Is Darwin's Theory of Evolution True? Part Three

  • Thread starter Thread starter Techno2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
If billions of years of evolution is the truth, I wonder why God went out his way to describe the opposite - creation over six days - in the Scriptures. The Lord doesn’t drop the slightest hint that suggests evolution.
 
Last edited:
There’s a school of thought that says all land was gathered in one mass before the Flood, and that the land was “divided” until the time of “Peleg”, 750 years after Noah’s flood.
 
Doesn’t the Scripture say that Adam started drinking beer almost immediately?
 
I’m sorry if my words to you (post #1223) were a bit harsh. Maybe I drank too much coffee that day. What I need to do is learn to be more diplomatic.
 
openmind77 said:
Just a small correction - brahman is not a person and can not be sitting on a lotus. However, Brahma is indeed the God of creation and does emerge from a lotus. Brahma and brahman are quite different.
Click to expand...
Brahma, the God of creation, emerged from a lotus? Who created the lotus?
 
benjamin1973 said:
What if the Biblical days are evolutionary epochs?
Click to expand...
In Exodus 20:8-11, God directly compares six literal days of human labour to the six days of creation. This suggests the six days of creation were literally of 24-hours duration each.
 
Glark said:
40.png
benjamin1973:
It has the purpose of understanding how animals of different species are related
Click to expand...
But “related” you mean the theory that all creatures share a common ancestor. How is this theory useful?
Click to expand...
I suppose it’s not surprising in a religious forum that you’re viewing things like evolution in that perspective. But while evolutionists make philosophical inferences consistent with their own world views, those inferences aren’t really that important to other aspects of work in evolution.

It is true that abiogenesis hasn’t been achieved yet, despite much effort. But let’s say we could completely fabricate DNA, or find a way to force a soup of molecules to develop single-celled organisms. What would this mean?

In my opinion, not that much. From a religious perspective, it would just mean that God has been so kind as to set up a Universe which supports life much more easily than we knew. It would mean that we’ve been given so much free will that we can even choose what new life forms we might choose to bring into the world.

In other words, even if abiogensis and all of evolution could be confirmed, 100%, I really don’t think it would bring us closer to understanding the more essential questions which God answers: like why is there anything rather than just nothing? How can “stuff” be conscious? and so on.
 
Every ancient culture has a global flood story, and there is even some evidence about massive flooding events in early agricultural human regions.

So my hunch, and it’s just a hunch, is that the writer has combined some cultural memory with ideas about faith and obedience in God.

As for the story being a historical truth, that seems pretty unlikely to me. The thing about the flood and building a boat to prepare-- okay, I’m down with that. The thing about every (EVERY!) species on Earth getting marched in pairs onto a giant boat for their preservation. . . well, this seems like a very strange way to go about doing things. I mean. . . why would you need to save them at all, since God can literally just snap his fingers and have them right back in place once the flood subsides?

The logic of this story, as a historical truth, is just so absurd that I’d need really compelling reasons to believe it to be intended in that light.
 
Last edited:
Glark said:
40.png
openmind77:
Just a small correction - brahman is not a person and can not be sitting on a lotus. However, Brahma is indeed the God of creation and does emerge from a lotus. Brahma and brahman are quite different.
Click to expand...
Brahma, the God of creation, emerged from a lotus? Who created the lotus?
Click to expand...
The lotus plant appears from Vishnu’s navel while he is lying reclined on the endless, multi headed serpent. The universe is essentially Vishnu’s dream while he is sleeping. Some believe that the serpent Sesha is made up of the souls of people who did not make it to liberation (who were left behind) in the last incarnation of the world. Of course, this is a myth - nobody believes there is an actual lotus. Hindus usually have no problem with the theory of evolution - that is the way the Gods create.
 
Last edited:
buffalo said:
“Adam is created to work the garden and care for it (Genesis 2:15). He then names the animals (Genesis 2:19, 20). This is not something that an infant could do.”

“Adam and Eve are to “rule over” the earth (Genesis 1:28, 29). Such responsibility implies maturity.”

