Eve came from Adam, evolution does not allow this

[Archivist]

Yes it happened. BUT, you claim it didn't happen like the account presented in Genesis says it happened.

You had said, "A great many Christians don't see the creation stories as the "foundation of Christianity."

So, Adams fall and the need to be delivered from the falls consequences isn't foundational to christianity?

Evolutionism does away with the fall. Your "It doesn't matter when it happened, it happened" reply CLEARLY demonstrates you have no idea as to when and why the fall occurred. You've exchanged the truth of Genesis for the lies of evolution the moment you decided to filter the bible through evolutionism.

The two Genesis stories (which do not agree) are allegories. They do not tell us how it was done, but they do tell us that God created everything and at some point man fell.

 

[JacksBratt]

Why do some Christians think that regarding the Bible they do not need to put any effort into cultural background study and can simply read it in their (American) way.

How do you read the words of Genesis and NOT take away a six literal day creation. Then, reading further, have it confirmed in later scripture?

 

[-57]

The two Genesis stories (which do not agree) are allegories. They do not tell us how it was done, but they do tell us that God created everything and at some point man fell.

Will you ever explain how man fell? When man fell? Why man fell?

 

[Archivist]

When asked if the ax floated you replied back with...

It seems as if Archivist would deny this account:
2 Kings 6:5 But as one was felling a log, his axe head fell into the water, and he cried out, “Alas, my master! It was borrowed.” 6 Then the man of God said, “Where did it fall?” When he showed him the place, he cut off a stick and threw it in there and made the iron float. 7 And he said, “Take it up.” So he reached out his hand and took it.

That happened. You didn't asked about a specific reference in the Bible, so I presumed that you were talking about a modern ax head. If I go out on the street and ask people "do ax heads float," every person will say "of course not." I don't know of one who will say, "well, in 2 Kings..."

I find it hard to converse with christians who don't believe their bible. Perhaps I'm wrong, but how do you justify the ax not floating?

But I do believe my Bible.

 

[Archivist]

So no allegory games in the NT. OK. just curious, for someone that denies Eve was a real woman made from a man by God, do you think there was really darkness when Jesus died for what was it three hours? Do you think that there really was a guiding star at the time of His birth?

Actually I was at a program at the State planetarium a number of years back, and the presenter said that it was probably a comet.

 

[Archivist]

Will you ever explain how man fell? When man fell? Why man fell?

Why does the when and why matter so much to you. God tells us that man fell. That is enough for me.

 

[The Barbarian]

I couldn't quite follow your line of thought. I believe you are saying the SDA invented the YEC position then in your next quote tell us the SDA said you can't have a 24 hour day interpretation?

As you know, an SDA "prophphetess" revised the "days" in Genesis to mean literal 24-hour days.

Barbarian observes:
But since evolution is directly observed to happen, there isn't much choice, really.

Evolutionism has not been directly observed.

Evolutionism has also been directly observed. Put two YECs together and they start inventing new "evolutionism." Evolution is also directly observed. Perhaps you don't know what "evolution" means in science. Many creationists think it's natural selection, which is an agency of evolution, some of them think it's common descent, which is a consequence of evolution. But very, very few of them actually know what evolution is.

unless you want to consider the mixing of dog breeds as evolution

Yep. You have no idea what it is, do you?

or the loss of information as evolutionism

In "evolutionism", (which is, remember, the misconceptions creationists invent about evolution) there is "loss of information." However, since I've yet to find a YEC who knows with "information" means in biology, or even how to calculate it, the word is just a filler they toss in to sound sort of sciencey.

Every new allelle is an increase in information.

So for example, we take Adam and Eve, with at most, four alleles for every gene. And today, we have dozens or hundreds of alleles for most human genes. All the rest evolved, and thereby we gained a huge amount of information. Would you be kind enough to show us how you think "information" is measured?

YEC's understand micro-evolutionism such as speciation events have occured and do occur.

Now they do. They used to deny that. And lately, many like the ICR have retreated even farther, admitting the evolution of new genera and families:
Noah's Ark; a Feasibility Study
John Woodmorappe, ICR

On the other hand there is no direct evidence of macro-evolution.

Perhaps you don't know what "macro-evolution" means. "Micro-evolution is evolution within a species. "Macroevolution" is speciation.

What is macroevolution?
Macroevolution generally refers to evolution above the species level. So instead of focusing on an individual beetle species, a macroevolutionary lens might require that we zoom out on the tree of life, to assess the diversity of the entire beetle clade and its position on the tree.
What is macroevolution?

So, that much is pretty much false in your statement, but YECs continue to conflate the two.

You also mentioned "In fact, we know humans have evolved since the first two. " No, not really true.

Absolutely true. Because you don't know what you're talking about, you're just making stories up as you go. Maybe it would be good for you to look up what "evolution" means in biology. Might save you a lot of embarrassment.

I believe a better term would be humans have de-evolved.

No such thing as "de-evolution"; you're thinking of a one-shot band, not biology.

One would think Adam and Eve were created with 100% functioning DNA...

(which is something the YEC sect would have to invent, in the absence of any scriptural support for it)

But not if they were of our species, genera, family, or class. Another "just-so" story by creationists, with nothing to support it, but wishes.

.as they were created "very good"...

And here, you confuse "very good" with "perfect."

Would it be too much trouble for you to at least learn what the terms mean, before you tell us about them?

