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

Misunderstanding Darwinism

Why is the anti-biblical concept of creation by Darwinian evolution so appealing to some Christians?

Moderator - Even if I was an atheist I couldn't believe the silly theory. The reason people belief the theory is that they don't know what the theory states in detail. They think things evolve which they do in micro evolution, however not macro evolution.

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Relationships Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 2/22/13
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Post a New Blog



Warwick:

If you are so happy to believe what God knows about creation, why not take him at his ACTUAL word? Every time you discuss this, you embelish "days" by calling them "ordinary 24 hour days". If that is so obvious from the text, you need not embelish it. And if it ISN'T obvious from the text, you SHOULDN'T add to scripture what isn't there.
---StrongAxe on 3/8/13

Amen. An example of seeing on your part Axe. "Some", we could say most preachery types avoid the scripture they can never understand and dwell on more gray material and seldom edify's truth.
---Trav on 3/10/13


Peter:

Warwick's constant protests notwithstanding, Genesis doesn't say just how long the creation days actually were. For example, we NOW measure days by the earth's rotation around the sun (i.e. the sun's position in the sky), but such a measure must necessarily have been meaningless before the sun was created - so some other measure must have been in place at least then.

God did not give specifics about that. I guess he didn't consider it important to do so.
---StrongAxe on 3/10/13


StrongAxe, you have it backwards. I am saying what God's word says. Genesis 1:3-5 reports God made light "..... God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day."

So what is 1 day, the 1st ever day? It is composed of a period of darkness, followed by a period of light. What is the only period of time which is so composed? A 24hr day. It is relevant that in the Middle East today each new day still starts at "evening", just as God describes it. Maybe you are not aware of this.

Relevantly the Hebrew expert, as quoted below is adamant the days of creation are meant to be taken as 24hr days, as confirmed by Exodus 20:8-11.
---Warwick on 3/10/13


I see no point
---Peter on 3/9/13

Good post, so lets wait and see hos g clarifies his statement

God says CLEARLY he does not measure time the way we do.
---g on 3/9/13
---francis on 3/10/13


g, where does God say Genesis ch.1 is "types and shadows?"

Relevantly, and in direct contradiction of your views, Jesus and the apostles quoted from or alluded to the first 11 chapters of Genesis (including ch.1) no less than 107 times and always as historical reality. No "types and shadows" spoken of!
---Warwick on 3/10/13




Axis: "Facts' validity are based solely on their content, not the character, wisdom or even sanity of those who belive them."

OK, genius, give us one fact validating the fantasies of these three nut cases that you KNOW for a FACT to be true - just one!


"The Bible says God created, but doesn't go into great details about HOW."

Isa 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens, God himself that formed the earth and made it,

Psa 33:6 By the word of the LORD were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Psa 33:9 For he spake, and it was done, he commanded, and it stood fast.

That should be enough detail for any Christian.
---jerry6593 on 3/10/13


StrongAxe: Your comment about believing God created and believing Darin in the evolution sounds nice, but it involves too many 'cuts', I think, into Genesis

If we change 'let the earth bring forth living creatures..' to 'let the earth evolve living creatures', which seems to be what you are suggesting, we have two massive problems:

1) Time - the 7 days would have to be much longer - which is troublesome

2) Death - if time was so long, all the animals can't have stayed alive, or the world would have been too full, so death must have begun before the fall of man, but death is usually assumed to be a punishment for sin...

Personally, I can't agree with either of the two.....
---Peter on 3/9/13


Warwick:

Again, you insist on interpreting what you think the Bible MUST mean, rather than just letting it speak for itself.


jerry6593:

I didn't say they were not permissible, just not relevant to the topic. Many blogs here get off topic. Whether Darwin was Christian, Atheist or even Scientologist has no bearing on his theory's validity. Facts' validity are based solely on their content, not the character, wisdom or even sanity of those who belive them.

The Bible says God created, but doesn't go into great details about HOW. It's possible to believe Darwin and Gamow about the intermediate steps happens, and still believe God is responsible for the big picture.
---StrongAxe on 3/9/13


Francis: the term you use 'time is not pressing for God as it is for us'.

Bear in mind that terms like 'time is pressing for God' is a very English phrase, so it would not be in the original.

But the point it that the argument about time can only be used if one FIRST desires to dispute Gen 1, and then we must ask WHY?

