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

Evolution Helped Creation

Why do some Christians keep insisting that Evolution played a part in the Creation?

Moderator - Because they truly don't understand the theory of evolution, but think they do.

Join Our Christian Chat and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 2/4/11
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



"...a scientific theory that is well accepted...he'd better know whereof he speaks."

Cluny: You no doubt mean "well accepted" by the scientific community? Will I be struck by lightning if I blaspheme against this august body of god-men? :)

It is "you" who, so far, hasn't come up with any definitive (factual) proof to support evolution being compatible with Christianity. That, in a nutschell, is what this blog is all about & , by the way, has nothing to do with anyone's credentials (bogus or otherwise). :)

Based upon "your" far out claims Doc, the burden of proof is upon you.
---Leon on 2/11/11


Trav: For clarity sake, Cain mated with a close relative, a descendant of Adam & Eve. She likely was a sister or possibly a niece if Abel also mated with another sister & had children too.

The Bible says Adam begat sons & daughters. From reading Gen. 5, we can easily assume it means after he begat Seth (somewhere between age 800 & 930) he then begat more sons & began having daughters. But, does the Bible really say that? I don't think so. Generally speaking, throughout his life, Adam begat sons, daughters then died. :)

As God commanded, I believe A & E were fruitful & multiplied from the beginning. How else can the existence of "every one" Cain feared be explained (Gen. 4:14)?
---Leon on 2/11/11


I am surprised that Moderator fully understands evolution, bearing in mind that most evolutionists don't fully understand it.
---alan8566_of_uk on 2/11/11


Yes, I have studied in detail from science and the Bible. Why would you doubt there are educated people on various topics? Do you have an evolution question that nobody has answered to your satisfaction?
---Moderator on 2/11/11


Moderator: I mean, do you FULLY understand the scientific ideas behind evolution

I certainly do not beleive the idea, but then I cannot say I UNDERSTAND the whole idea

The evolution of the eye is someting I do NOT understand, and also DO NOT beleive

Are you saying you fully understand the theory of evolution and also do not beleive?

I have my doubts (that you fully understand)!
---Steve on 2/11/11




Yes, I understand the "theory" of evolution. Even if I was not a Christian, I would not believe such a poor thought out theory. Explain the evolution of an eyeball for example?
---Moderator on 2/11/11


Moderator: are you sure you fully understand evolution? From my searches I can be fairly certain that almost no one really understands evolution!
---Steve on 2/11/11


\\And if you are saying we need to have a Ph.D to discuss a certain subject do you have same in a scientific field? \\

I never said this.

But I AM saying that if someone is going to simply dismiss a scientific theory that's well accepted (for example), he'd better know whereof he speaks.

So far, Leon has not given this.

I never told him he had to have a PhD. I merely inquired about his expertise and education in this subject.
---Cluny on 2/11/11


Trav: 'Scripture does not say all races of men began from Adam and Eve. '
I can see no evidence in Scripture to support that,...---Peter on 2/10/11

It is not clear. What is not clear must have witnesses.
1.There are two creation accounts.
2.Cain married someone...
3.Noah new beginning of Adam kind.
4. Confirming no global flood find word "erets" and search mathamatical impossibility's confirming.
Adam and Israel are both found in scripture separated from other peoples.
Deuteronomy 32:8
When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
---Trav on 2/10/11


Cluny I get a little sceptical of someone who says they have a doctorate and spells it doctrate!

And in what discipline, and from what institution is your "doctrate."
---Warwick on 2/10/11

I'm sceptical of self proclaimed preachers who distort/deceive, that all Israel is Judah. And abhors corresponding scripture witnessing otherwise.
What seminary(cemetary) school did you learn this in?
I'm sceptical of a self made preacher jealous enough to call a learned man a liar on the basis of a misspelled word. When he has done so many times. A disqualifer in your seminary?
Deuteronomy 32:9
For the LORD's portion is his people, Jacob is the lot of his inheritance.
---Trav on 2/10/11




Cluny are you saying you hold a Ph.D in theological studies? Why are you shy about giving the details?

And if you are saying we need to have a Ph.D to discuss a certain subject do you have same in a scientific field?

I am sure you don't and you know as well as me it is not necessary.

To say it is necessary is an appeal to authority isn't it? Like someone saying I have a degree so I am right!
---Warwick on 2/10/11


Those "other words" are your words Cluny, not mine. What fact?!!! :) Like I previously said, goobledygook ~ pure bunkum!

