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

Evolution Among Christians

Why is Evolution popular among some Christians?

Join Our Free Penpals and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 1/16/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



Warwick, one thing I do not agree is what you said on 1/21/11. You took the day you understand made it law. To the point of someone not been saved for not understanding the day. Since Genesis does not give every detail. The first two passages could mean a lot of things. Other passages concerning salvation have clearer meanings, so to say they will not understand salvation is wrong. I believe it is enough to say that a day is a day in Genesis.
I know you are not known to throw the Sabbath Day at everyone as Jerry does, When Jerry speaks of the days of creation he is leading you to the Saturday Sabbath. Here you supply the meaning of day and he in turn supplies the Sabbath.
---Mark_V. on 1/24/11


James I have studied it, and have discussed it with Hebrew speakers. All my research says that Yom in Genesis 1:5 defines an ordinary earth-rotation day. Biblical dictionaries agree.

This and only this fits with Exodus 20:8-11, and 31:14-17. The other ideas don't.

For example the standard Hebrew lexicon indicates Genesis 1:5 as a 'day of 24 hours.'

Oxford Hebrew scholar James Barr (a liberal who does not accept Genesis as historical reality) is in print as saying whoever wrote the creation epic meant the days to be 24 hours.

Those who will not accept this are ignoring what Scripture says, and the rules of grammar, in preference to the evolutionary/long-ages opinions of falible men.
---Warwick on 1/24/11


Warwick: We are still left with the prime question unanswered. Why do these people who claim to believe the Bible fight so hard for a paradigm that contradicts it? Throughout the Bible, the six-day creation, seventh day of rest is given as a sign of the one, true Creator God in contradistinction to the false, impotent idols of the heathens. Nowhere does the Bible even hint of long age species development.

One can only conclude that these misguided folks want to keep one foot in the world so as not to appear foolish to worldly academics. But how must they appear to heavenly intelligences?
---jerry6593 on 1/24/11


Strongaxe have a look at Genesis ch. 1, and Exodus 20:8-11 and 31:14-17 and show me where there is any suggestion that the six days of creation vs the six days of work are not all the same length. Will you do that for me?

---Warwick on 1/23/11


Warwick: Have you actually studied the meaining of hthe Hebre 'yom' or 'yhom'?

When I look in historical sites, the information in very uncertain
---James on 1/23/11




\\In the first two days, there WAS no sun to make such measurements. I am not saying the first two days were NOT 24 hours - just we have no way to know.
---StrongAxe on 1/23/11\\

Point I've been trying to get across.
---Cluny on 1/23/11


\\It's not uncommon for one word in the original language to be the equivalent of two different words in the receptor language.\\

The tongue of a human, shoe, or wagon are three different things denotated by the same word.

Sole can be the bottom of your shoe or a fish.

GLOSSA in Greek can be the tongue of a person, a language, or a fish as well.
---Cluny on 1/23/11


\\ Why the KJV translates the same word two different words in the same verse is a mystery.\\

That's just the way it is when translating from one language to another.

It's not uncommon for one word in the original language to be the equivalent of two different words in the receptor language.

For example, I learned that a Mexican song, "Yo vivo in mi bao", while it literally means, "I live in my bathroom," is an idiom for "My life is going down the toilet."
---Cluny on 1/23/11


Warwick:

Yet again, you read "c24hr days" into the text, when there is nothing whatsoever in the text that says or implies this.

Yes, one could infer "ordinary" days. But what does that mean?

In our present day (and, in fact, every day in the Bible except the first few), a day is measured by the position of the sun in the sky. This just happens to be approximately 24 hours (with one exception - the day where God stopped the sun over Gibeon for Joshua's sake). Note: 24 hours is NOT a definition of a day, just an observable phenomemon based on the sun.

In the first two days, there WAS no sun to make such measurements. I am not saying the first two days were NOT 24 hours - just we have no way to know.
---StrongAxe on 1/23/11


\\I provided this because it does show that God's six days of creation are ordinary c24hr days.\\

Does it?

Or is the seven day week rather a metaphor or image of the stages of Creation?
---Cluny on 1/23/11




Strongaxe Gods inscribed words (Exodus 20:8-11) do say ....Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day..