 

[The Barbarian]

Except I didn't say that. Please stop making such false accusations.

I wonder if YECs ever realize that inventing weird ideas for other people makes Christians distrust them.

 

[Cis.jd]

21 So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22 And the rib that the LORD God had taken from the man he madeh into a woman and brought her to the man. 23 Then the man said,

“This at last is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man.”

In the above you can click on the links for the word rib and bone.

When you study a word you need to read around the verse to obtain the proper nuance. That's why I linked you to rib and bone. You do know a rib is a bone?

The verse uses terminology such as "closed up its place with flesh" and "taken out of" should help you understand it was a rib and not Adams side.

But it really matters not....if it was Adams "side" according to the bible it happened and wasn't allegorical. Sure, we can assign an allegorical meaning to the formation of Eve from Adams rib, that is the equality, the one flesh and all that goes along with it but you fail to realize is that the allegory is based upon and reflects an actual event that once happened in history.

You are still forcing your dead arguments. Nothing here changes the fact that the hebrew word used is "side" not "rib". That verse is a figure of speech, just take a look at the second sentence "flesh of my flesh".

So now, there was actual flesh taken out regardless of, as according to you, God "using only a rib"? That verse is clearly making it clear that women are equal to men. Even creation.com explains it.

Come on. You are giving christians a bad name by making a negative example for others to reference. I've asked you so many times to look up the word "metaphor" and over and over again your replies are still showing you don't know what it means.

 

[Archivist]

I wonder if YECs ever realize that inventing weird ideas for other people makes Christians distrust them.

So true. Their attitude semms to be that when the facts are against you, just start throwing insults. The sad thing is that I have said in my thread that they we free to have their interpretation, but that apparently isn't good enough if I refuse to adopt the same ideas.

 

[Cis.jd]

What you fail to realize is that Eve was made from Adams rib and the account was literal and historical THEN the allegoric or metaphoric meaning was derived from that event.

You on the other hand keep saying the account didn't happen every time you label the event as allegoric or metaphoric. The event literally and historically occurred THEN the allegoric or metaphoric meaning was derived from that event.

You said you posted links, I visited them. The first was from Got Questions who said God made Eve in this fashion...THEN...told us why. Many people have then assigned allegoric or metaphoric meaning to the why God did it that way.

I do find it ironic that you would use Got Questions considering they have this belief "The Bible clearly presents Adam and Eve as literal people who existed in a literal Garden of Eden." They go on to say "Christians who deny the story of Adam and Eve essentially deny their own faith."

What you fail to accept is that Eve was not literally made from his rib, you where already given so many christian sources telling you the messages behind it. The fact that you again are going as if I am denying Adam and Eve as literal people shows once again that up to now you don't understand what metaphors are. lol

Did you not read the example i gave in 358? Here another example: "Lebron James is the top dog in his team". Is he really a dog, if not then does this mean i'm saying he doesn't exist? Saying The story of Adam and Eve doesn't deny they existed it's just the details with in it are symbolic. Your last paragraph is you once again having 0 understanding of what is being told you about metaphors.

 

[JacksBratt]

I wonder if YECs ever realize that inventing weird ideas for other people makes Christians distrust them.

You mean like inventing all things having the same ancestor?

 

[The Barbarian]

You mean like inventing all things having the same ancestor?

Actually, that was first discovered by a scientist long before Darwin. Linnaeus showed that a family tree could be drawn for all living things. Only later did scientists figure out why.

And they predicted that genes would give us the same family tree. Which they do. And they predicted that there would be many transitional forms yet undiscovered which there were.

As YEC Kurt Wise admits, this is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory."

 

[dad]

Nobody corrects God. We correct only you and your reading/using of Genesis.

So the correction is that we should not believe Eve was real and taken from a man by God, and believe that man descended from simple life forms, right?

 

[dad]

Animals are also from the dust (= mortal). They have also the spirit (breath) of life. They are also living creatures (= souls).

The only diff is that man bears the image of God and authority over them.

So I guess the fish are from dust too. Ha.

 

[dad]

Understanding the authors of Genesis is not unbelief in Genesis, its just an unbelief in wrong, modern, SDA reading of Genesis.

When your supposed understanding claims that there was no woman taken from a man by God, but that, instead, she had ancestors that were the same ones as banana trees and cockroaches, you are not understanding the bible, or the Author, or the men He used to write it. You are just doubting and insulting and overruling them.

 

[ExTiff]

No it doesn't

And your evidence for your statement is . . . . .? Just another YEC unicorn coprolite.

 

[-57]

That happened. You didn't asked about a specific reference in the Bible, so I presumed that you were talking about a modern ax head. If I go out on the street and ask people "do ax heads float," every person will say "of course not." I don't know of one who will say, "well, in 2 Kings..."



But I do believe my Bible.

So the ax head floated?

 

[dad]

Actually I was at a program at the State planetarium a number of years back, and the presenter said that it was probably a comet.

edit....

On the topic od the star of Bethlehem as another poster pointed out, that moved and guided people to a house, so it was not any usual planetary body.

 

[dad]

So true. Their attitude semms to be that when the facts are against you, just start throwing insults. The sad thing is that I have said in my thread that they we free to have their interpretation, but that apparently isn't good enough if I refuse to adopt the same ideas.

You are welcome to your own ideas, no matter how weird. You are not welcome to say the bible says so.