I don't claim to be some great scientific wonder as you seem to think you are. The plain & simple truth of God's Bible is good enough for me. Your high minded "scientific theory" is a hole in which you are digging yourself deeper 'n' deeper into.
---Leon on 2/11/11


Sorry. My computer has sticky keys.

It's enough for you to know that it's in theological studies.

Otherwise, I say nothing here that would help anyone to find me.

Why don't you ask Leon about his scientific background?
---Cluny on 2/10/11


Cluny I get a little sceptical of someone who says they have a doctorate and spells it doctrate!

And in what discipline, and from what institution is your "doctrate."
---Warwick on 2/10/11


\\You discuss theological issues regularly. Do you have theological qualifications? If so what and from which institution/s?\\

I have a doctrate. How about you, Warwick?
---Cluny on 2/10/11


Are we not pandering to political correctness by denying that there are different races?

The fact that we are all descended from Adam & Eve (and I don't know where trav gets his contrary view on that) means that all humans belong to the same species

But as there are different breeds within the dog species, so there are different races within the human species.

All are descended from A & E, and all have equal value in God's eyes. The dirtiness is not in the word "race" but in the way race is used to separate people
---alan8566_of_uk on 2/10/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


Cluny I think you are grandstanding by asking Leon about his qualifications to discuss this issue.

You discuss theological issues regularly. Do you have theological qualifications? If so what and from which institution/s?
---Warwick on 2/10/11


The fact that all known dogs can successfully interbreed proves that all the varieties which exist today came from the one original dog ancestors.

Likewise because all the so called human races (in reality there is one race)can interbreed demonstrates we are all descended from the same human ancestors.

Biblically speaking we know those ancestors were Adam and Eve. This is what Scripture says.
---Warwick on 2/10/11


Trav: 'Scripture does not say all races of men began from Adam and Eve. '

Are you implying that other races were created by God as independent groups, and there were other 'first humans'?

I can see no evidence in Scripture to support that, and it would aslo mean that the fruit eaten by Adam and Eve would not have polluted ALL humans

So I doubt you idea, but please tell me how you have that idea, and I'm happy to listen
---Peter on 2/10/11


Jane, did you follow up on the Dawkins/Lennox debate? If so do you see my point?

Also do you get the point about 'careful inspection?' That a person's idea can be put to scientific physical experimentation and therefore be proved or disproved purely upon scientific lines. That is, personal beliefs do not alter demonstrable, proveable facts.

What I am saying is for something to be considered scientific fact it must be proveable, by experimentation, in the present.

However evolutionary beliefs cannot be so tested therefore they are not scientific fact, but beliefs about the past.

Therefore scientific proof is not about belief but about physical experimentation.
---Warwick on 2/10/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


\\I agree Jerry: Evolution doesn't qualify as a scientific theory.
---Leon on 2/10/11\\

In other word, Leon, you can't disprove the fact that "theory" has different meanings in different contexts, therefore you simply dismiss it as nonsense.

And please tell me what degrees you have in which scientific disciplines that allow you to say what is and is not an acceptable scientific theory, in the technical meaning of the term.
---Cluny on 2/10/11


It's a serious misconception to suppose there's more than one race of people on earth. The fact of the matter is there is but one race & that's the HUMAN RACE. Now, within the HUMAN RACE there are diversities of characteristics caused by environmental habitats of people worldwide. This is where we get the various nationalities (ethnic groups) of people on earth. But, make no mistake about it, ALL HUMAN BEINGS ARE DESCENDANTS FROM ADAM AND EVE.
---Leon on 2/10/11


...obviously starting with two people signifies there has been evolution of races and languages...---larry on 2/9/11

Obviously? Evolving into all races is where most doctrines are hard evolutionist.
Scripture does not say all races of men began from Adam and Eve.
This is doctrinally implied by men.
Scripture implies Adam and Eve were different.
Even as Israel was different and separated.
7Remember the days of old, consider the years of many generations: ask thy father, he will shew thee, thy elders,they will tell thee.
Deut 32:8
When Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.
---Trav on 2/10/11


Goobledygook Cluny! When some folk can't dazzle you with their brilliance (illumination) they seek to baffle you with a load of nonsense. :) The Bible clearly exposes such teachings/teachers.