I provided this because it does show that God's six days of creation are ordinary c24hr days. To say that the six days of vs.9 are not the same length as the six days of vs. 11 is nonsensical, making language meaningless.
---Warwick on 1/23/11


Steve, read Job 40:15-24 carefully and tell me what living animal is described there. None! He has a tail like a cedar tree. The middle-eastern cedar (e.g. Cedars of Lebanon) is a tall large tree. What animal had such a large tail? Only a dinosaur.

He cannot be captured, but there is no animal alive today which even hunters with primitive tools cannot capture.

From my long experience I am convinced that the only reason some Christians will not accept Behemoth as what we call a dinosaur is because they have been influenced by evolution/long-ages beliefs. They cannot accept the obvious because their evolutionary view says dinosaurs became extinct 60+ million years ago.
---Warwick on 1/23/11


ChristiaNet notwithstanding, plants are indeed alive and even have blood. Ever cut one open? But, the blood is not generally red. It is more likely clear, white or green. It is interesting that the molecular structure of chlorophyll differs from that of hemoglobin by only one atom (iron for hemoglobin and magnesium for chlorophyll).
---jerry6593 on 1/23/11


Warwick, I completely agree with you for many reasons about creation. First of all God does not give every detail about how everything came to be, but what He does give us are few details concerning creation and those details are all God wanted to give. If He had given every detail of just Genesis there would be thousands of books to read. There is many questions people have that are not detailed. Example, God spoke and it was done, so why did it take a whole day for the heavens and the stars, moon and sun to be created? Did He speak it into creation in a whole day? To speak and it is done is suddenly. So every detail is not given, but what is given is for us to understand. One day He said, should be one Day.
---Mark_V. on 1/23/11


Warwick 2: in verse 11 God speaks and says, Let the earth bring forth grass in the herb that yields see etc. All of this He says "He saw that it was good" that happened in 1 day. Just think the grass grew and gave seed and all in one day. With God everything came to be as He spoke. He gave us details of it been one day. He didn't intend for believers of His Word to question how and why He did what He did, only that He did. Again, if He wanted to give every detail He would have. What He said has a purpose He wanted to convey. Not only that He rested on the Seventh day, but what He did in six days. Another thing I wanted to say is that a day does not have 24 complete hours. The reason we have a leap year.
---Mark_V. on 1/23/11


As has been pointed Scripture does not endow plant life with 'nepesh' which scientists refer to as sentience or more commonly consciousness. Plants are nonetheless alive, and die.

Returning to the blog question I believe the main reason some Christians accept evolution is because they have uncritically accepted it as scientific fact. It isn't.

Until I was shown the multiple flaws in the evolutionary belief I also uncritically accepted it. I do not blame Christians who accept it. Rather I blame the churches which compromised with it saying falsely-God could have used evolution. It is illuminating to mix with scientists who are convinced God's word is a better record of our origins than the ever changing evolutionary myth.
---Warwick on 1/23/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Lawyer


Charles--Since you are referring to a Christianet questionnaire, don't take it as infallible.

I don't remember either, but I'll bet what you were thinking of was "the life is in the blood" (Lev 17:11) For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.


This is a far cry from saying that nothing without blood is alive! The Bible is not speaking of biology!

Are trees not living things? Or vines and grasses? What about bacteria and other single cell organisms (which are bloodless)?
---Donna66 on 1/22/11


Jezz:

The original Hebrew for Leviticus 17:11 uses the word "Nephesh" (which means "soul") for BOTH the words "life" and "soul".

So, it would be more accurately translated:
"For the soul of the flesh is in the blood". Why the KJV translates the same word two different words in the same verse is a mystery.

I think that few would argue that plants have souls, but it is plain that they are "alive". (The same would also apply to other bloodless lower creatures like bacteria, viruses, fungi, protozoa, etc.)
---StrongAxe on 1/22/11


\\Actually, it comes from Christianet's evolution questionnaire! Which shows from the laws that anything without blood is NOT ALIVE (book, chapter and verse I don't remember, but I do very well remember that!)
---Charles on 1/22/11\\

The Bible is not a biological textbook.
---Cluny on 1/22/11


Warwick: 'whoever told you plants are not alive has told you nonsense'

Actually, it comes from Christianet's evolution questionnaire! Which shows from the laws that anything without blood is NOT ALIVE (book, chapter and verse I don't remember, but I do very well remember that!)
---Charles on 1/22/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Dedicated Hosting


\\I disagree, and have shown the references many times. Do some research. \\

You and others have claimed this, but your arguments are not convincing.

\\Whoever told you plants are not alive has told you nonsense. Plants reproduce as do all living things. Non living matter doesn't.\\

I pointed out that plants die when they are eaten by herbivores, hence death existed the before the Fall, and I would be told that they don't have the "breath of life" in them.

I agree with you on this point. ALL living creatures carry out the ten life functions, reproduction among them.
---Cluny on 1/22/11


Warwich: Cluny's coment about plants not being alive is a Christianet statement, not his own: Evolution quiz Q19: Life is in blood bearing creatures, not plants. Answer: Leviticus 17:11

Of course, Lev 17:11 talk ONLY about the life of the FLESH - it says nothing of life of other things, so I am not sure about Christianet's interpretation, though it is quite reasonable as things go
---Jezz on 1/22/11


I believe Cluny and I had this discussion once, with others as well but...
Plants do not live or die, but they grow and wither, can be cut up and burnt, and fail.
It is quite interesting to study this in the Bible.
I have not seen a verse where it says plants live or die.
Of course, our terminology nowadays exclaims something different due to the current definition of 'living'
---micha9344 on 1/22/11


Cluny wrote "There's nothing about dinosaurs in the Bible."

I disagree, and have shown the references many times. Do some research.

Whoever told you plants are not alive has told you nonsense. Plants reproduce as do all living things. Non living matter doesn't.

Therefore, as God says, life originated on land. Only the evolutionary belief has life originating in the ocean. They got it wrong.

Whenever you read an evolutionary text book both the Big Bang, abiogenesis and the onward evolution of life are regularly covered.

No Big Bang, no abiogenesis no evolution!
---Warwick on 1/22/11


Shop For Church Fundraisers


Clueless Cluny: Your attempt at scientific credibility (earth rotational slowing and lunar recession) has brought you face-to-face with the impossibility of your long age, evolutionary paradigm. When asked if you concur with the scientific conclusions of your assertions, you respond "Maybe yes, maybe no." Not a very scientific answer. Sounds like you are more of an agnostic than a Christian.

And now we find that, like Catherine, Jesus talks to you directly. What did He tell you about what He wrote on those stone tablets? That He was lying, just joking, or He made a mistake when He wrote "For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth (Exo 20:11)?
---jerry6593 on 1/22/11


Warwick:

You said: The days of creation are 6 equal length days, as clearly stated in Genesis 1. This is confirmed in Exodus ch 20:8-11 and 31:14-17 where God speaks to the Israelites commanding they work for 6 ordinary earth-rotation days and rest the 7th earth-rotation day. As He says, because He created in 6 of these days, and rested the 7th.

Anyone who says these days are not equal length is rejecting the inscribed word of God and ignoring grammar, making language incomprehensible.


(emphasis mine).

The words I have highlighted are NOT in the original. As such, they are NOT inscribed. You are merely inferring them yourself, which is mere supposition.
---StrongAxe on 1/22/11


Warwick: I am NOT sure about your '6 equal length days, as clearly stated in Genesis 1' automatically means 24 hours.

I have looked at some comments about the Hebrew word, and it appears to have two possible means.

In fact, Genesis 1 does NOT say anything about same length days, it mearely usees the hebrew word for day. We always assume a day (normal meaning only) to by 24 hours, but even we, in English, also use 'day' (in my day) to mean other things as well.

You are (reasonably) very attached to the 24 hour idea, and I resepct you for that. But do not take it that someone who does not 'has a problem' or 'is not Christian'
---Anne on 1/22/11


Warwick: While it is possible that the animal described in Job (40:15) IS a dinasaur, we cannot be sure - the English translation is not clear enough, and if we try to decipher God's description we will certainly get whatever animal we WANT to.

You can say that, but other, equally reasonable, people may disagree with you
---Steve on 1/22/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


The days of creation are 6 equal length days, as clearly stated in Genesis 1. This is confirmed in Exodus ch 20:8-11 and 31:14-17 where God speaks to the Israelites commanding they work for 6 ordinary earth-rotation days and rest the 7th earth-rotation day. As He says, because He created in 6 of these days, and rested the 7th.

Anyone who says these days are not equal length is rejecting the inscribed word of God and ignoring grammar, making language incomprehensible.

How can we know what "I am the way the truth and the life, and no one can come to the Father except through me" means if we cannot understand what these Genesis and Exodus verses mean? We can't. Then how can we know we are saved? We can't?
---Warwick on 1/21/11


Warwick:

\\Bible: Man and dinosaurs lived together\\

There's nothing about dinosaurs in the Bible.

And I've been told here that plants are not really living, so that would mean that life originated in the sea, as both Genesis and science say.

BTW--please do NOT confuse the Big Bang theory with evolution. They are talking about two different things, though I realize the difference might be too subtle for you to grasp.
---Cluny on 1/21/11


Cluny: Personally, I find it easier (Biblically) to assume it was 24 hours, as otherwise I am not sure what else to believe......

But I do not feel people who think otherwise have a problem - I can't say for sure, and such evidence - especially as to exactly what Gen 1 says, is limited, most is a matter of interpretation
---peter3594 on 1/21/11


James

Bible: Earth before sun and stars. Evolution: Stars and sun before earth.

Bible: Earth covered in water initially. Evolution: Earth molten blob initially

Bible: Oceans first then dry land. Evolution: Dry land then oceans

Bible:Life first created on land. Evolution:Life started in oceans.

Bible: Plants created before the sun. Evolution: Plants came long after sun.

Bible: Fish and birds created together. Evolution: Fish formed long before birds.

Bible: Land animals created after birds. Evolution: land animals before whales.

Bible: Man and dinosaurs lived together. Evolution: Dinosaurs extinct long before man appeared.

Bible: big bang future. Evolution: big bang past.
---Warwick on 1/21/11


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


James consider that Genesis is God's account of creation. The account of a perfect eyewitness, who makes no mistakes and who cannot lie.

However evolution is a philosophy developed by people who were not eyewitnesses, who are falible, and who can lie, and do. That is why the story continually changes.

To say there are similarities between God's account of His creration and evolution is akin to saying there are similarities between the Lord Jesus and some evil dictator. They are both human, both eat, talk, walk, and whose physical bodies function in a similar fashion. It is rather meaningles to say there are similarities, isn't it?
---Warwick on 1/21/11


Cluny, someone approaches a stop sign. The rule is-stop, and proceed if safe to do so. He follows what the sign says and waits.

Man two approaches the sign. He knows what it says but notes there is no traffic approaching so illegally proceeds through without stopping.

Man one does not interpret but takes it at face value. Man two knows what the sign says but interprets it away from its obvious meaning and breaks the law.

This is what you do with your attitude to Genesis. You approach Genesis 1:3 'God said "Let there be light."' and 1:5 (part) "And there was evening and there was morning-the first day."

You ignore what is written and reinterpret it to fit in with your antiBiblical views.
---Warwick on 1/21/11


\\Do you then concede that the evolutionary process has unfolded in much less than 62,000 years?\\

Maybe yes, maybe no.

**Cluny: Jesus told you in person?
---James on 1/21/11**

Yep.

++Cluny, Warwick: There is always this problem of how the 24 hours were defined before the sun++

My point exactly.
---Cluny on 1/21/11


Cluny, ask God, it's His Word..
I'm glad you see it, I'm sad you don't believe it..
---micha9344 on 1/21/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


Clueless Cluny: "Futhermore, the rotation of the earth slows down about a second a year

If only you'd question your science with the same vigor that you question the Bible, you'd become a true believer!

The earth spins currently at 24 hours/day, and with a radius of 4000 miles, has a tangential speed of 1000 mi/hr and a gravitational acceleration of 32 f/s^2 = 9.8 m/s^2. If you extrapolate back a mere 62,000 years, the earth would have been spinning so fast that surface gravity would have been reduced to zero at the equator, and everything would have floated off into space.

Do you then concede that the evolutionary process has unfolded in much less than 62,000 years?
---jerry6593 on 1/21/11


Clueless Cluny: "the moon moves away at the rate of about an inch a year."

Actually, it's about 1.5 inch/year, and again if you extrapolate back in time, the moon would have fallen to the earth about 20,000 to 30,000 years ago.

Do you concede that the evolutionary process must have unfolded within the last 30,000 years?
---jerry6593 on 1/21/11


Cluny: Jesus told you in person?
---James on 1/21/11


\\Let me make it very clear that I am not interpreting Scripture but taking it at its face value. Just as Jesus and the apostles did. //

Yes, you are. And denying that you are interpreting Scripture does not change the fact that you are.

And all you are doing is saying that anyone who disagrees with your interpretation is not a real Christian.

Jesus told me to tell you that you are wrong.
---Cluny on 1/21/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


Warwick: While I don't agree with it, one could say that some similarity IS present between evolution and creation (first the world, then life in water, then life on land, then man).

Of course, I agree the differences are too big to accept it (evolution) but some similarities can be found
---James on 1/21/11


Cluny, Warwick: There is always this problem of how the 24 hours were defined before the sun

While I think 24 hours remained the same both before and after God created the sun, I will not argue with someone who feels different - after all, we DO (or did, over history, now it is done differently) define 24 hours as the time it took the earth to rotate once, or, in older parlence, for the sun to go around the earth - so if no sun, we could not define 24 hours..... does that make a differnce - that's up to you, dont argue too much
---Peter on 1/21/11


Cluny you are one of two things. Either somewhat y lacking grey-matter or secondly an evasive deceiver.

I do not think you lack intelligence.

You could not be so thick or so unknowing (having had it pointed out to you many times) to have missed that God Himself created light and said that this light was that which separated day from night, on the first three days. But you avoid any Scripture which does not fit in with your man-centered philosophies.

Orthodox? I don't think so.

I ask again how will God light heaven, where there will be no sun? I notice you fail to attempt an answer to this question.
---Warwick on 1/21/11


\\Gen 1:5b So the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:8b So the evening and the morning were the second day
Gen 1:13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.\\

Since there were no sun, moon, or stars until the FOURTH day, how were evenings and mornings determined, micha?
---Cluny on 1/20/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


Alan as I have said I believe that anyone who rejects the plain meaning of Genesis 1-3 (eg. 6 ordinary earth-rotation day creation, that sin and death entered the world only after Adam's sin, and the coming Saviour) is obviously not a Bible-believing Christian. I can say this with confidence because Scripture is very clear on these foundational issues. And Scripture does not in any way support other views.

Let me make it very clear that I am not interpreting Scripture but taking it at its face value. Just as Jesus and the apostles did.

No one rejects the historicity of Genesis for Biblical reasons.
---Warwick on 1/20/11


If your blogs represent Eastern Orthodoxy then it has lost the plot.

Genesis tells us that God created the universe and all therein in 6 ordinary earth-rotation days. It tells us upon which day God created what matter and the different creatures. It also tells us that God created each of His creatures to reproduce after it own kind. And that is exactly what we see-cats have cats and dogs have dogs etc.

Conversely the evolutionary view is that all life came from tho one original ancestor. And that one kind has evolved from a previous kind. Where does Genesis say this?

The evolutionary fable bears no relation to Genesis. Even the order of appearance is totally different.
---Warwick on 1/20/11


\\Didn't you say you are orthodox? The question is orthodox what? Sceptic?\\

Eastern Orthodox, as I've said repeatedly.

**Cluny where does Genesis say there is a rational coherent sequential development from one stage to the next?**

All through Genesis 1, creation is so described.

What proof to you have that it is irrational, incoherent, and non-sequential, which would be the alternative?

Where does Genesis say this?
---Cluny on 1/20/11


Gen 1:5b So the evening and the morning were the first day.
Gen 1:8b So the evening and the morning were the second day
Gen 1:13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.
---micha9344 on 1/19/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


Cluny your lack of faith in the word of God and your lack of knowledge about it is amazing.

Genesis says God said let there be light and there was light, which He says brought about "the first evening and morning day. You would have us believe that God could not light the earth without the sun He later created. That creator and sustainer of the whole universe and everything in it cannot create light without the sun! Question how does Scripture say heaven will be lit?

Didn't you say you are orthodox? The question is orthodox what? Sceptic?

For the sake of argument let us accept that the earth's rotation speed decreases by a second per year. What is your point?
---Warwick on 1/20/11


Warwick ... You said "Bible-believing Christians accept God created in six earth-rotation (what we call 24hr)"

You now say "Therefore it is my considered opinion that anyone who rejects 6 (evening and morning) day creation is not a Bible believing Christian ... "

I am pleased that you accept that is only your considered opinion ... the fact is that many Bible believing Christians do not share your interpretation of the Bible.

---alan8566_of_uk on 1/20/11


Cluny where does Genesis say there is a rational coherent sequential development from one stage to the next?

In reality Genesis says God created the various kinds to reproduce after their own kind, and all within a 6-day time frame. Conversely the evolutionary philosophy says one kind became a totally different kind, over vast periods of time, without any intelligent input. Not comparable at all.
---Warwick on 1/20/11


Cluny: "There could have been NO evenings or mornings the first three days because neither the sun nor moon had been created yet."

