ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Evolution And The Bible

Evolution, can it stand along side of scripture?

Moderator - Evolution, can it stand along the side of science? No because it is a fairytale.

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---Joe on 11/14/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (13)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog

God made all things in their own kinds...animals, plants and humans...they cannot mutate into another species they are separate. Humans were created in God's image, nothing else on earth was created claim that humans are descended from animals is to abuse God.
---Margaret on 12/31/07

The last few post are rhetorical and do not deal with evidence (factual reality) I will not go against the grain but will ask my own rhetorical questions.

Does natural selection nessesarly contradict scripture?

Is evolution really a prescription for atheism?

Why when objective evidence, such as 'facts' are presented do fundamentalist always cut and run from the debate?
---MikeM on 12/30/07

Ask yourself what you believe. Do you believe the Bible? Are you willing to let it be the Word of God to you? Remember Eve took the word of the serpent which directly contradicted what God had said--what have been the results of that choice? When you decide who you will believe--man or God, then you have your answer. God makes no attempt to prove truth, He reveals truth. In the Bible we have a divinely inspired record of the history of the world, of sin, and of redemption--God's plan of restoration.
---Wayne87 on 12/29/07

Christianity is a religion believing in a transcendent Creator-God. Evolution is a religion believing in transcendent time and chance. It is not science. Just because people call their belief system science does not make it science. Are all those "scientists" wrong? Estimates are that 9 billion people died in the flood in Noah's day. All 9 billion were wrong. And no, all scientists do not believe in evolution.
---Rick on 4/10/07

I agree with Moderator. Why should we be concerned with if evolution can stand with scripture, when it can not even stand along side of science itself.
---Ben on 2/21/07

virginia; The 'machines' of cells is an implication, it presupposes nothing pro.anti evolution. Darwin was a religious man, in origen of Species, he constantly refered to 'the Creator.' Darwin never said 'man evolved from apes'-where do you get that from?
---MikeM on 12/2/06

Just yesterday I saw science program on TV explaining and showing the 'machines' of cells. Their conclusion was that these complex 'machines' that make things work could not have been by random chance as Darwin once thought. That there MUST have been divine intelligence to create them.
Just an aside: If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes?
---Virginia on 12/2/06

Absolutely not. How can man compare his work with the divine work of God? Finite being is so gullible and think he can outdo God in some scientific or whatever way is utter rubbish. That the world is made with a big bang theory? Get real. Yes, man uses his brain well only sometimes way over the mark then think hes God.
---bob on 11/30/06

To the Moderator - Evolution is considered part of the sciences!
---ShawnM.T. on 11/30/06

Part 1-They can not be along side one another because they are two sides of the same coin. Scriptures is creation of all things, written by divinely inspired men. Evolution is the opposite of creation; it is the random evolving of things, written from the worlds point of view.
---ShawnM.T. on 11/30/06

. Part 2- The sciences dill in facts but the scriptures is the truth. God created ALL THINGS. These things are divinely revealed to men. But when man seeks to discover them under his own worldly strength he only comes up with facts. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. Matt. 24: 35.
---ShawnM.T. on 11/30/06

Allele frequency change cannot be circumscribed within a species. diversity of life-natural selection. The appearance of new adaptations AND the appearance of new species are facts, as the evidence points from both biological and the palentological. (In depth posts on this subject seldom seem to be posted) Evolutionary biology goes speculate on the origins of life, and it does not, to my understanding presuppose the supernatural.
---MikeM on 11/25/06

Genetic drift I know something about. There is ample evidence, morphological, genetic, of macro-evolution. There is GREAT diversity of opinion in the scientific community on the specific mechanisms, that does no implication of weakness, as a fundamentalist would state. The mechanism of tides were not fully explainable by naciesent science, leading the then RCC-fundamentalist to attack science as being anti-God for being unable to fully explain the mechanisms of tides.
---MikeM on 11/25/06

