Why Christians and evolutionists can NEVER agree

gluadys

Legend
Mar 2, 2004
12,958
682
Toronto
✟24,020.00
Faith
Protestant
Politics
CA-NDP
Originally Posted by Calminian View Post
Exactly. And the canopy theory, as just about all creationists now admit, is nowhere to be found in Genesis or the rest of the Bible. The concept over reached beyond what the text could sustain.




So you agree that canopy can be found in the Bible. Fine.
:wave: Good work.


No, what is found in the Bible is 'raqia'. What is found in an English translation reflects the bias of the translators and is not necessarily a good guide to what the text actually says. Especially when only one out of dozens of translations opt for that term.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Last edited:
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat

Just thought I'd mention, if you need a Hebrew font BSTHebrew is really good, it can even be embedded in html with css. Anyway...

I never thought the Canopy theory was a bad idea, I'm not surprised that Darwinians don't like it. I just think it has it's merits but how would you start to prove something like that? Would it matter if you did?

Grace and peace,
Mark
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Scaffolding

Genesis was written for the edification of the child like mind of those distant ages by the literate priest class. They made no claim of writing the word of God. The fragmented stories, surviving via oral tradition up until they were incorporated into Hebrew theology, served a purpose, it was the scaffolding for future events.

The authors of scripture were neither historians nor philosophers. The motive would be to promote and maintain faith by the community of believers in the blind faith that Abram had in God. It worked.


Faith in Jesus does not require that one believe in things that are untruthful in a more scientific age. If "in him we live and have our being" then investigating mans origins, with faith in Gods destiny, is to be expected. God is the source and cause of material and religious history, there is nothing wrong with studying it and revising the stories of our heritage.

Evolutionists are just reporting on, and constructing theories about, the observable traces of Gods technique of cosmic evolution even though they may not ascribe their findings as being a shadow of Gods plan.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

KWCrazy

Newbie
Apr 13, 2009
7,229
1,993
Bowling Green, KY
✟82,877.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Faith in Jesus does not require that one believe in things that are untruthful in a more scientific age.
So it's your contention that the Bible is an untruthful collection of stories designed to pacify the minds of the uneducated?

In this "more scientific age," how does one account for the virgin birth, casting out demons and rising from the dead? How does one scientifically explain the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? How does science account for being born again? How do we serve God when we constantly call His holy book a collection of untrue stories? If the Bible isn't true then there is no God, so why pretend to serve Him at all?

Your position is untenable, If the Bible is word of God and the events retold are true, that puts you in the position of a false teacher intentionally undermining the faith of others. If the Bible is NOT true that puts you in the position of professing to have faith in something you know to be a lie; not a very enlightened position at all.

The laws of science govern the physical world unless superseded by a greater force. Just like inertia will hold a ball motionless until you kick it, the forces of gravity will continue to rotate the earth in its orbit around the sun until God decides to cease its rotation for a day. Science tells us that the dead who are not embalmed will rot in three days, not rise in three days. Yet without faith in the resurrection of Christ there is no forgiveness for sin, and you will never see the kingdom of Heaven no matter how fervently you insist it's all untrue.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
So it's your contention that the Bible is an untruthful collection of stories designed to pacify the minds of the uneducated?

In this "more scientific age," how does one account for the virgin birth, casting out demons and rising from the dead? How does one scientifically explain the indwelling of the Holy Spirit? How does science account for being born again? How do we serve God when we constantly call His holy book a collection of untrue stories? If the Bible isn't true then there is no God, so why pretend to serve Him at all?

Your position is untenable, If the Bible is word of God and the events retold are true, that puts you in the position of a false teacher intentionally undermining the faith of others. If the Bible is NOT true that puts you in the position of professing to have faith in something you know to be a lie; not a very enlightened position at all.

The laws of science govern the physical world unless superseded by a greater force. Just like inertia will hold a ball motionless until you kick it, the forces of gravity will continue to rotate the earth in its orbit around the sun until God decides to cease its rotation for a day. Science tells us that the dead who are not embalmed will rot in three days, not rise in three days. Yet without faith in the resurrection of Christ there is no forgiveness for sin, and you will never see the kingdom of Heaven no matter how fervently you insist it's all untrue.

