Why I'm an evolutionist believer

Roidecoeur78

This world is not my home.
Dec 14, 2018
238
153
Midwest
✟21,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
1. A day to the eternal One is not a 24 hour earth day. It's as long as He decides it is, because a million years is no time at all to Someone that exists outside of time in an eternity of eternities.

"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."-2Peter3:8
And 1000 is likely used because it's a number that was near the upper limit of human understanding at the time of the epistle being written.

2. Evolution is the process of creation, and so creation is done through the process of elemental, and consequent biological, evolution.

***Run-on sentence warning***

3. The sequence of creation, as illustrated in Genesis, has more or less been verified by the scientific theory of evolution. (i.e. first a void with only a single Being, then space and elements, then environments of varying natures[wet, dry, hot,cold] then simple lives like bacteria and plants filling those places, then more complex lives created by compiling the preexisting simpler systems [grasses, to flowering plants, flowering plants to shrubs, shrubs to trees, etc], by this way every niche gets filled, the seas fill up with creatures that will become fish, fish become every type of fish according to the niche they're filling, some fish will lead to lungfish and mudskipper-types, that lead to amphibians, amphibians lead to reptiles, reptiles lead to both birds and small mammals, reptiles get as big as they will until God sends their walking papers in the form of a meteorite. The small and or airborne reptiles and mammals survive because they are more mobile, and require less sustenance to carry on their mojos. As the ecological state re-stabilizes they become every type of mammal, reptile, and bird, according to the ecological niche they're filling. Eventually a mammalian body currently called a homo sapiens is created, thus agreeing with Genesis that mankind was the last created being of note on record, and so also, according to the evolutionists, the most recent newcomer on the scene.

So there is an obvious direction, which would imply intent; from inanimate elements to animate ones, simple systems to complex ones compiled of the simple ones, from the Singular come the many and diverse, through the rough edged imperfections of nature and its impulses comes the perfection of Jesus Christ's example of what the Father, in Whom all these things live and breathe and have their existence, expects from His children. Not the world's children, for a homo sapiens is only a collection of biological functions, but His children, meaning those whom He wills to awaken to human-being-hood (more than just the instinctual monkey-suit they are wearing). And it was all, is all, and will always be deliberate. And none of it has ever or will ever happen by chance. And never did a leaf or will a leaf fall from a tree, or the number of hairs on anyone's head be unknown to He in whom, by whom, through whom all these wonders come into, endure for a time, and then leave, existence. What it is, it was, and ever shall be.

Just because a homo sapiens named Charles Darwin was created, and was given the faculties and the revelation that would come to elucidate the process of creation, doesn't mean God would or could ever stop existing. It means that those predestined to only see the material, superficial workings of creation will barely be able to comprehend and prove those, so the odds of their coming to understand, know, or believe on He that is working invisibly behind the surface are slim and none. So, long answer made short, there is no actual competition between creationism and "Darwinism", just in the conceited minds that believe only one or the other can be true.

Well, what about Adam and Eve? Yes, they were real people, but so were the ones "from the world"(the tares)

You might notice that the bible follows a particular lineage of people, that many other people outside that particular family line neither know God nor are expected to, but are more or less just there to live their animal lives and be destroyed. Who is it Cain goes off and marries and has children with? Who does Seth end up producing descendants with? The other people of the world. All were and are created by God, but only some does He claim as His or offer to adopt as His. Even Jesus says "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours" in Jhn 17:9. So to whom, what, and where do the rest get claimed by? To the world, it's worldly nature, and its' inevitable fate. But do not automatically think 'Oh no! I'm just an animal, I guess much can't be expected of me'. If you end up being called to be more than animal, then you must instead "kill (deaden, deprive of power) the evil desire lurking in your members [those animal impulses and all that is earthly in you that is employed in sin]: sexual vice, impurity, sensual appetites, unholy desires, and all greed and covetousness, for that is idolatry (the deifying of self and other created things instead of God). Colossians 3:5 AMPC

Praise, Glory, and blessedness be to God in the highest, for He is all, does all, and wills all.
 

Jonaitis

Soli Deo Gloria
Jan 4, 2019
5,191
4,204
Wyoming
✟122,609.00
Country
United States
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
"And then there was evening and morning..." is mentioned after each day of creation in Genesis 1. Then in Genesis 5 we have a tight genealogy of each generation, Adam specifically living 930 years old.

