism in the creation account is not mandatory. Christians have considered allegorical interpretations of Genesis since long before the development of Darwin's theory of evolution, or Hutton's principle of uniformitarianism. A notable example is St. Augustine (4th century), who, on theological grounds, argued that everything in the universe was created by God in the same instant, and not in six days as a plain reading of Genesis would require.[6] Modern theologians such as Meredith G. Kline and Henri Blocher have advocated what has become known as the literary framework interpretation of the days of Genesis.

Problem is they ALL must reexplain the fall and our sin nature.
The Bible explains how it happened while those presented above have to invent a new reason.

They often tell us science has shown otherwise yet always forget science says when you've been dead and in the grave for 3 days you remain dead. They forget it was the risen Christ who fashioned Adam from the dust.

 

[ExTiff]

JacksBratt said: You thought my last response to this was funny.

That doesn't surprise me... You don't take scripture as truth as a habit..

Check this out:

“I Speak in Parables So They WON’T Understand.”

Listen up at the back there!

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because [as a result of their dull mindsets,] they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. [Thus they fulfilled the prophesy], And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: For [because,] this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes THEY have closed;
(Not Jesus stopping them from understanding),
LEST at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
(It was THEM that were preventing their own understanding, not Jesus).
But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear. For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.
(And the disciples DID understand, but even they had to have some of it explained again, so they understood it properly). Matt.13:12-17 KJV

Read and learn. Yes! Jesus spoke to them in parables because they would not tolerate sound, straightforward teaching. Jesus put things to them in the simplest, most explainable way possible for them, yet they STILL refused to understand, because, their hearts were gross, their ears were dull of hearing, their eyes were closed, and they refused to let Jesus heal them. Jesus wanted them to understand so they could be healed, but they were just too thick headed to be bothered to understand him. They had no use for him in their twisted world view, just like YECs feel about people who have accepted that evolution may have been a very sensible way for God to make the universe work and which fits quite well with what we actually observe in nature. And have been sensible enough to see that the Adam and Eve story has deeper significance than merely telling us that man is made of mud and Eve was made of one of Adams ribs. Get your mindset right and you will be enlightened, Luke 11:35-36. Matt.6:23.Continue in your present mindset and you will remain in the dark about many things God wants you to know.

And you still don't understand what I am telling you, do you? Perhaps I should put it in a parable for you, or even set it to music and dance to it, to get the truth through to you in there.
.