“Eve is presented to Adam as a wife (Genesis 2:24). They are to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28). For them to consummate their marriage and have children would require both of them to be in their age of physical maturity. At the very least, this means what the modern world would call “adolescents.” However, in ancient times, if you were old enough to have children, you were old enough to get married.

Adam is instructed not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Genesis 2:16, 17). Either God then instructed Eve or Adam passed this on to Eve because she knows it in chapter 3 (and expands it).1 When they eat from the forbidden tree, they are treated as accountable for their actions (Genesis 3:7-24). While the age of accountability varies from person to person, teens and adolescents are usually seen as accountable.”
Click to expand...
Sure all those things indicate maturity, but not that they arrived that way, there is no indication that this happened immediately after they were created. It actually bends the rules of science and common sense to a point where it sounds like a myth when you claim they come fully formed, when they are pretty much the only ones to break the pattern of growth from a fetus.

To put it plainly, Genesis makes no account of the time in between creation and all those other recorded acts. It didn’t say how long it was from creation to the “story” of the garden.
 
Glark said:
I think in your zeal and excitement you have neglected something - the context
Click to expand...
Lest I leave out the context, I’ll put the whole context in
But merciless wrath assailed the wicked until the end, for God knew beforehand what they were yet to do: That though they themselves had agreed to the departure and had anxiously sent them on their way, they would regret it and pursue them.For while they were still engaged in funeral rites and mourning at the burials of the dead, They adopted another senseless plan: those whom they had driven out with entreaties they now pursued as fugitives. For a compulsion appropriate to this ending drew them on, and made them forget what had befallen them, That they might complete the torments of their punishment, and your people might experience a glorious journey while those others met an extraordinary death. For all creation, in its several kinds, was being made over anew, serving your commands, that your children might be preserved unharmed. The cloud overshadowed their camp; and out of what had been water, dry land was seen emerging: Out of the Red Sea an unimpeded road, and a grassy plain out of the mighty flood. Over this crossed the whole nation sheltered by your hand, and they beheld stupendous wonders. For they ranged about like horses, and leapt like lambs, praising you, LORD, their deliverer. For they were still mindful of what had happened in their sojourn: how instead of the young of animals the land brought forth gnats, and instead of fishes the river swarmed with countless frogs. And later they saw also a new kind of bird when, prompted by desire, they asked for pleasant foods; For to appease them quail came to them from the sea. And the punishments came upon the sinners not without forewarnings from the violence of the thunderbolts. For they justly suffered for their own misdeeds, since they treated their guests with the more grievous hatred. For those others did not receive unfamiliar visitors, but these were enslaving beneficent guests. And not that only; but what punishment was to be theirs since they received strangers unwillingly! Yet these, after welcoming them with festivities, oppressed with awful toils those who had shared with them the same rights. And they were struck with blindness,* as those others had been at the doors of the righteous man— When, surrounded by yawning darkness, each sought the entrance of his own door.l 18 For the elements, in ever-changing harmony, like strings of the harp, produce new melody, while the flow of music steadily persists. And this can be perceived exactly from a review of what took place. 19 For land creatures were changed into water creatures, and those that swam went over on land. Fire in water maintained its own strength,and water forgot its quenching nature; Flames, by contrast, neither consumed the flesh of the perishable animals that went about in them, nor melted the icelike, quick-melting kind of ambrosial food. For every way, LORD! you magnified and glorified your people; unfailing, you stood by them in every time and circumstance.
Click to expand...
 
Glark said:
I think in your zeal and excitement you have neglected something - the context
Click to expand...
Continued from last post…

Now, notice that nothing gets changed back to its original form or function.

Your quote of changing back happens prior to the changes and indeed talks about another circumstance, not about those which were evolved.

Fire and water can be changed in their properties at that location under certain circumstances, we don’t know that this was a global phenomenon. It may be that fire and water still have those properties somewhere. Nevertheless, it has little to do with the creatures being changed in their species.

At the very least, this is the strongest Biblical proof that God did change species into other species, and refutes the claim that all creatures were the same from the beginning and continued that way without any change. Again as in Genesis, we don’t have a timeframe, but it seems it was witnessed within a generation.

God is the God of evolution.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top