Peter did not literally mean a day is a thousand years. In context, his statement referred to the coming of Christ can seem to delay, but to God it is on time.
 
Upvote 0

Roidecoeur78

This world is not my home.
Dec 14, 2018
238
153
Midwest
✟21,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"And then there was evening and morning..." is mentioned after each day of creation in Genesis 1. Then in Genesis 5 we have a tight genealogy of each generation, Adam specifically living 930 years old.

Peter did not literally mean a day is a thousand years. In context, his statement referred to the coming of Christ can seem to delay, but to God it is on time.
Oh right, but I thought it was clear I wasn't a literal-ist. With the point being that one is able to see the truth in both the allegory and the real world, if one doesn't turn either one into an idol.
 
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
1. A day to the eternal One is not a 24 hour earth day. It's as long as He decides it is, because a million years is no time at all to Someone that exists outside of time in an eternity of eternities.

"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."-2Peter3:8
And 1000 is likely used because it's a number that was near the upper limit of human understanding at the time of the epistle being written.

2. Evolution is the process of creation, and so creation is done through the process of elemental, and consequent biological, evolution.

***Run-on sentence warning***

3. The sequence of creation, as illustrated in Genesis, has more or less been verified by the scientific theory of evolution. (i.e. first a void with only a single Being, then space and elements, then environments of varying natures[wet, dry, hot,cold] then simple lives like bacteria and plants filling those places, then more complex lives created by compiling the preexisting simpler systems [grasses, to flowering plants, flowering plants to shrubs, shrubs to trees, etc], by this way every niche gets filled, the seas fill up with creatures that will become fish, fish become every type of fish according to the niche they're filling, some fish will lead to lungfish and mudskipper-types, that lead to amphibians, amphibians lead to reptiles, reptiles lead to both birds and small mammals, reptiles get as big as they will until God sends their walking papers in the form of a meteorite. The small and or airborne reptiles and mammals survive because they are more mobile, and require less sustenance to carry on their mojos. As the ecological state re-stabilizes they become every type of mammal, reptile, and bird, according to the ecological niche they're filling. Eventually a mammalian body currently called a homo sapiens is created, thus agreeing with Genesis that mankind was the last created being of note on record, and so also, according to the evolutionists, the most recent newcomer on the scene.

So there is an obvious direction, which would imply intent; from inanimate elements to animate ones, simple systems to complex ones compiled of the simple ones, from the Singular come the many and diverse, through the rough edged imperfections of nature and its impulses comes the perfection of Jesus Christ's example of what the Father, in Whom all these things live and breathe and have their existence, expects from His children. Not the world's children, for a homo sapiens is only a collection of biological functions, but His children, meaning those whom He wills to awaken to human-being-hood (more than just the instinctual monkey-suit they are wearing). And it was all, is all, and will always be deliberate. And none of it has ever or will ever happen by chance. And never did a leaf or will a leaf fall from a tree, or the number of hairs on anyone's head be unknown to He in whom, by whom, through whom all these wonders come into, endure for a time, and then leave, existence. What it is, it was, and ever shall be.

Just because a homo sapiens named Charles Darwin was created, and was given the faculties and the revelation that would come to elucidate the process of creation, doesn't mean God would or could ever stop existing. It means that those predestined to only see the material, superficial workings of creation will barely be able to comprehend and prove those, so the odds of their coming to understand, know, or believe on He that is working invisibly behind the surface are slim and none. So, long answer made short, there is no actual competition between creationism and "Darwinism", just in the conceited minds that believe only one or the other can be true.

Well, what about Adam and Eve? Yes, they were real people, but so were the ones "from the world"(the tares)

You might notice that the bible follows a particular lineage of people, that many other people outside that particular family line neither know God nor are expected to, but are more or less just there to live their animal lives and be destroyed. Who is it Cain goes off and marries and has children with? Who does Seth end up producing descendants with? The other people of the world. All were and are created by God, but only some does He claim as His or offer to adopt as His. Even Jesus says "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours" in Jhn 17:9. So to whom, what, and where do the rest get claimed by? To the world, it's worldly nature, and its' inevitable fate. But do not automatically think 'Oh no! I'm just an animal, I guess much can't be expected of me'. If you end up being called to be more than animal, then you must instead "kill (deaden, deprive of power) the evil desire lurking in your members [those animal impulses and all that is earthly in you that is employed in sin]: sexual vice, impurity, sensual appetites, unholy desires, and all greed and covetousness, for that is idolatry (the deifying of self and other created things instead of God). Colossians 3:5 AMPC

Praise, Glory, and blessedness be to God in the highest, for He is all, does all, and wills all.