Unless one has first decided that evolutionary theory is 'better', then why argue with the idea that the seven days are actual days?

I see no point
---Peter on 3/9/13


God says CLEARLY he does not measure time the way we do.
---g on 3/9/13
where did he say that?
The bible says that time is not pressing for God as it is for us

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
---francis on 3/9/13




g, 'day' is used with a number throughout Genesis 1. It is used as a
singular or plural with a number 410 times outside of Genesis and it always means an ordinary day. 'Evening' and 'morning' are used together without 'day' 38 times outside Genesis 1 and it always indicates an ordinary day. 'Evening' or
'morning' are used 23 times each with 'day' outside Genesis 1 and it
always means an ordinary day. And 'night' is used with 'day' 52 times
and it always indicates an ordinary day.

I have given you specifs, not unfounded ideas, specifically show me where the above is wrong.

I believe your desire to hold onto types and shadows is because you do not want to accept Genesis ch. 1 as written.
---Warwick on 3/9/13


g, Professor James Barr, Chair of Hebrew, Oxford university, (a world renowned expert in Hebrew)wrote the following in a letter to David C.C. Watson. BTW Barr is a liberal who does not believe Biblical events actually happened.

"Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that:
a) Creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience.

No "types" or "shadows" here!
---Warwick on 3/9/13


Warwick there is enough biblical support that the 6 days are not our literal 6 days..God calls it types and shadows.

God says CLEARLY he does not measure time the way we do.
The 6 days God commands us to observe is a SHADOW of what HE did.
You can continue to argue your literally 6 days but it just won't work with what God has told us about himself.
If we trust God, and I do, then we should take ALL of what he says is truth.
That includes HIS meaurement of time.
By the way, I don't think Darwin had it right either.
---g on 3/9/13


StrongAxe, I embellish nothing. In Exodus 20:8-11 God commands man to work 6 days, rest the 7th because He created in 6 days, rested the seventh. If they are not ordinary 24hour earth-rotation days, as man has always lived, the Commandment is meaningless. And the Israelites could not have known when the Sabbath was, worked upon it and been executed (Exodus 31:15) and you would have us believe God was not specific in His meaning!

God commanded the Israelites to gather manna on the 6 days, but abstain doing so on the 7th day, the Sabbath. How long were these days?

We have been through this many times before and no one has provide any Biblical support for a contrary view. Therefore the contrary view is not Biblical.
---Warwick on 3/9/13


Axster: "This is a blog abot [sic] Darwinism"

How good of you to chide me about the permissible content of my own blog. Mr. g brought up the Big Bang theory, and I was responding to his take on it by pointing out that, like Darwin's goo-to-you fantasy, it too was of satanic origin. The Big Bang, Nebular Hypothesis, and Evolution form the entire framework of the atheist's creation paradigm. It is wholly at odds with the Bible, as:

Isa 45:12 I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

It's hard to see how Gamow, Swedenborg and Darwin can be reconciled with that scripture.

---jerry6593 on 3/9/13


jerry6593:

This is a blog abot Darwinism - i.e. what Darwin taught about the creation of higher species from lower ones. What Darwin may have believed about any other subject is not relevant to this discussion.


Warwick:

If you are so happy to believe what God knows about creation, why not take him at his ACTUAL word? Every time you discuss this, you embelish "days" by calling them "ordinary 24 hour days". If that is so obvious from the text, you need not embelish it. And if it ISN'T obvious from the text, you SHOULDN'T add to scripture what isn't there.
---StrongAxe on 3/8/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


I am quite happy to believe that our God who was there knows far more about the truth of our origins than falible sinful men who weren't there.
---Warwick on 3/5/13

If you are happy with that, It doesn't bother me.
I know the word of God states that God deos not measure time the way we do.That is bible.
I know that Genesis creation is from God's point of view, not man's.
I have actaully measured what happened in the Genesis acount to the big bang theory and creation of the universe. An they match perfectly.

Just cause you don't have the open mind to understand that both accounts can be right, is not my problem.
---g on 3/7/13


Although Darwin did indeed mention his belief in abiogenesis in a letter, he didn't have the Big Bang theory in his book of fairy tales, since the science fiction writer George Gamow hadn't written it yet. He did, however, have access to Emanuel Swedenborg's Nebular Hypothesis Theory (swirling gasses producing stars and planets), which Swedenborg "received" during a seance.

Darwin himself had his Evolution epiphany on the Galapagos archipelago after attending a witchcraft ceremony on mainland South America. Kinda makes you wonder who's behind these theories, and why any Christian would go near them.




---jerry6593 on 3/7/13


StrongAxe I explain again. Darwin had little scientific knowledge, and of course less than scientists of today. Research after his time showed his theory failed so mutations were added to the brew to make it work-this is called Neo-Darwinism. It doesn't work anyway.

No matter what Darwin did or did not write about, billions of years and abiogenesis are integral parts of modern evolutionary theory. Therfore I am not undermined in any way.

I have not compared Biblical creation with Darwinism, as you say, but with evolution. For example "Bible: Earth before sun and stars. Evolution: Stars and sun before earth." You must get your facts straight or you could be fairly accused of putting words in my mouth! Not a good look.
---Warwick on 3/6/13


StrongAxe: I suspect that this is actually something we all do (use one name for a general idea that does not fully match that one word). Most people who accept creation use terms with the term 'Darwin' somewhere in there to mean the theory of evolution, not actually the theories Darwin himself developed

Also, remember that Warwick has to answer everything in 75 words, and it's hard to make a complete statement is no few words - if Warwick could write you a complete essay, I'm sure it would be far better developed!
---Peter on 3/6/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


Warwick:

Whether or not you have any interest in Darwin's beliefs, it weakens your own case if you try to refute him by quoting things he never actually said anything about. This means you are not refuting the ACTUAL Darwin, but a straw man of your own creation.
---StrongAxe on 3/6/13


StrongAxe, I have little interest in Darwin's beliefs as no knowledgeable person today accepts Darwinism. That it why we today talk about Neo-Darwinism. The evolutionary belief is innextricably bound up with vast ages, to allow mircobe to man evolution to occur, and abiogenesis, life arising from non-life by chance random processes.

The list I have given compares the two beliefs properly within the constraints of 125 words. It shows God did not use evolution, as the two beliefs bear no likeness.
---Warwick on 3/6/13


Warwick:

In many other blogs related to this subject, you repeatedly quote a list of "The Bible says X. Darwinism says Y." Some of these things deal with evolutions of species, which is what Darwin spoke about. But many of these deal with cosmological issues (creation of the earth, sun, stars, oceans, etc.) - things Darwin did NOT speak about at ALL. Darwin and the Big Bang theory are NOT the same, and if you bring up one while discussing the other, it means you don't really understand the difference - or you don't care.
---StrongAxe on 3/6/13


From my discussions with those of evolutionary creation, it comes from a confusion with the 6000 years of dispensational time.
Someone thought that the 6000 years indicated the length of the existence of the universe. It doesn't.

Every other E.C. argument stems from this one issue.
---jan4378 on 3/6/13


Shop For Christian Publishers


g, You wrote "if you study the creation against what happened when the universe was formed according to science, you would get a very big surprise."

I have asked you to explain your meaning without success. Maybe you believe I do not know what the socalled 'scientific' explanation of our origins is? Many friends and acquaintances are scientists so I am well versed in the ever-changing 'scientific belief concerning origins.

I am also well aware that the long-ages/evolutionary beliefs of origins are contradicted by God's account in Genesis.

I am quite happy to believe that our God who was there knows far more about the truth of our origins than falible sinful men who weren't there.
---Warwick on 3/5/13


James, Joshua says God delayed the sunset "about a full day", meaning this is not an ordinary day, and why.

Day is used with a number throughout Genesis 1, and is used (singular or plural) with a number 410 times outside Genesis-always meaning an ordinary day 24hr day. There is every reason to understand the 6 days of creation/7th of rest in Genesis ch.1 and Exodus 20:8-11 are c24hr days, and no Biblical reason to believe otherwise. If they are not c24hr days then this Commandment, written by God's finger, is meaningless.

In Genesis ch. 1 note the repetition of-And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day, the second day... In the Middle East even still today, each day begins at evening.
---Warwick on 3/4/13


James: "How do you know that God wanted the first 7 days to be of 24 hours?"

Because God ORDERED us to count them and rest on the seventh one. Have you ever seen a day that was significantly different than 24 hours? Neither have I. So don't worry about that which doesn't concern you. Just count six days and rest on the Sabbath Day like God told you to do.


