Evolution in any form in the Bible?

God made it very clear how he made the earth:

1. He created the earth by his word.

2. When he spoke it it happened.

3. He created it in 6 days that consisted of an evening and a morning.

4. He created man in His image.

5. He created every plant, animal, and man to reproduce after its kind.

6. He created Adam from the dust of the ground and Eve from Adam.


Pretty specific it is.

 

I agree, concur, toss in my vote, accept, and otherwise hobb-nobb with the above answer :laugh:

 

Yes, a species will "adapt" to its environment and make minor changes to survive, but there is no such thing as completely changing from one species to something entirely different--except maybe through procreation. Even then, the offspring won't be an"entirely" new species, but it will have qualities of both its parents.

Yes, there are similarities between apes and humans (and maybe between other species, but after all, we do all have the same Designer and Builder.

 

Most who buy into theistic evolution also deny the bodily resurrection, and thus, are not really Christians at all. Jim is an exception, though, and I'm glad he is inconsistent on this point, at least.

 

You are wrong MP. I said "Also if one rationally believes in evolution they have to believe in the eternity of matter/energy." That statement is absolutely true That is unless you are one of those kooky physicists who believe in the spontaneous creation of the universe from nothing but the mathematics of quantum physics and relativity theory [page 206, Vol. 2 and page 16, Vol. 3 of The Modern Creation Trilogy by Henry M. and John D. Morris].

 

What a total misunderstanding of science, OR. There is no correlation between the origin of the cosmos, and biological evolution. In fact, neither is abiogenesis.

I am not saying this is my position, but you could believe matter / energy / time / space was created during a big bang event or not...yet it would not have any bearing on biological evolution.

Also, before you declare me wrong, remember the prime rule of me...I am ALWAYS right! :thumbsup:

 

Well MP you are wrong for the first time I am sure. Matter/energy were not created during the big bang. That concept assumes a particle of infinite mass exploded resulting in the universe.:sleeping_2: :sleeping_2:

 

This is really where I'm at too. Well said.:thumbsup:

That said I also believe in an (really) old earth. It is too much, imho, to suggest that all of this happened in around 8,000 years. Just doesn't seem plausible with the observable evidences in science.

One thing I always keep in mind in these conversations, as well as with humanistic evolutionists, is that there is no evidence for cosmological evolutionism or creationism. They are both points of faith.

 

What is a wizard in the context of your above statement?

 

There is nothing about scripture that is simply faith. It has been proven by evidence to be inerrant, infallible, and completely reliable. Just as we know that Christ rose from the dead also know that God created all things. The word of God is our evidence.

 

I believe God created earth with age built in, just like he created man with age already built in. In the same way Adam was a "newborn", yet appeared to be an adult capable of walking, talking, feeding himself, naming animals, etc., there is no reason to believe on day 1, the earth couldn't have appeard to be billions of years old. It doesn't mean it is, it just appeared to be.

Many of the layers used by scientists to come up with an age are also a result of the flood, so there is no accuracy there in determining age. I have seen a fossil of a worm imbedded in 3 such layers, and when the layers were shown without the fossil to evolutionists, they maintained each layer was hundreds of thousands of years old...until the worm is shown. That was one old worm!

 

That is because they predetermined what the age of the layers were and now when they find anything in their predetermined layers they date it by those layers.

 

Sure, that is a perfectly acceptable position to take imho.:saint:

While I hesitate to get into a discussion on the philosophy of science and, more pointedly, about the epistemological issues involved with having a "scientific method" that doesn't quite exists, I will agree that the hydro-physical properties of the worldwide Flood would have exerted amazing amounts of pressure on the globe. These pressures would have (over the course of the year that the earth was covered in water) formed a new globe that would have been mightily different from before.

As well with the changing nature of the environment from the ante-dilluvian tropical paradise the world existed in to the more geographically dictated climates we know today there would have been immense micro-evolutionary change in animal and vegetation.

That said, the observable issues in science (I stipulate in my philosophy of science lectures that science is bound by observation and any other speculative ventures from science are no more than fanciful journeys) still make many wonder if this whole thing is older than just 8,000 years.

I'll suggest it is just as biblical to suggest that all of this stuff is older than 8,000 years. Many scholars who were a whole lot smarter than I and had a better connection with God than I agree with that point.

Maybe this whole this is just a faith-conversation.:thumbs:

 

I suggest you are wrong.

Many scholars smarter than me disagree with that point!

 

Are you stating that that the earth cannot be more than a few thousand years old?

 

If you follow the timeline backwards from Christ's birth...no it cannot.

 

Not only the earth but the universe. The Bible as well as many scientists agree with me. It is ridiculous that so many professing Christians have fallen for the myth of evolution.

 

Since when did believing in creation require a belief in an earth that is only a few thousand years old? I am a creationist but I don't see where that requires a very, very young earth.

I think the Biblical requirement is to have faith in God as our Creator, not to have faith in a timeline or a particular age of the earth or the universe.

 

KenH, why am I almost always in agreement with you?:thumbs: :thumbs:

http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/notable_leaders/index.shtml