Question for Christian Evolutionists

[Ark Guy]

Northern Christian, that is a very good point.

If God used evolution...then why not say so.

One verse that does contradict evolution is from the mouth of Jesus.

Read it:
MAT 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

Now think about it...if evolution was true then Jesus would have said something different. Why? According to the evos, male and female came at the end of all history and not at the beginning. In the beginning would have been about 4.5BY ago according to the evos..not 6,000 years ago.

 

[Vance]

Northern Christian, that is a very good point.

If God used evolution...then why not say so.

One verse that does contradict evolution is from the mouth of Jesus.

Read it:
MAT 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

Now think about it...if evolution was true then Jesus would have said something different. Why? According to the evos, male and female came at the end of all history and not at the beginning. In the beginning would have been about 4.5BY ago according to the evos..not 6,000 years ago.

But think about what you are saying. When Jesus said "in the beginning", what did He mean? He obviously didn't mean in the VERY beginning, which was the first moment of Creation, since man was not created until a few "days" later. Did Jesus get it wrong? Of course not, Jesus is God.

So, Jesus must have meant *something else* by "in the beginning" since He did not mean "in the beginning of Creation", or "in the beginning of Time". Maybe He meant "in the beginning of Mankind's special relationship to God." I am not quite sure what He meant exactly, but I know He could not have meant "in the beginning of Creation".

More importantly, what was Jesus trying to tell us by that verse? That God created Man and Woman so that they would leave their father and mother and become one flesh, defending marriage and condemning divorce. How is this statement of doctrine diminished by the when or how God created Man and Woman? God definitely created us in a way that we should be joined together as one flesh no matter how He did it.

 

[Ark Guy]

vance, Jesus is quoting from Genesis....Genesis tells us Eve was created after Adam (so does the New Testament).

In other words...evolution wasn't used.

if evolution was used by God then male and female were all ready established on this earth.

 

[Ark Guy]

remember, Eve was created from Adams side...not a primate...or is the bible wrong?

 

[Vance]

remember, Eve was created from Adams side...not a primate...or is the bible wrong?

Well, there are a few possibilities, as we have discussed many times. None of them involve the Bible being wrong. I am not going to bother going back over all the possibilities every time you raise the issue. If you didn't understand them then, I am not sure why you would now. If you understood them then, but didn't think any of them were viable possibilities, I don't think you would find them viable now, either. So, what would be the point in repeating the same possibilities over and over.

As they say, don't bother trying to teach a pig to sing, it frustrates you and irritates the pig.

Not equating you with a pig, but the concept is appropos.

 

[Ark Guy]

So now you call me a pig.....and in anoother post you started you claimed that the YEC's were rude? Whatever.

Anyway Vance, You never proved your point in the first place. I remember you stuttering around trying, but failing to support your argument.

Your religion of evolutionism needs to change way to many biblical passages to make it work.

You need to invent soulless groups of people that cohabitated with Adam and Eve...which isn't supported with scripture....unless Adam had kids after he died.

 

[Vance]

Well, that is good for all to see. You not only misrepresent, you blatantly lie about something which everyone can see in the post right above! I specifically stated I was not calling you a pig by that analogy, and yet you state that I am.

The good thing is that you also prove the point of the analogy perfectly.

I will GLADLY refer anyone to the "Cain Married His Sister" thread to let them see who was dancing around the issue and failing to face facts and then finally resorting to rude attempts to misdirect the point at issue.

It is very obvious that this is an attempt to teach the "pig to sing" and I can't be bothered. You are officially on my PLONK list. You are the only one there, by the way. I have never, in any forum, taking the step of actually plonking someone, since I actually welcome sensible challenges to my ideas and arguments. Since yours have no sense to them whatsoever, and are rude and childish to boot, I can't be bothered.

Please do keep posting, though. It really does help with my mission to dilute the falsehoods of YECism. You are the best anti-YEC poster going.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Northern Christian, that is a very good point.

If God used evolution...then why not say so.

One verse that does contradict evolution is from the mouth of Jesus.

Read it:
MAT 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

Now think about it...if evolution was true then Jesus would have said something different. Why? According to the evos, male and female came at the end of all history and not at the beginning. In the beginning would have been about 4.5BY ago according to the evos..not 6,000 years ago.