---jerry6593 on 3/4/13


Warwick: You are forgetting that there are at least 2 times in the Bible (Joshua 10:12-14 and 2 King 20:10 - which is probably the same as Isaiah 38:8) when God has made a day longer.

So you reject the idea of a longer day, but you forget that God has also decided to make days of different times for His own reasons

How do you know that God wanted the first 7 days to be of 24 hours?
---James on 3/3/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


g, 1 24hr day is 1 rotation of the earth. It consists of evening (night-dark) and morning (day-light) as Genesis says.

Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man-Mark 2:27. Therefore the 6 days mentioned twice in Exodus 20:8-11 are 24hr earth days.

I agree God's time is not our time, He lives outside of time, not in days of any length.

You wrote "if you study the creation against what happened when the universe was formed according to science, you would get a very big surprise." What do you mean?

Two Timothy 3:16 "All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." So in whose terms, and for whom was Scripture written?
---Warwick on 3/2/13


Warwick I don't think God is mistaken.
I know that God is speaking from what HE sees not man.
God SEES 6 days.
He sees the beginning and the end of a thing!
Does man? No.
We have to understand that God's time is NOT our time.
God is outside of time and real time is measured by LIGHT not a clock that we look at everyday.
Its not me who disagrees or argues trying to figure God out. Thats you because you refuse to believe that science can prove God is real.
I happen to believe that science PROVES God is real.
one cannot get something from nothing. Only GOD can do that.
if you study the creation against what happened when the universe was formed according to science, you would get a very big surprise.
---g on 3/1/13


trey sounds like you have a sweet family. after my husband was saved, he sure changed. I loved being with him after he have his life to Christ. the change was so profound, everyone could see it that was ever around him. He has been gone since 07 and it is still fresh to me. seems like 6 months ago. many things on these blogs are so not in line with God's Word. God told us to wipe our shoes off and go the other way. I have had to do that even with some of my family. God bless you trey
---shira4368 on 2/28/13


---shira4368 on 2/28/13
Good post keep it up

but always remember

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.
---francis on 2/28/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


g: "God told Moses what to write in the book of Genesis. And it was NOT from Mose's(man's) point of view. It was from God's."

Not exactly. There was one written document that God wrote with His own finger in stone. In that document, God Himself wrote:

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Do you think that God was mistaken?



---jerry6593 on 3/1/13


Shira, may I just say that breaks my heart!

My wife and I were blessed when we were raising our kids. The teachers were christians. They told the kids they didn't believe the things they were teaching but it was part of the cirriculum that the teachers had to teach. My wife is a teacher and nearly all the ladies she teaches with are christians. It is not unusual for these ladies to get together and pray for each other or students.
---trey on 2/28/13


francis, I am not a genius in genetics but I do know what God said in His Word. when a couple has children from a different race, someone back several generations ago had to make the difference with sexual intercourse. there are many things God didn't tell us in His Word. If God had written down all, we wouldn't have enough years to even read it. there are many things we don't understand but we must know God made a way for man to be redeemed. that is really we all need to know but we are hungry for the truth and God's Word has the truth we need to know if we study to show ourselves approved.
---shira4368 on 2/28/13


my grandson is 11. he learned about Darwin. his opinion is not worth the time of day. why are our children learning about a heretic that was atheist. this is just wrong. I ask my daughter in law if she was going to confront the teacher and she said no. "my son knows darwin is an atheist". how can she know what my grandson thinks, she is too busy to spend much time with him.
---shira4368 on 2/28/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


francis: "So if they had all stayed together, and lived in the plans of Shinar would we still have all the different races?"

Probably not,
---jerry6593 on 2/28/13

That is exactly the point.
The races that we see today are a result of the environment over time

If we can clearly see this effect of the environment overtime in humans, can we not expect to see it in other life forms?
---francis on 2/28/13


g, (why such a long name?)the Bible is God's story to man, written in terms man can will understand.

There is no need of me to prove the days of creation are 24hr days, as God has plainly said they are. In Exodus 20:8-11 God said He created in 6 days and rested the 7th so man would work 6 days and rest the 7th. Are you saying man's 6 days of work etc are not 24 hour days? If so what Scripture do you base your claim upon?