Old secular saying: You can't have your cake and eat it too.
 
Upvote 0

Roidecoeur78

This world is not my home.
Dec 14, 2018
238
153
Midwest
✟21,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Old secular saying: You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Since there are those that take up in opposing camps, and say they are right while the other is wrong, while they exist in a world that behaves in a way that is easily explained by both ancient experience and modern understanding, it would appear that both of those camps are worshiping at the idol of their own understanding and eating the cake they also want to have (whether it be science or religion).

That being said, science can deal only in a person's direct relation to what is measurable while religion deals in a person's direct relation to He that is immeasurable. As such, all science is contained within Him and will only be an idol if one forgets that. But religion can be an idol if one just wants to believe they are in the right in relation to others.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Job 33:6
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Since there are those that take up in opposing camps, and say they are right while the other is wrong, while they exist in a world that behaves in a way that is easily explained by both ancient experience and modern understanding, it would appear that both of those camps are worshiping at the idol of their own understanding and eating the cake they also want to have (whether it be science or religion).

Either one believes the Holy Bible is Gods Word as His truth .... or not.

People believe whatever they want to believe, that's the free choice God gives everyone. Each of us are responsible and will have consequences one way or another for what they believe and Gods OK with that ... he created us that way ... individual choice and I'm glad He did.
 
Upvote 0

Roidecoeur78

This world is not my home.
Dec 14, 2018
238
153
Midwest
✟21,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Either one believes the Holy Bible is Gods Word as His truth .... or not.

People believe whatever they want to believe, that's the free choice God gives everyone. Each of us are responsible and will have consequences one way or another for what they believe and Gods OK with that ... he created us that way ... individual choice and I'm glad He did.
Yes, that is something I agree with. A person will only believe according to the measure of faith God grants them, some will not be given any and even demons believe the truth. James 2:19 It doesn't say people get to choose that or not though. It says Jesus knew beforehand who would believe and who wouldn't. But are you a literal-ist in the sense that you believe a seven headed dragon will be showing up at some point?

Even Christ said reading and believing in the scriptures doesn't save anyone. See John 5:39-40
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Yes, that is something I agree with. But are you a literal-ist in the sense that you believe a seven headed dragon will be showing up at some point?

Even Christ reading and believing in the scriptures doesn't save anyone. See John 5:39-40

But are you a literal-ist in the sense that you believe a seven headed dragon will be showing up at some point?

No I don't believe this .... some not all ... teachings in the bible are done through symbolism.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Roidecoeur78
Upvote 0

Roidecoeur78

This world is not my home.
Dec 14, 2018
238
153
Midwest
✟21,194.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
some not all ... teachings in the bible are done through symbolism.
Exactly, so, where is the line drawn between what you believe is meant figuratively and what is meant literally? Does that depend on, as you said, what you want to believe and what you don't want to believe? Does it offend your pride to admit you are an eternal soul that is in a temporary animal body?
 
Upvote 0

New Birth

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
584
199
41
Vicksburg
✟22,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oneness
Marital Status
Married
Are you taking the word death to mean the absence or cessation of biological function, or of being spiritually bound by sin? Because the bible doesn't use the word death in the scientific sense. In the bible, where Jesus says "let the dead bury the dead" he's obviously speaking of those that have an animal existence and nothing more, and He says it while He's offering to free someone from that state.

Are you asking whether there was sin or spiritual death back when there was nothing but microbes and trilobites? Because that would be an obvious "no". No point in making an offer of having a spiritual life until there is a being created that can host a spirit that is able to understand, recognize, and be willing to have, a personal relationship with his or her Creator.
Im speaking of cessation of a heart beat. The scripture says "for since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."
 
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

eleos1954

God is Love
Supporter
Nov 14, 2017
9,696
5,613
Utah
✟713,367.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Exactly, so, where is the line drawn between what you believe is meant figuratively and what is meant literally? Does that depend on, as you said, what you want to believe and what you don't want to believe? Does it offend your pride to admit you are an eternal soul that is in a temporary animal body?