I agree Jerry: Evolution doesn't qualify as a scientific theory.
---Leon on 2/10/11


Shop For Church Furniture


From Wikipedia:

...In modern science the term "theory", or "scientific theory" is generally understood to refer to a proposed explanation of empirical phenomena, made in a way consistent with the scientific method. Such theories are preferably described in such a way that any scientist in the field is in a position to understand, verify, and challenge (or "falsify") it. In this modern scientific context the distinction between theory and practice corresponds roughly to the distinction between theoretical science and technology or applied science. A distinction is often made in science between theories and hypotheses, which are theories that are not considered to have been satisfactorily tested or proven.
---Cluny on 2/9/11


Part 2:

And is it worth mentioning that "theory" has a different meaning in music from ordinary speech, or even science?
---Cluny on 2/9/11


Evolution does not qualify as a scientific theory (it is barely an hypothesis) because it is not testable, neither does it define a "plausable" mechanization from cause to effect. Both "natural selection" and "genetic mutation" have been thoroughly debunked as viable operative forces in evolution because they lack a mechanism for increasing genetic information.

Evolution is a creation account for atheists, and it rests on the the twin pillars of childish conjecture and fraud. Why any Christian would continue to argue for such an anti-biblical deception is beyond me.
---jerry6593 on 2/10/11


"and NONE of these are the same as a 'scientific THEOry'." Okay, please explain the factual difference (dissimilarity) Cluny.

BTW, would that be the intellectually elite ancient Greeks who worshipped many gods & then threw in one to boot (the unknown god St. Paul referenced in Scripture) just in case they "theoretically" missed anyone? :/
---Leon on 2/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


The "theory" of evolution makes perfect sense to those who are relying solely on their human understanding.
But to those who let the word of God rule, the "theory" of evolution just exposes the foolishness of mankind.
One of the strongest conversions I ever saw was from a person with a Masters degree in biology. Once he investigated the "theory" evolution and saw all the leaks he totally changed.
---mima on 2/9/11


\\Cluny: Are you aware a scientific "HYPothesis" is in fact a supposition, an assumption, proposition, assertion, postulation, conjecture -- ALL GUESSWORK?
---Leon on 2/8/11\\

And NONE of these are the same as a "scientific THEOry."

(BTW--the very word "theory" comes from two Greek words meaning "vision of God.")
---Cluny on 2/9/11


Jane find the Dawkins/Lennox debate and you will see Dawkins does not fare well when confronted by the Oxford Scientist Lennox.

"Careful inspection by WHOM?" By scientists who are able to show Dawkin's science (and that of other evolutionists) is flawed. For example Proff. Dawkins said "But I havent mentioned the most glaring example of imperfection in the optics. The retina is back to front." To which George Marshall (Sir Jules Thorn lecturer in opthalmic science-Sheffield University UK) replied "The idea that the eye is wired backward comes from a lack of knowledge of eye function and anatomy."

In otherwords the specilaist says Dawkins doesn't know what he is talking about! Dawkins has egg on face.
---Warwick on 2/8/11


Evolution did play a huge part in our development but not our creation. God spoke everything into existence, however obviously starting with two people signifies there has been evolution of the races and languages, perhaps the two issues which divide the world most today.
Evolution does not attempt and can't explain creation. It only assumes it can't be God because the idea of a moral agent and creator is intolerable to the rebellious heart.
---larry on 2/9/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


Cluny in reality we do have countless numbers of fossils in sedimentary rock all around the world. What we don't have is representatives of intermediate forms. That is why Gould and Eldridge came up with their punctuated equilibria idea.
---Warwick on 2/8/11


Cliff: You said, "...how did the amoeba know it couldn't see?" 2/5 I thought maybe this was a juvenile joke like "why did the chicken cross the road"? That's why I asked, "How do you know the amoeba knows it can't see?" 2/7

True, with my naked eye, I can't see an amoeba & likewise IT (not he) probably can't (I don't know) see me/you/us either. That doesn't mean IT doesn't possess insight (vision) of some sort even if IT can't see us. God only knows Cliff! :)

---Leon on 2/8/11


Warwick: 'The fact is these days even prominent atheistic evolutionists such as Proff. Richard Dawkins are unwilling to debate creationist scientists, as they know their story falls apart upon careful inspection.'

Careful inspection by WHOM? Christians who put the Bible first - there, we ALL know it does

Inspection must, though, be like a court - an IMPARTIAL observer.