Hi KWcrazy,

You seem to be overreacting to my belief, both religion and science tend to be overly dogmatic in their positions. I consider author, audience and motive. When Jesus told the parable of say, the sower, it was a story intended to teach a meaning, a value, a truth. The fact that it wasn't a historic fact doesn't invalidate any of those elements.

I believe that bible book collection in it's present form is a story about----->The Word, it doesn't claim to be The Word. God is the Living Word. The bible leads people to The Word.

The difficulty with the Bible is that much of it is retrospective, written long after the very real metaphysical events as those events were understood by the authors. There were also redactions which further complicated the issue of historicity.

The original gospel of Jesus effectively reboots everything. For me the older parts and pieces are interesting but not critical. In fact putting the new wine into the old wine skins can distort the message and the historical worldview of one today.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I believe that bible book collection in it's present form is a story about----->The Word, it doesn't claim to be The Word. God is the Living Word. The bible leads people to The Word.

That narrative of redemptive history most certainly does claim to be the revelation known collectively as 'the Word of God'. The difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament is that in the OT the, 'Word of God', came to the prophets, in the NT, the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.

Aren't you a Christian? You should know this.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It seems from these 3 issues that being a Bible believing Christian and an evolutionist simply isn't an option. You HAVE to choose one side or the other.

Not true. When Jesus caused a lame man to walk, He never asked you to scientifically examine the age of his muscles.

Same with the earth.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,024
7,364
60
Indianapolis, IN
✟549,630.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Does that include the Baptist and Evolutionist Francis Collins (amongst many others)?

Francis Collins has been pretty straight forward in telling others he believes the New Testament miracles, something no self respecting Darwinian would ever do. Evolution isn't contrary to Creation, it just starts after the creation of life.
 
Upvote 0

lesliedellow

Member
Sep 20, 2010
9,652
2,582
United Kingdom
Visit site
✟104,175.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Francis Collins has been pretty straight forward in telling others he believes the New Testament miracles, something no self respecting Darwinian would ever do. Evolution isn't contrary to Creation, it just starts after the creation of life.

I am sure it would come as news to Francis Collins that he isn't a "Darwinian".

By definition, if something is to evolve, it must already exist. Nobody I know of argues otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Luke17:37

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2016
1,667
550
United States
✟12,166.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
The word yom is used all throughout the first testament, and is not always translated as day. So, actually Genesis could have been more clear.

Are you kidding me?

Genesis 1:3-4
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

How is this not clear?

God defined the day as:
dividing the light from the darkness, the light Day, the darkness Night, evening and morning, (one) day. Each day is listed: first, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth. (And the seventh day God rested, to give us a pattern for the week and a day of rest to reflect on all He has done.)

Does it have to say 24 hours to be a normal day to you? Does God need to create a different word?

Do you believe Jesus rose on the third day? What does third day mean to you? Could he have been in the grave for three thousand years?

Your excuses aren't making any sense.
 
Upvote 0

Luke17:37

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2016
1,667
550
United States
✟12,166.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Very good argument. However, how can we have literal evenings if there is no sun or moon? Also, isn't it possible that "evening and morning" could just be a poetic way of saying the beginning and the end of some unspecified period of time?

God can make the earth rotate around a light source without that light source being a sun. It's His universe, and He defined the day--quire clearly.

Personally I think it's fitting that the sun came after plants, not before, since some people worship the sun. God wants us to worship Him, the source of all. He is Creator of the sun and everything else.

Exodus 20:11 makes it clear that in six days (Genesis 1:2-2:3) God made the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1), the sea and all that is in them (Genesis 1:2-2:3).

Do you think it was possible that Jesus was in the grave for three thousand years?

Rejecting the clearly stated truth concerning creation and the flood is a slippery slope. This is a serious thing, really! The foundation of the gospel hangs on Genesis 1-3. Also, the Bible prophesies that in the last days, there will be scoffers who foundationally reject God's creation out of water and the worldwide flood will reject the similarly straightforward teaching on the literal, bodily return of Christ. Check it out here: 2 Peter 3:3-9. Please note the actual context of 2 Peter 3:8. (It's not talking about Genesis.)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums