How to deal with evolution?

[PrincetonGuy]

PrincetonGuy, have you studied the old earth creation theory? I think a literal reading of the text shows that the flood was a local event which only affected the middle east (and presumably, the whole of the human population would have lived there at the time). This eliminates most of the difficulties, since we are no longer required to believe that every animal in the entire world was carried aboard the ark. It also explains how vegetation appeared so quickly after the flood.

No, I have not studied, to any substantial extent, old earth creation theory. However, there is absolutely no way to reconcile a literal interpretation of the flood with the topography of the Middle East. And, of course, water flows from high points to low points so if there had been a great flood in the Middle East the water would have flowed into the ocean long before it covered even the hills, let alone the mountains.

Taken literally, the story of the Genesis flood not only does not allow for miracles, it very clearly teaches against miracles having taken place because it explicitly teaches that through the natural means of the construction and use of a VERY large boat representatives of all the genetically discrete populations of animals (more than 1.5 million populations!) were preserved. For reasons that I have posted above, a 7th grade knowledge of science is more than sufficient so make it expressly clear that such an event could not possibly have occurred.

What I cannot understand is why anyone, when presented with the evidence against such an event having taken place, would continue to believe that it did take place. Such beliefs do not constitute Biblical faith—they constitute presumption and a whole list of other things that it is not appropriate to name on a Christian message board! I find, however, the very same thing in the Mormons, the Jehovah Witnesses, and other fundamentalist cults, including those of the Middle East. God did not only give us the Bible—He also gave us the ability to learn about the Bible and the world that we live in and I believe that God wants each one of us to be good stewards over what He has given to us.

The Church today is being attacked on all sides by advocates of “gay” (really homosexual) rights, on demand abortion, absolute secularization of society, etc., and yet the Christian fundamentalists who argue for a strictly literal interpretation of Genesis, an interpretation for which there is no justification whatsoever, are without question guilty of bringing discredit to the Bible, the gospel message, and our Savior on a scale that is hitherto unknown in the entire history of the Christian church! I can not begin to imagine the wrath of God that is stored up for those who are guilty of doing this in spite of the fact that they have been shown time and again that they are responsible for vast multitudes of people rejecting the Bible, the gospel message, and our Savior with the consequence that these vast multitudes of people are being damned for eternity to the fires of hell.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

You might find this interesting: http://home.entouch.net/dmd/gstory.htm

Thank you for posting this personal testimony by Glenn R. Morton. So extremely sad, but so very real. Unfortunately many such testimonies have a much sadder ending—that of spiritual homicide and damnation to the fires of hell for eternity.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Princetonguy, I know we have different views on evolution. I will say however that when the Lord Jesus comes again, we will know once and for all that the Bible is true and evolution was founded by a non-believing man. Granted, those scientists have Ph. D's, but if they are christians and believe in evolution, I believe them to be liberals. I will never be as smart as those men are, but I will forever believe that the Bible is inspired by God and when Jesus comes again everyone will know it. The only way evolution will become fact is if Jesus himself says it is. I don't believe that will happen. I don't care what scientists say because there is only one true scientist and that is the Lord God Almighty.

 

[Joykins]

Thank you for posting this personal testimony by Glenn R. Morton. So extremely sad, but so very real. Unfortunately many such testimonies have a much sadder ending—that of spiritual homicide and damnation to the fires of hell for eternity.

I had meant to post these excerpts except my computer rebooted in the midst of an edit:

Morton then said that he had hired several graduates of Christian Heritage College, and that all of them suffered severe crises of faith. The were utterly unprepared to face the geologic facts every petroleum geologist deals with on a daily basis

Nothing that young-earth creationists had taught me about geology turned out to be true. I took a poll of my ICR graduate friends who have worked in the oil industry. I asked them one question.


"From your oil industry experience, did any fact that you were taught at ICR, which challenged current geological thinking, turn out in the long run to be true? ,"

That is a very simple question. One man, Steve Robertson, who worked for Shell grew real silent on the phone, sighed and softly said 'No!' A very close friend that I had hired at Arco, after hearing the question, exclaimed, "Wait a minute. There has to be one!" But he could not name one. I can not name one. No one else could either. One man I could not reach, to ask that question, had a crisis of faith about two years after coming into the oil industry. I do not know what his spiritual state is now but he was in bad shape the last time I talked to him.
And being through with creationism, I very nearly became through with Christianity. I was on the very verge of becoming an atheist.