But WHERE can we find one?
---Jane on 2/8/11


Leon, ** How do you know the amoeba knows it cant see**
Just ask the next one you see! Can't see one?? That's OK he can't see you either!
---1st_cliff on 2/8/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


I used to believe in evolution and have to teach how it works in Public school. Many evolutionist teach speciation is evolution in action. But my problem is that this is not the truth. Speicaiton is a group dividing from an ancestor like all the breeds of dogs of today.

Evolutionist teach that all life is a tree. Our ancestors are not monkeys but flatworms and sponges.

Creationists that I know teach bushes with decendents not the single tree of evolution.
---Samuel on 2/8/11


Cluny: Are you aware a scientific "HYPothesis" is in fact a supposition, an assumption, proposition, assertion, postulation, conjecture -- ALL GUESSWORK?
---Leon on 2/8/11


\\If, as evolutionists promote, over vast periods of time one kind of a creature became a completely different kind, then we should see countless intermediate creatures in the fossil record.\\

Only if we had countless fossils--but we don't.

**You do admit the theory of evolution is "THEORY" (supposition)?**

Leon, are you aware that "theory" has a technical meaning in a scientific context? What we call a "theory" or "supposition" is called a "hypothesis" by scientists.

jerry, if Felis cattus speciated 5000 years ago, this would be BEFORE the Flood.
---Cluny on 2/8/11


Cluny, punctuated equilibria was the brainchild of Gould and Eldridge in about 1972. If I remember rightly it was dreamt up to get around the lack of intermediary (or is it intermediate?) fossils. If, as evolutionists promote, over vast periods of time one kind of a creature became a completely different kind, then we should see countless intermediate creatures in the fossil record. Gould and Eldridge accepted they just aren't there so they came up with the idea that creatures evolved from one kind to another in isolated groups, and too quickly to leave intermediate fossils.

Not much of an idea if you ask me. It seems to be a belief based upon a total lack of evidence.

You are joking about Lamarkianism aren't you?
---Warwick on 2/8/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Cluny I don't think many scientists hold to Darwinism these days, as they know it doesn't work. Today they talk about neo-Darwinism where they add mutations into the pot to overcome Darwin's error of ignorance.

Nonetheless neo-Darwinism is but a belief which cannot be proved true or false by the scientific method. If it was testable observable repeatable scientific fact then the argument would have been over long ago.

The fact is these days even prominent atheistic evolutionists such as Proff. Richard Dawkins are unwilling to debate creationist scientists, as they know their story falls apart upon careful inspection.

Search for the Lennox/Dawkins debate and you will see what I mean.

---Warwick on 2/8/11


Cluny: You do admit the theory of evolution is "THEORY" (supposition)? So, what else needs to be said? It's all concocted from the vain imaginings (hypothesize, beliefs, opinions, ideas) of deluded men.
---Leon on 2/8/11


Cluny: So that's your very best evidence - 5000-year old cats? Gee, that time period roughly corresponds to the time of Noah's flood, and ALL cats are of the cat "kind", whether some atheist dweeb calls them separate "species" or not. And further, if your "short-term evolution" were true, we would see new species popping up every day.

Got anything a little more believable?
---jerry6593 on 2/8/11


\\The theory of evolution is man-made "fiction" (fantasy)\\

I wonder how many people on these blogs actually understand the theory of evolution (be it Darwinian, Larmarckian, or punctuated equlibrium--there's more than one, you know) on its own terms.

There are probably at least as many who misunderstand it as there are secularists who misunderstand the Bible.

Even Einstein said, "I don't believe that God plays dice with the universe."
---Cluny on 2/7/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Contrary to what some would have us believe Biblical creationists are not anti science. In fact the methods of empirical science were developed by Christians. This method which has given us the amazing technology which surrounds us came about by these methods. This is hard science where ideas have to be put to the stringency of testable, repeatable, observable experimentation.

If an idea cannot be so tested and proved or disproved it isn't science, but philosophy. Microbe-to-man evolution is such a philosophy or belief, not science, as it cannot be tested, observed and repeated. What test could be constructed to prove that life came from non-life by naturalistic processes?
---Warwick on 2/7/11


The theory of evolution is man-made "fiction" (fantasy). Many confused people, with darkened understanding, try feverishly to make it stand equal & solidly alongside the enlightening"fact" of God's devinely inspired word/the Bible (reality).

Trying to mix the slimy muck of evolution with pure living waters of biblical-Creation is like trying to mix oil & water. IT'S IMPOSSIBLY INCOMPATIBLE.

Just curious Cliff: How do you know the amoeba knows it can't see? :)
---Leon on 2/7/11


Cluny, you wrote " I do NOT believe in a model of evolution that excludes God from the process."

But this is the point Cluny-God excludes evolution from playing any part in His 6-day creation.
---Warwick on 2/7/11


God created Creation is happening and science (evolution, biology, chemistry, phyisics, etc) is the 5 senses (touch, sight, smell, hearing, taste) view that we (humans) have of creation. The Bible tells only a part of creation because its purpose is to show Gods glory not how atoms and life work.
---Scott on 2/7/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Bullion


Poser, Ostriches (could include emus) are mentioned in Roman and Greek literature, also in scriptures 3,500 years ago essentially the same flightless birds we see today,unchanged, how many thousand years before that, could they fly?? Acquired characteristics are not passed on to the newborn! (except to the evolutionist)
---1st_cliff on 2/7/11


\\Bill, can you imagine the massive amount of totally new, specific genetic information which would have to come about by chance for the whole visual system to evolve!\\

I am the first to gladly admit that a godless model of evolution requires too many things to evolve simultaneously.

But this is the point. I do NOT believe in a model of evolution that excludes God from the process.
---Cluny on 2/7/11


Bill, can you imagine the massive amount of totally new, specific genetic information which would have to come about by chance for the whole visual system to evolve!

Those who imagine the seeing eye could evolve by blind chance have to remember that in the evolutionary philosophy every one of the countless steps towards a functioning eye has to give a survival value so as to be retained. To imagine this could happen by unguided chance requires more faith than to believe God created, just as He says in Genesis.
---Warwick on 2/6/11


Bill W: "good mutations"

There's no such thing as a good mutation. A mutation is a defect in the genetic code, and is always harmful to the organism. If mutations caused improvements in organisms, then hundreds of super-humans should have emerged from the nuclear blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But alas, only death and destruction came from them.
---jerry6593 on 2/7/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Menopause


\\The fact that any Christian could give any credibility to evolution is proof of that Christian's failure to believe God!!!!\\

Non sequitur.

Felis cattus (house cats) evolved from Felis lybica (north African wildcats) in just 5,000 years, according to genetic studies.

Speciation--genetic drift from one species to another--clearly happens in shorter time scales than a godless model of evolution.

Unlike some people here, I have no problem with God working through natural processes that He Himself set up.
---Cluny on 2/7/11


Evolutionists seem to say changes of living things come with mutations that are helpful. A good mutation may not show up for many years. But we have things that need many different good genes all working to produce certain structures. Plus, evolutionists believe behaviors are evolved. So, what is the statistical chance of getting the different needed gene mutations, all at the same time, to produce an eye, for example, plus gene mutations for the behaviors that would make the eye helpful?

And many human behaviors have just shown up, in much less than a thousand years. It's not evolved genetic mutation producing these.
---Bill_willa6989 on 2/6/11


The fact that any Christian could give any credibility to evolution is proof of that Christian's failure to believe God!!!! Man desperately wants to judge God within his limited understanding. And because of his limitations no judgment of God is possible for man. That is the sad condition of man's comments about God's Word. God's word is to be treated with reverence and total trust. Anything short of this places man and a ridiculous, outrageous position.
---mima on 2/6/11


Cliff I suppose the amoeba didn't know it couldn't see because it didn't know what see meant at all. In fact I suppose it didn't know anything.
---Warwick on 2/6/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Penpals


"Behold, God is great, and we know him not, neither can the number of his years be searched out. For he maketh small the drops of water: they pour down rain according to the vapour thereof: Which the clouds do drop and distil upon man abundantly." Job 36:26-28

"And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?" Exodus 4:11
---christan on 2/6/11


No real Christian does.
---eloy7794 on 2/6/11


C'mon Cluny! I'm challenging you here in front of all these Christian witnesses.....

Give us your very best scientific proof of the veracity of the evolutionary theory.
---jerry6593 on 2/6/11


God produced the human eye from dust, just as the rest of Adam. He did not use spare parts, improve a currently used system, nor upgrade to a newer model.
Improvements and upgrades denote imperfections and insufficiencies.
It was good each day.
Perfection does not necessarily equal completeness.
It was very good at the end of day 6.
---micha9344 on 2/5/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Accounting


Before tackling the evolution of the eyeball, how did the amoeba know it couldn't see?
---1st_cliff on 2/5/11


Moderator that is a good question for Cluny.