Does it offend your pride to admit you are an eternal soul that is in a temporary animal body? You may believe this ... not me ... and why would I be offended by what you think? Think what you want and so will I ;o)

line drawn between what you believe is meant figuratively and what is meant literally?
There's not a line drawn per se.

First I look at the context of the scripture(s)

Also, depends on whether what being studied presents itself to be prophetic or not. Sometimes it's obvious ... some times not so much.

I run many many MANY word/word re-lated searches ... word and phrase searches across the entire bible and look for consistencies. Also check the original greek and hebrew using concordances.

I believe the bible interprets itself ... and I liken it to a huge multi- jig-saw puzzle .... it's a matter of searching out all the pieces and those pieces will eventually fit together to complete a picture or pictures(s).

783,137 words in the bible so thats how many pieces are in the puzzle ;o)

It's a lifetime commitment. Don't know if I'll live long enough to consume it all LOL

It's a journey and one I truly enjoy.
 
Upvote 0

New Birth

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2019
584
199
41
Vicksburg
✟22,877.00
Country
United States
Faith
Oneness
Marital Status
Married
If you have truly received the new birth, there is no mystery or fear of such a temporary death as that.

"Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell." Matthew 10:28

" and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death." Hebrews 2:15
Friend I think your missing my point. I am stating the model of evolution most have places "death" before human sin. When the bible says "death" came as a result of sin not before sin. My question simplified is do you believe death is a result of sin or was there death before sin? If death came as a result of sin then evolution can not be true. If death came before sin then the bible is not true.
 
Upvote 0

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,663
6,531
God's Earth
✟263,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Theistic evolutionists get a lot of flak on this forum. But for those who actually examine the scientific evidence, they realize that there are really only two possible options:

1. Deep time and evolution are true. The Bible passages that suggest they're not are meant to be read metaphorically.

2. God planted a false history in nature to make deep time and evolution seem to be true from any kind of examination, even though they're not.

I think #2 goes against God's character, so therefore I go for #1.
 
Upvote 0

St. Helens

I stand with Israel
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
CF Staff Trainer
Supporter
Jul 24, 2007
59,012
9,666
Lower Slower Minnesota
✟1,216,573.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-American-Solidarity
MOD HAT ON
241656_73a4b943f6c592cdf71a88c50d5eb4d8.jpg

MOD HAT OFF
 
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

dad

Undefeated!
Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,904
1,261
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
1. A day to the eternal One is not a 24 hour earth day. It's as long as He decides it is, because a million years is no time at all to Someone that exists outside of time in an eternity of eternities.
So when Jesus stayed dead for three days and nights this was actually...what...millions of years? It seems God knew what a day was.
"But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."-2Peter3:8
And 1000 is likely used because it's a number that was near the upper limit of human understanding at the time of the epistle being written.
You can prove this was the reason Peter said this...how?
2. Evolution is the process of creation, and so creation is done through the process of elemental, and consequent biological, evolution.
If a created bird evolved, then that is actually a process working on something created. Now if all you could see was the changes and didn't know where the bird came from, well, one might come up with such an idea, but that is religion not science.

3. The sequence of creation, as illustrated in Genesis, has more or less been verified by the scientific theory of evolution. (i.e. first a void with only a single Being, then space and elements, then environments of varying natures[wet, dry, hot,cold] then simple lives like bacteria and plants filling those places, then more complex lives created by compiling the preexisting simpler systems [grasses, to flowering plants, flowering plants to shrubs, shrubs to trees, etc], by this way every niche gets filled, the seas fill up with creatures that will become fish, fish become every type of fish according to the niche they're filling, some fish will lead to lungfish and mudskipper-types,
One problem is that the oceans are said to have come after the planet was here already over a long period of time. Nowhere does the bible mention simple bacteria, let alone that this was the first life made here! Nor is it science to claim that complex animals came from simpler ones! The bible does not say Adam came from compiled simple life either. God formed him from the dust of this earth.

that lead to amphibians, amphibians lead to reptiles, reptiles lead to both birds and small mammals, reptiles get as big as they will until God sends their walking papers in the form of a meteorite.
Total dream. Try and prove that religious nonsense and see.

The small and or airborne reptiles and mammals survive because they are more mobile, and require less sustenance to carry on their mojos. As the ecological state re-stabilizes they become every type of mammal, reptile, and bird, according to the ecological niche they're filling. Eventually a mammalian body currently called a homo sapiens is created, thus agreeing with Genesis that mankind was the last created being of note on record, and so also, according to the evolutionists, the most recent newcomer on the scene.
Pure fantasy.
So there is an obvious direction, which would imply intent; from inanimate elements to animate ones,
In your religion, yes there is obvious intent. In reality there is no such thing.