There are constraints on change. The notion that phylogeny is controlled by ontogeny, for example is long abandoned. What is known is phylogenetic branches (through genetic drift) become less broad over time, but there no limits to change. It's only rhetoric to insist that we don't know its so. Life did evolve and there aren't set limits to change. No "alternatives" in science classrooms unless they are scientific ones. To do otherwise is to deny there is such a thing as science.
---MikeM on 11/25/06

MikeM: It appears to me that Allele frequencies are simply dealing with the statistics of natural variation within the DNA of a given species. Studies of mutations, on the other hand, have all concluded that the creatures with mutated DNA are less viable than normal ones, and are "naturally selected" out. Thus proving that mutations cause genetic flow in the direction of the norm and uphold the sanctity of the species - opposite of the direction Evolution would predict.
---jerry6593 on 11/25/06

I suggest a study of Allele frequencies. Without variation (which arises from mutations of DNA molecules to produce new alleles) natural selection would have nothing on which to act. The inference is clear, can you deny it?
---MikeM on 11/23/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting

Whenever I have 'gone into depth' trying to answer your question what I try to post is not posted. I suppose (they) feel its to jargonistic and too off center from the purpose of these blogs. Several have not been posted-Yes, that must be what it must be.
---MikeM on 11/23/06

Mikie-1: I haven't bailed, just busy. Nice try with your chicken-egg deflection, but you still haven't addressed the core issue. Evolution rest upon the assumptions of random chance and lots of time. The simplest bacteria known contains over 3x10^6 nucleotides, all in precise order. Random combination of all the proper chemicals (given that they were all present), into this order within 5 billion years is mathematically impossible (probability < 1 in 10^50).
---jerry6593 on 11/22/06

Mikie-2: But even if it did form, it would be useless without a decoding machine. The decoding machine is a protein that is also quite complex. Its probability of simulatneous occurance in a window within the 5 B years is also impossible. But, the instructions for the manufacture of this decoding protein are in the genome itself. How can a thing read instructions to make itself? And you thought the chicken-egg was a conundrum.
---jerry6593 on 11/22/06

As stated, all would bail.
---MikeM on 11/20/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing

MikeM,,your mystake.Let me re-phrase it.Believers in GODS Word know which came first.
---JIM on 11/20/06

greetings.Which one became into existance(materialized) before the other,the sun(Chicken) or the earth(egg)?
---earl on 11/17/06

The Internet is not mentioned in the bible, nor even electricity
These blogs must all be a figment of our imaginations.
---AlanUK_quent5969 on 11/16/06

Evolution and Scripture are like oil and water, they don't mix. No where in scripture does it talk about evolution. Evolution was invented, creation was created by a Holy God who said, "Let there be light, and there was light." Here is my definition of Evolution: In the beginning GOD.Period.
---Donna9759 on 11/16/06

Shop For Church Furniture

Jim; I did not know 'Everyone knows GOD CREATED the chicken first'-A very profound response. I note my response to jerry was not posted.
---MikeM on 11/16/06

MikeM...There is no such question as the chicken/egg. Everyone knows GOD CREATED the chicken first.
---JIM on 11/16/06

**Chlorophyl-is the photo-syn-'thesis' mechanism for life of plant systems.**

Actually, chlorophyl is the catylist. Photosynthesis is itself the mechanism.
---Jack on 11/16/06

God is not in any way excluded from any aspect of the evolutionary process. "He marks the sparrows fall." Remember, there are two creation stories between Gen 1 and 2. Again,

I see no posts on this thread refering to objective evidence, evidence which is ignored, denied again and again. It is oNLY the fundamentalist that sees conflict between evolution and scripture. What I also note is the credible scientist involved in intelligent design, like Dr. Behe are non-fundamentalist.
---MikeM on 11/16/06

Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service

Jerry is trying to turn this into a chicken/egg question. Perhaps he sees it as a confounding factor in inferring evolutionary phylogenetic trees? The mechanism of transfer is not completly understood, therefore it leaves open a gap between theory and fact- to exploit. Science has always been a constant flight from superstition, it should not be one from God, as Jerry sees it. i suspect no mattere what I write, no matter what infromation I post Jerry will repeat the same question again and again.
---MikeM on 11/15/06

earl....GODS brightness was the light to bring forth grass and trees.
---JIM on 11/15/06

**This view contradicts the Bible that ascribes to God an active role in all aspects of creation.**

Is there any reason why God can't have an active role in evolution?