Again, you show your ignorance of the Bible.

Gen 1:5 ... And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Gen 1:8 ... And the evening and the morning were the second day.

Gen 1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.

Who told you that God needed the sun or moon to make the earth rotate? We'll still have days, weeks and months in the new earth with no sun or moon.

Isa 66:23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD.
---jerry6593 on 1/20/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Software


\\ If that were the case, why did God go to such lengths to define the 6-literal-day Creation? Just to throw us off?"\\

Where did you get the idea that God indeed defined the days of creation as 24 hour days?

There could have been NO evenings or mornings the first three days because neither the sun nor moon had been created yet.

Futhermore, the rotation of the earth slows down about a second a year, because the moon moves away at the rate of about an inch a year.
---Cluny on 1/19/11


Leslie-- I'm sorry you got the impression you did from my post. I know you think science is "unbiblical". But here is science that takes a step in the right direction.

The "Big Bang" research shows that the universe and our world came into being suddenly and all at once...(which is closer to what the Bible says) NOT over a long period of time.

Any time scientists move closer to the truth as we know it from scripture, I'm happy.
---Donna66 on 1/19/11


Alan from considerable experience I know you rarely state a firm opinion. You have said that Genesis 1 could mean this or that.

Jerry answered well:

"Alan: 'the timescale does not matter.' If that were the case, why did God go to such lengths to define the 6-literal-day Creation? Just to throw us off?"

"Be honest, if you had only read the Bible, and had never heard of darwinian evolution, you would never have conceived of a long-age creation."

God is very specific about the time-scale, and those who say otherwise are rejecting His word so therefore should not be called Bible-believing Christians, as they only believe those parts which do not contradict their man-made nonBiblical views.
---Warwick on 1/19/11


\\The Bible says NOTHING about a big bang or evolution taking place.
---Leslie on 1/19/11\\

Yes, it does.

The BB says there was Nothing in the physical universe, and then there was Something.

So does Genesis.

Evolution says there a rational, coherent, sequential development from one stage to the next.

So does Genesis.

OTOH, Leslie says if it's not in the Bible, it must be a lie.

Well, Leslie is not in the Bible, therefore...
---Cluny on 1/19/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


Donna66 - Who is God, you or God Almighty? Who knows more, you or God Almighty? In your answer, you basicly say you are God and know more than God - is this correct? The Bible says NOTHING about a big bang or evolution taking place.
---Leslie on 1/19/11


\\Cluny, Bible-believing Christians accept God created in six earth-rotation (what we call 24hr)\\

Did you know there is evidence that the earth has rotated much faster and even much slower than a 24 hour period?

Which speed did God base "day" in Genesis 1 on? And how do you know FOR SURE it's a 24 hour rotation period?
---Cluny on 1/19/11


Warwick ... You did not read my post carefully. I did not show any opinion. I stated a fact:

Other Bible believing Christians believe that it that the Bible gives a general description of how God made the world ... and everytning else ... and that the timescale does not matter

It is you who has given an opinion, that they are not Bible-believing Christians
---alan8566_of_uk on 1/19/11


Alan: "the timescale does not matter"

If that were the case, why did God go to such lengths to define the 6-literal-day Creation? Just to throw us off?

Be honest, if you had only read the Bible, and had never heard of darwinian evolution, you would never have conceived of a long-age creation.
---jerry6593 on 1/19/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Eating Disorders


Alan God says His creation took 6 days. He defines what a day is so very carefully. Nowhere in His word does He even hint that the days of creation can be anything other than ordinary days, just as we live them.

Your view makes nonsense of Exodus 20:8-11, and 31:14-17.

Therefore it is my considered opinion that anyone who rejects 6 (evening and morning) day creation is not a Bible believing Christian, but rather one who chooses what they are prepared to believe. Not a position of faith, and as Romans 14:23 says "that which is not of faith is sin."
---Warwick on 1/18/11


But the timeline does matter for god foreknew He would lead Israel out of Egypt with a mighty hand and set a timescale for them to follow.
God made the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh as an example for the week prescribed to Israel. In fact, the whole world still follows a seven day week and there is no other reason for this than the seven day creation.
---micha9344 on 1/18/11


Warwick ... Some Bible beleiving Christians beleive in the 6 X 24 hour creation process

Other Bible believing Christians believe that it that the Bible gives a general description of how God made the world ... and everytning else ... and that the timescale does not matter
---alan8566_of_uk on 1/18/11


I rejoiced when scientists first mentioned the "Big Bang". It gave a starting point to creation, pinning it to a single event, as the Bible says.