This is an old chestnut.

It depends upon two premises:

(1) Jesus' words imply He thought Genesis was literal
(2) Jesus during His incarnation on earth knew everything.

Both of these premises are questionable - http://freespace.virgin.net/karl_and.gnome/mark10.htm

 

[lucaspa]

Northern Christian, that is a very good point.

If God used evolution...then why not say so.

One verse that does contradict evolution is from the mouth of Jesus.

Read it:
MAT 19:4 "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'

Now think about it...if evolution was true then Jesus would have said something different. Why? According to the evos, male and female came at the end of all history and not at the beginning. In the beginning would have been about 4.5BY ago according to the evos..not 6,000 years ago.

What is the context of the quote? It is talking about divorce. Jesus disagrees with the rules of divorce as laid down in the Torah. So, to justify his argument, Jesus uses the theological message of Genesis 1: God created both males and females equally. Not males dominant over females.

Now, in evolution sex evolves without any definite male and female. Therefore the two sexes really are equal and co-dependent -- just as Jesus claims when he argues that divorce is not to be allowed.

So, the theological message works just as well or better in evolution as it did in the general knowledge of the time.

Finally, Ark Guy, did you read the rest of the chapter? Go down to verses 7 and 8. Jesus denies that God wrote Genesis but says Moses did. And Moses got it wrong. The blame supposedly is on the people for being so hard to teach, but that gets back to your question: why couldn't God give Moses the correct rule to begin with?

BTW, the corresponding story in Mark is chapter 10.

So, the next time you claim the Bible is "God's Word" you can be sure I'll send you to Matthew 19:7-8.

 

[lucaspa]

remember, Eve was created from Adams side...not a primate...or is the bible wrong?

Just as "wrong" as when it says the earth is immovable or that the whole word was taxed or that the Kingdom of Heaven would come before the generation that lived with Jesus were dead or when it has two contradictory geneologies for Jesus, and both are wrong because they trace back thru Joseph.

Now you are back to that theological cliff where the Bible has to be literally totally correct or completely wrong. I can't stop you from committing suicide by jumping off the cliff, but hopefully I can pull others back from the brink.

 

[lucaspa]

So now you call me a pig.....and in anoother post you started you claimed that the YEC's were rude? Whatever.

No, he didn't. Here's the relevant portion of Vance's post:

As they say, don't bother trying to teach a pig to sing, it frustrates you and irritates the pig.

Not equating you with a pig, but the concept is appropos.

See? Vance went out of his way so that you would not say what you did. Didn't work. More important to distract by flame wars, isn't it, Ark Guy?

The point is that we have given you viable replies/refutations to all your points. You never address them but continue to make your same points as tho the refutations don't exist.

Your religion of evolutionism needs to change way to many biblical passages to make it work.

Pot, meet kettle. Or rather, meet projection. Take the weakness of your position and try to put it on someone else. Have you seen what Flood Geology does to the Bible? Takes a gentle, nonmiraculous flood and completely changes it. Look at your posts in this thread. You change the Bible so that Genesis 1:26-27 is about Adam and Eve. It's obviously not.

Now, since you say we never back anything up, how about you backing up that "religion of evolutionism" statement? Sauce for the goose.

You need to invent soulless groups of people that cohabitated with Adam and Eve...which isn't supported with scripture....unless Adam had kids after he died.

Misrepresentation. Vance simply showed the implications of a literal interpretation of those passages. The ad hoc hypothesis of other people is one of the implications.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

remember, Eve was created from Adams side...not a primate...or is the bible wrong?

Fallacy: False dichotomy

 

[CryptoKnight]

My question has been ignored for the most part.

I agree that the whole process would be a bit much for relatively primitive minds, but I also believe that God gave us some awesome clues . For example,

Genesis 2:7
And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

To the ancient people, dust was the smallest particle of which God could speak that would make sense to them. To claim, in essence, that man(kind) was formed from the same essence as everything else in the world (dust i.e. atoms) is quite a bold statement. Maybe I'm reading too much into it , but I believe the Holy Spirit was speaking truths to them that we only now can begin to understand.

Compared to other religions, where mud, clay and other materials were used Genesis' claims are all the more striking.

Similarly, I wonder what we'll think in a few thousand years about verses we don't understand now.