In evolutionary thinking evolution occurs when a genetic change such as a mutation enhances survival ability. But for a change to assist it must confer added survival value immediately or the change will not be retained.

How can this system work with the eye which is 3 separate but interlinked systems:

Camera.

Video transport system.

Plus an incomprehensibly complex computer program to interpret and show the image.

The eye cannot function at all until the whole system is up and running. Therefore evolutionists must believe the whole system came about by accident at the same time!

A fairy story.
---Warwick on 2/5/11


moderator, will you honor part 1,2,3.. of ? for cluny? i would like to hear this.
---aka on 2/5/11


WHAT? Ya gotta be joking....
"The moderator is almost right.
It's because those who think that evolution is incompatible with Christianity understand neither."
Cluny
Moderator you must understand that those who believe that evolution is compatible with Christianity understand neither Christianity or the Power of God.
Just keeping our "eyes" on God. (Good question Moderator.)
---Elder on 2/5/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Fundraisers


Moderator, you think this question can actually be answered in 125 words?
---Cluny on 2/5/11


Cluny, please explain the evolution of an eyeball?
---Moderator on 2/5/11


Romans 1:20 "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse:" 21 "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened."

22 "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools," 23 "And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things." 25 "Who changed the truth of God into a lie..."
---christan on 2/5/11


Cluny: "It's because those who think that evolution is incompatible with Christianity understand neither."

WRONG! It is you who understand neither. Where the Bible clearly contradicts the foundational principles of Evolution, you ALWAYS side with Evolution, using outlandish theories and mental gymnastics to explain why the Bible doesn't really mean what it clearly says. When solid scientific evidence refuting the foundations of Evolution are presented to you, you ignore them and move on to other anti-biblical assertions.

Give us your very best scientific proof of the veracity of the evolutionary theory.
---jerry6593 on 2/5/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Ecommerce


"God is light", it says in 1 John 1:5. And we know how physical light can move so fast. So, I think God could be fast enough to make a universe in less than six days. So, maybe He was taking His time and enjoying Jesus His Son so pleasing to Him, while They created but also were sharing with one another. The universe is our Heavenly Father's place for having and bringing up children who are pleasing to Him like Jesus is (c: Why hurry? (c:
---Bill_willa6989 on 2/5/11


Microbe-to-man evolution is directly contradicted by God's word. Therefore it is not for Biblical reasons some claim the two are compatible.

In western society people have been long indoctrinated into evolution, a belief taught as fact. To make matters worse whole Christian denominations have failed to confront this lie or have accepted it as truth. I praise God my walk lead me to people and churches where the truth of God's word was taught from Scripture. And where the lie of evolution was exposed by scientists.

The moderator is correct in saying people do not really understand the theory of evolution. Rather they mostly have a Hollywood version of it in mind. One which they have simply accepted without critical evaluation.
---Warwick on 2/4/11


Christan ... You seem to be imposing your own definitions on others.

Now, what we have here is this situation:

One set of people think God created the world in one way.

Another set belive He may have created the world in a slightly different way.

How can you say that either of these two groups of people is denying that God created the world and everything in it. and everything else as well?
---alan8566_of_uk on 2/4/11


Do things like cars evolve from an old bone shaker to a hybrid of today? Do designs of homes or buildings evolve from bricks of old to green-friendly designs made of better materials? Of course they do. This is one form of evolution of designs.

But if one speaks of the evolution of creation, then this is a complete lie and if you are a Christian, please stop calling yourself one for God will deal with you severely. If you belief in this evolution, you have to deny that God created the world and everything in it.

And even in the evolution of designs, Jesus declared "for without me ye can do nothing" John 15:5 and "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven." John 3:27
---christan on 2/4/11


Read These Insightful Articles About Jewelry


The pride of man makes him realize that to believe God created everything- alone- without help from anything, then he(man) would have to humble himself to the highest of powers. God having the Glory of being the only one- means that creation(evolution), man had nothing at all to do with anything.They want to take credit for having a part in the evolution. Some people just can't humble themselves to admit that they're nothing without God.
---Reba on 2/4/11


The moderator is almost right.

It's because those who think that evolution is incompatible with Christianity understand neither.
---Cluny on 2/4/11


Jerry, The reason people turn to evolution is that they can't swallow the fundamentalists preaching that a loving God tortures and burns humans eternally.
That they leave their body at death. And worship a three-headed god with mpd!
---1st_cliff on 2/4/11


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