Leslie-- God gave us our "mind", curiosity, and "intellect". Through them He produces wonderful things for our benefit...
mechanical, medicinal, chemical.. that the Bible cannot reveal. But we must realize that when our intellect tells us something that CONFLICTS with the Word of God, WE have reached a false conclusion! Scientists have reached many false conclusions in the past, only to revise them later.
Be suspicious of scientific "theories" un- demonstrated in real life, but don't label as "unholy", the process that forms them.
---Donna66 on 1/18/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


Cluny, Bible-believing Christians accept God created in six earth-rotation (what we call 24hr) days because that is what God's word clearly says-Exodus 20: 8-11 (part) "Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God........For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy."

Why would God's creation appear like a big bang?
---Warwick on 1/18/11


Leslie ... "God's Word is the ONLY TRUTH (John 17:17) - anything outside of that is a LIE"

So it is a LIE that your name is Leslie.

It is a LIE that there was a World War involving the USA in the 1940s.

Is is a LIE that Americans have travelled to the moon and back.
---alan8566_of_uk on 1/18/11


Christians would rather use their human mind and intellect to say what is truth. However, the human mind is NOT God's mind (which is WAY smarter), and also God's Word is the ONLY TRUTH (John 17:17) - anything outside of that is a LIE.
---Leslie on 1/18/11


\\Because the scientific theory--or model, if you like--held that the universe was static, changeless, and had always existed\\

I should have expressed this more clearly and written, "Because PREVIOUS scientific theory....."

One reason so many scientists rejected the Big Bang theory was because it "smacked of creationism" (the critics' phrase, not mine).

IF the heavens, including the earth, moon, stars, and other planets were created in a 96 hour period of earthly time, as some here believe, it would certainly look like a bang or explosion, wouldn't it?
---Cluny on 1/17/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


\\If those principles are scientific and predictable, why didn't they do the "big bang" sooner???\\

Because the scientific theory--or model, if you like--held that the universe was static, changeless, and had always existed.

The Big Bang theory (which name was originally given in mockery of the idea) held that the universe had a sudden beginning in time--exactly what Genesis says.
---Cluny on 1/17/11


There are people who claim that everything in existence is material and all is determined by predictable scientific principles. They claim that by scientific principles the universe was produced in a "big bang". If those principles are scientific and predictable, why didn't they do the "big bang" sooner??? They had all past eternity.

Also, ones claim that living beings evolved by means of physical mutations of DNA. Mutations are needed in order to produce behaviors, ones understand. But humans have many behaviors unique to humans, and these are interconnected. How statistically likely is it that all these mutations would come together and be so well-coordinated to produce our behaviors???
---Bill_willa6989 on 1/17/11


Thinking in evolutionary terms life was always complex. Evolutionists propose the original life-form was akin to a bacterium- incredibly complex organism. It is not that other supposedly evolved life forms are increasingly more complex but rather have massive amounts of totally new, specific, unique genetic information.

Scientist friends, far more knowledgeable than I, say that to call natural selection or speciation evolution is misleading, as no evolution (e.g.bacterium to bat) occurs.

BTW it was Christian creationists who discovered the principles of variation within a kind or species.

Surely no Bible-believing Christian can claim God used such a slow, wasteful, violent prosess to create, as is proposed evolution.
---Warwick on 1/16/11


1st is ignorance of the Bible, and 2nd is rebellion toward the Bible - why evolution is popular.
---Leslie on 1/16/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


they are called polonium halos,which tells science that the earthg could not have cooled down after it was made,meaning that the rock was never hot just made
---tom2 on 1/16/11


There is micro- & macro- evolution. Creation scientists do believe in the type that involves smaller evolutionary changes within a species. For example, Dogs may evolve, or change over the centuries, but will always be dogs.
Does anyone remember the specific name of those "halos" found in rocks that prove instantaneous creation?
---Hope on 1/16/11


Hope-- You make a good point. It's quite possible to understand the same facts that others do, yet draw different conclusions. "Facts" do not always "speak for themselves" but the more science you know, the easier it is to see the failures of the evolutionary theory.

Also, most people who claim to believe in evolution are not that well informed either. Like anyone else they like to sound as if they are. We should not be intimidated by them.
---Donna66 on 1/16/11


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