Just because a homo sapiens named Charles Darwin was created, and was given the faculties and the revelation that would come to elucidate the process of creation, doesn't mean God would or could ever stop existing.

Darwin was born of a woman, not created. His defunct delusions of course had no effect on God.

It means that those predestined to only see the material,
Pre destined? By what, a germ!? Ha.
So, long answer made short, there is no actual competition between creationism and "Darwinism",

Darwin cooked up some alternate story to creation. That puts his story as an enemy of God and creation. I assume a creationist is someone that believes God and that He did create? How would those folks not oppose some baseless lying fables that claim man was not created?
Who is it Cain goes off and marries and has children with? Who does Seth end up producing descendants with?

Since Eve was the mother of all, it would be the children of Adam and Eve anyone married. Just because some other folks were born also and spread out to another area does not make them aliens or people from a lost lagoon etc.
Even Jesus says "I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours" in Jhn 17:9. So to whom, what, and where do the rest get claimed by?
The ones that are given to Jesus are the ones that chose Jesus.
 
Upvote 0

Ohj1n37

Active Member
May 13, 2018
143
52
North Carolina
✟25,524.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
There are no known observable occurrences of a species gaining genetic information it did not already start with. The closest thing to new unique information is a mutation that duplicates genes. These types of mutations are not new or unique genetic information though. The argument is how can a organism become a more advanced organism if there is never any increase in unique genetic information?

Why would evolution be pushed so hard in school? It could be that Darwin's uncle who originally came up with the idea was quoted saying they needed to get God out of science.

Anyway I agree with genetic variability, adaptation, and breeding as all of the mentioned are observable. They may also be something that would be interesting to research.

I had a similar discussion here:

What Evolution fails to mention.

People who believe in evolution and are much more educated than I were unable to give an example of a species gaining genetic information it did not already start with. I would guess this is because observable science is contrary to their version of science.

The point is do not believe everything you are taught or told. Test it and see if it is truth. I recommend researching evolution while making sure to look at both sides of the argument.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,215
2,786
Hartford, Connecticut
✟292,946.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
There are no known observable occurrences of a species gaining genetic information it did not already start with. The closest thing to new unique information is a mutation that duplicates genes. These types of mutations are not new or unique genetic information though. The argument is how can a organism become a more advanced organism if there is never any increase in unique genetic information?

.

If we begin with a genetic sequence AAAA, then have a duplication AAAA AAAA, we have new genetic information that did not pre-exist. If we then have a point mutation AAAA AATA, we then have a brand new sequence introduced. AATA did not exist at the start. So how could this not be considered new or unique? AATA doesn't exist anywhere else, so it is unique. The quantity of genes has increased numerically, so this is an increase in genetic information, literally.

How can AATA not be considered unique, when only AAAA exists otherwise? How can it not be considered new, when only AAAA pre existed? How can it not be considered an increase in information, when quantitatively, the genes have doubled in number?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

Ohj1n37

Active Member
May 13, 2018
143
52
North Carolina
✟25,524.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
I apologize and should have better worded my first post. There are no known occurrences of a species becoming a new species by gaining information it did not otherwise start with.

Let me make sure I understand what you are saying. Please correct me if I am wrong. What if a section of genes gets duplicated and the duplicated section becomes altered? If this is what you are saying I too have thought this.

Here is what I used to address the argument in the thread I linked.

Do new functions arise by gene duplication? - creation.com

Here is an excerpt from the link.

"Evolution by gene duplication predicts a proportional increase in genome size with organism complexity but this is contradicted by the evidence. It is not genome size but intergenic regulatory sequences and gene regulation hierarchies that determine complexity. Gene regulation networks are irreducibly complex and constitute an insurmountable barrier for the theory."

From what I can gather it is a quality versus quantity type of deal.

I was hoping others could enlighten me by giving an example of an evolutionary process that has created new genetic information leading to the creation of another species. Evolution is suppose to explain how life went from single celled organisms to creatures around us today. The only answer I got was two different people citing the cabbage radish hybrid. I do not believe hybridization is a valid answer and if it is the only answer it would seem we are is scraping the bottom of the barrel. All this and the theory was published as On the Origin of Species.
 
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