 

[No Swansong]

I had meant to post these excerpts except my computer rebooted in the midst of an edit:

OK just one question for those who do believe evolution theory. How do you come up with a literal Adam? If you don't then who was the 'one man' through who, Paul declares, sin entered the world? I realize that many take the first 11 chapters of Genesis at metaphorical. I disagree but I don't usually make an issue of it. But Paul was not writing metaphorically when he made it clear that sin entered through one man. So was Paul and thus the Holy Spirit who was inspiring him wrong or lieing?

 

[Joykins]

OK just one question for those who do believe evolution theory. How do you come up with a literal Adam?

Someone, somewhere, must have been the first to sin. Someone, somewhere, realized they were different from other animals (who live in a state of innocence) and that such a thing as good and evil existed--and made the choice to commit some kind of evil.

Whether this is a "literal Adam" I don't know. Certainly it could have been an Eve instead--or even a small group of early people.

If you don't then who was the 'one man' through who, Paul declares, sin entered the world? I realize that many take the first 11 chapters of Genesis at metaphorical. I disagree but I don't usually make an issue of it. But Paul was not writing metaphorically when he made it clear that sin entered through one man. So was Paul and thus the Holy Spirit who was inspiring him wrong or lieing?

I would think that Paul and his audience believed the Genesis story. So that excludes lying and gives the message needed to the people about to receive it.

Consider the possibility that the "one man" was not Adam. Although in Gen. 2-3 there was only one man, there was also a woman involved in the incident as well:

[BIBLE]Romans 5:12[/BIBLE]

[BIBLE]1 Timothy 2:14[/BIBLE]

Which appears to see Eve as the original sinner, not an inconsistency with Romans 5:12 ONLY IF we stipulate that the word in Romans means not "man" as in "male" but "man" as in "person" (and it is, indeed--anthropos, not andros)

 

[trinityisunity]

No one wins in a debate like this. Both creationists and evolutionists believe they are right no matter what information is presented. This thread has gone a bit off track from the original post. At the end of the day, are we all not brothers and sisters in Christ whether we believe in creation or evolution? As much as I totally disagree with everything that PrincetonGuy has researched and posted, he was the first one to post a reply to a prayer request I urgently required, so I know he has a love for Christ and others.(Bless you brother).

I also will not post on this thread anymore as it is going nowhere fast. I pray that we all are prayerful about our beliefs and allow the Holy Spirit to direct us to the truth. We as humans have only so much knowledge about the Infinite God we worship, no matter how many degrees we have. "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding"(Proverbs 9:10).

Peace be with you all.

 

[flair1111]

I have a cousin that went through this same thing a few weeks ago during a major science test. The test asked about the man/monkey subject along with other questions that went against the teachings of the Bible. He said he knew if he didnt answer the questions, he would fail the test and possibly miss getting a scholorship to UGA. He said he just couldnt answer the questions without feeling like he was turning his back on Jesus, so he left them blank and failed. Sometimes a Christian must suffer in this world to bring honor to the Lord. Sure, he may miss out on the scholorship, but he says he sure can sleep better now.

My sister also flat out quit coledge (sp?) years back because they had to take a Bible class that taught all kinds of stuff that wasnt right so she said no and left.

Do the right thing for the Lord in all things.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

OK just one question for those who do believe evolution theory. How do you come up with a literal Adam? If you don't then who was the 'one man' through who, Paul declares, sin entered the world? I realize that many take the first 11 chapters of Genesis at metaphorical. I disagree but I don't usually make an issue of it. But Paul was not writing metaphorically when he made it clear that sin entered through one man. So was Paul and thus the Holy Spirit who was inspiring him wrong or lieing?

Rom. 5:12. Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned--
13. for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
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.
15. But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
16. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18. So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
20. The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21. so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (NASB, 1995)

I believe that your question is a very good one, and I don’t have a really good answer for it. From the standpoint of biology and geology there is not the slightest possibility that the story of Noah’s Ark is an accurate account of an historic event, and that fact casts a very dark shadow over the suggestion that any of Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of an historic event. Also from the standpoint of biology and geology, there is not the slightest doubt that the earth is more than 10,000 years old, casting yet another dark shadow over the suggestion that any of Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.