Remember, God neither thinks nor sees things the same way that you do.
---Jack on 11/15/06

Greetings.p1.Evolution is a rule of life development.Mortal man is not an evolutionary accident.The peocess of evolution is orderly and controlled.The development of higher organisms from lower groupings of life is not accidental.Chlorophyl-is the photo-syn-'thesis' mechanism for life of plant systems.The sun must be present to trigger this action for plant survival and reproduction.
---earl on 11/15/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements

Greetings.p2.cont.'Gene'sis.- day 3.Let earth bring fourth grass and trees,etc.'Gene'sis.-Day 4.Greater light to rule the day,etc.Photosynthesis was 'not'active on day three.The earth ,on day 3 was unable to bring fourth grass and trees and no reproduction occured.Is this not common knowledge?
---earl on 11/15/06

Ramon-2: This is equivalent to millions of years of human generations. The net result - NOT ONE species or even beneficial change in thousands of generations. The obvious conclusion, according to the scientific method, is that Evolution is a false theory - it doesn't work.
---jerry6593 on 11/15/06

Ramon-1: I agree with your comments with the exception of your ststement that no Evolutionary experiments have been conducted. Many have, but all with zero success. The fruit fly, for example, which produces a new generation in a few hours, has undergone mutational experiments for over 80 years in the hope of creating a new species according to the Evolutionary hypothesis.
---jerry6593 on 11/15/06

Mike M: You're awake! What's the answer to my question?

"In the origin of life, which came first, the DNA code or the code-decyphering mechanism?"
---jerry6593 on 11/15/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services

Some excellent replies, I'm excited to see that at least the majority believes that the bible is the final authority when it comes to explaining our origin. I myself work for Answers in Genesis, check us out.
---Joe on 11/15/06

Tony, you're right about human footprints inside dinosaur prints. I was a new born again christian in 1983, living in Pittsburgh PA,recently graduated from college, studied evolution. As a new christian I prayed to God about this issue and what was truth. Within a few hours I had an invite to view a dislay nearby with, you guessed, human prints inside dinosaurs. Also became aware of major findings in Texas, abandoned because of abrupt cut off of funds when evidence did not support evolution.
---Christina on 11/14/06

Joe.#6This view adopts most of the conclusions of naturalistic evolution, adding only that God is responsible for starting the evolutionary process. This view contradicts the Bible that ascribes to God an active role in all aspects of creation. For example, every main verb in Gen 1 has God as its subject, with the exceptions:

A) Gen 1:12 (which fulfills the command of God in v.11), and B) the recurring phrase "And the evening and the morning were"(vv.5b, 8,13,19,23,31b).
---Ramon on 11/14/06

In reality true science and Biblical revelation are not contradictory, but compatible. The American Scientifc Affiliation (ASA) directory lists the names of hundreds of scientists, scholars, professors, doctors, etc, who do not believe the theories of evolution, but believe that God as the supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created humanity.
---Ramon on 11/14/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores

#2Joe. The Mod made a excellent point. Proponents of evolution claim to have scientific data that supports their hyponthesis.

The teachings of evolution is not truly scientific. The scientific method requires that all conclusions be based on indisputable evidence gathered from experiments that can be duplicated in any laboratory. No experiments, however, have been or can be devised to test and substantiate the assumptions of this world view about the origin of matter.
---Ramon on 11/14/06

Joe.#3 Nor is there any concrete evidence of the gradual development of living beings from their simplest to their most complex form. Evolution is a hypothesis without scientific "evidence"; to accept it one must have faith in a human theory!.