The evidence supporting the theory of evolution, including the evolution of man, is of astronomical proportions. Nonetheless, even during my years as a student at the university studying evolutionary biology I had some reservations in my own mind regarding macroevolution. During these years I knew nothing about the Bible and I was an agnostic. I was saved in a fundamentalist evangelical church while I was still a graduate student and fellow Christians bombarded me with antievolution literature written by creation “scientists” and I was horrified to see Christians posing to be scientists publishing material that made a mockery of true science. Indeed, I was so horrified by this that I was at times ashamed to tell anyone that I was a Christian and I was at times even ashamed to be a Christian.

It was not long after this that I felt a call upon my life to prepare for the Christian ministry, and as I did so, I was absolutely appalled by the extremely negative attitude of very many Christians toward the idea of studying to learn the truth. Their attitude was that they wanted a formal education so that they could be ordained as a minister of the gospel in their denomination. The idea of praying everyday for God to teach them the truth and to protect from doctrinal error as they studied was the furthest thing from their mind. I personally saw these folks swallowing one maggot-infested bologna sandwich right after another and never take the time to prayerfully sit down to a seven-course dinner prepared from fresh and healthy foods.

Paul’s Epistle to the Romans is my favorite book of the Bible and I have more than 300 volumes on that book of the Bible in my personal library. I have more respect and love for Paul than I do for any other human being, and Romans 5:12-21 is a VERY important part of his argument that we have all sinned, that we are all in need of a savior, and that Christ Jesus is that Savior. Did Paul believe the story of Adam? I don’t know. In writing his defense of the doctrine of the resurrection he wrote,

1 Cor. 15:29. Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?

Did Paul believe that Christians could effectually be baptized on behalf of those who died before they had the opportunity to hear and believe the message of the gospel? I don’t believe that he did. I believe that he was using a belief that was commonly held in Corinth as an illustration to make his point about the resurrection. We may have a very similar situation in Romans 5, and in the words of Jesus and Peter regarding Noah. The matter is far from certain, and various scholars of the New Testament have proposed a number of other possible explanations.

Paul most certainly was not lying or deliberately misrepresenting the truth, but beyond that I have no solid answer.

2 Pet. 3:14. Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless,
15. and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you,
16. as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

(All Scriptures are from the NASB, 1995)

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Here is a link to a very good introduction to evolutionary biology,

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

 

[PrincetonGuy]

I have a cousin that went through this same thing a few weeks ago during a major science test. The test asked about the man/monkey subject along with other questions that went against the teachings of the Bible. He said he knew if he didnt answer the questions, he would fail the test and possibly miss getting a scholorship to UGA. He said he just couldnt answer the questions without feeling like he was turning his back on Jesus, so he left them blank and failed. Sometimes a Christian must suffer in this world to bring honor to the Lord. Sure, he may miss out on the scholorship, but he says he sure can sleep better now.

My sister also flat out quit coledge (sp?) years back because they had to take a Bible class that taught all kinds of stuff that wasnt right so she said no and left.

Do the right thing for the Lord in all things.

Thank you for sharing with us, and welcome to Christian Forums!

 

[No Swansong]

I believe that your question is a very good one, and I don’t have a really good answer for it. From the standpoint of biology and geology there is not the slightest possibility that the story of Noah’s Ark is an accurate account of an historic event, and that fact casts a very dark shadow over the suggestion that any of Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of an historic event. Also from the standpoint of biology and geology, there is not the slightest doubt that the earth is more than 10,000 years old, casting yet another dark shadow over the suggestion that any of Genesis 1-11 is an accurate account of historic events.



Paul most certainly was not lying or deliberately misrepresenting the truth, but beyond that I have no solid answer.

I appreciate your honest response here. Many evolutionists simply state that Paul was mistaken, or that he, being a product of his environment was writing a truth that isn't factual (I still haven't been able to figure out how something can be true but not factual) at least your admission shows that you do not view scripture as something less than Origin of the Species.

 

[JPPT1974]

I appreciate your honest response here. Many evolutionists simply state that Paul was mistaken, or that he, being a product of his environment was writing a truth that isn't factual (I still haven't been able to figure out how something can be true but not factual) at least your admission shows that you do not view scripture as something less than Origin of the Species.

Yeah thanks for your honesty
At least you were saying what you were feeling