It is noteworthy that some scholars, though not professing to be Christians, do not believe that it is possible mathematically for evolution to develop as is commonly supposed.
---Ramon on 11/14/06

Joe.#4 In contrast to the theory of evolution, the faith of God's people is in the Lord and His inspired Word that reveals Him to be the source and origin of all that exists (Heb 11:3). Thus, for a Christian who accept this human "idea" its not a Christian at all!.

It is undeniable that change and development within various species of living things has and does occur. Some varieties of species are becoming extinct; occasionally we see new strains forming within species.
---Ramon on 11/14/06

Joe.#5 But there is no evidence, not even in the geologic record, which supports the theory that one kind of living thing ever evolved from another kind. Rather, existing evidence supports the Bible's declaration that God created each living creature "after their kind" (Gen 1:21, 24-25).

Bible-believing Christians must also reject the mixed hypothesis called "theistic evolution".
---Ramon on 11/14/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training

Tony; Human footprints with dinosaura? That I would like to see! DNA blueprinting, mitochondrial DNA, palentological evidence confirm Natural selection. I have no idea how science threatens belief in the Bible. The presupposition that science conflicts with the Bible is a false dictomoney.
---MikeM on 11/14/06

Just a thought...Creation in the bible was pre fall. could it be that evolution did take place during that time, then after the fall things fell apart. which would explain the degrading mutations of today? why haven't I heard anything about this in creation or evolution?
---Jared on 11/14/06

tony...Your right..Dr.Kent Hovind is the man!Going to see him speak in May 07 here in Texas.Also,Moderator you couldn't of said it any better.It is a fairytale.
---JIM on 11/14/06

What I note on this subject is that those who oppose evolution do so based ONLY on emotion. Those who say the Bible ans science are in opposition know little of the Bible and nothing of science. God did not endow us with a mind then ask us to forgo its use. My education, my job is in the hard sciences and I see no conflict between science and the Bible, and millions of other Christians see no conflict.
---MikeM on 11/14/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Software

As to Hovind, mentioned earlier, on November 2, 2006, Kent Hovind and his wife, Jo, were found guilty by a jury in Federal court in Pensacola, Florida of numerous federal tax and tax-related offenses. Hovind is currently in prison, awaiting sentencing on January 9, 2007. He has been ordered to forfeit $430,400 and faces a maximum of 288 years in prison.[5][6]

Creationism, or its promoters are not doing very well.
---MikeM on 11/14/06

some hebrew scholars think so. they look at the progressive creationism and say that it is a symbolic representation of evolution in primitive minds. I have often thought of that,and imagine in about 400 years when our offspring will look at this debate and see it as a bunch of squabling.
---Jared on 11/14/06

Science will do it's thing and it may or may not be in line with the bible, I think it is not wrong to look into our orgins because it may give answers that can help many people. But I think we need to remember the main point of the creation story. God Gives purpose and meaning to our lives. This is the main point.
Personally I beleive that there is a progressive creationism, Not literal 24 hour days but that's just me, I'm probably wrong but so might be everyone else.
---Jared on 11/14/06

no it can't. and the moderator pegged it. it's not even scientifically proven. Dr. Kent Hovind does research and spends his time disproving this theory. that's exactly what it is, a theory. did you know that they found human foot prints in dinosaur foot prints. this proves that they coexisted. the text books in school are full of outdated matterial that has been proven to be wrong. they don't change them because that would cost money.
---tony on 11/14/06

Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising

I agree with the Moderator.
---laure5759 on 11/14/06

Isn't it interesting that evolution can't be proven or recreated in a controlled environment but is taught in schools as fact?

If it were demanded that equal play be given creationism without prejudice I bet they'd scrap the subject and stop trying to teach the origin of man.
---Pharisee on 11/14/06

Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.