God's word talks of shepherds, sunrise, sunset, rain falling, let the water under the sky, etc, all these are reality, from God, but in terms we understand.

The dates of things in the past are not scientifically proveable but assumptions.
---Warwick on 2/28/13


Darwin stated, in his "Origin of the Species" "I am aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often leading to conclusions directly opposite to those which I have arrived".
I wonder why his modern day devotees suffer apoplexy when evolution is questioned?
---John_Broughall on 2/28/13


francis: "So if they had all stayed together, and lived in the plans of Shinar would we still have all the different races?"

Probably not, but that's not what happened, so why speculate. Race was not an important concept in the Bible. Pity that men make it so today - giving preferential treatment to some because of the color of their skin.



---jerry6593 on 2/28/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


g, in reality Genesis 1 is written in man's terms.
Warwick//
Nope!
Warwick, God told Moses what to write in the book of Genesis. And it was NOT from Mose's(man's) point of view. It was from God's.
You can try to prove 24 hr days all you want but it is not fact from man's point of view.

The bible is CLEAR that God does NOT measure days as we do.
A clock measures OUR time NOT God's.
How do you explain native Americans LIVING in America 10,000 years ago? Or Egypt 8000 years ago?
And these are DOCUMENTED things.
Not 24 hr days according to man.
Only to God who is beyond our understanding
---g on 2/28/13


Francis, from what I see, I conclude God, as Genesis says made His creatures to reproduce after their own kind- humans produce nothing but humans. However Adam and Eve's children, and their children's children were not identical twins. Their 'created in' genetic variability was evident from the beginning. See Genesis 27:11.

By the time of the flood this variation, by combination and recombination of genes would have produced considerable variability in the population. Post flood, in Babel times this inheritant variability would have expressed itself in different appearance and skin tones. Environmental factors would have played a part but they cannot have any effect if the possibility for variation was not there in the beginning.
---Warwick on 2/27/13


Francis, time and evironment can do nothing unless the necessary genetic variability is there from the beginning, created in.
---Warwick on 2/26/13
---Warwick on 2/26/13


francis: By now you should understand that genetic variation is not the same as evolution.
---jerry6593 on 2/26/13

So if they had all stayed together, and lived in the plans of Shinar would we still have all the different races?
---francis on 2/26/13
---francis on 2/27/13


Francis, time and evironment can do nothing unless the necessary genetic variability is there from the beginning, created in. For example a pure bred animal is one which has almost all the original genetic variability bred out. Time, chance or environment then have little, if anything, with which to work.

The evidence of our eyes is that God created all His creatures with the genetic potential for great variability. This has allowed mankind to adapt to different or changing environmental conditions. This is not any kind of evolution but a design feature.

God's living world is one of intentional beauty and variety. How boring it would be without this magnificent variety.
---Warwick on 2/26/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


francis: By now you should understand that genetic variation is not the same as evolution.
---jerry6593 on 2/26/13

So if they had all stayed together, and lived in the plans of Shinar would we still have all the different races?
---francis on 2/26/13


The fact is that is was not just time that created the races, it was also environment

The environment helped shape the hair, nose, eyes and mouth, so that these people, although they came from one man, could survive in their chosen environment
---francis on 2/26/13


francis: By now you should understand that genetic variation is not the same as evolution. Warwick and 1st Cliff have summed up nicely the refutation of your thesis:

Do poodles when bred with poodles produce dobermans?

Same with humans ,diversity lies within the genes, tall short ,dark light still "humans!"

Another concept you need to digest is that Evolution, if true, would require impossibly long time periods. Thus whether the earth is 6000, 8000 or 10000 years old, they are all much too short for Darwin's theory to work. So why argue the point?



---jerry6593 on 2/26/13


When God created the first "dog" no one knows if it was a St.Bernard or a Lhasa Apso.
Cross a Labrador Retriever and a Poodle and you get a Labradoodle (beautiful dog) but it is still just a "DOG" not a new creation.
Same with humans ,diversity lies within the genes, tall short ,dark light still "humans!"
---1st_cliff on 2/25/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


Francis:

1) What part of Acts 17:26 don't you believe?

2) Why are you so keen to disregard God's word, preferring man-made explanations?

3) If you understood genetics you would be able to answer your own question!

I will give you a hint. A spaniel, and a poodle, though very different in appearance can breed and produce viable offspring. This proves they are both of the one dog kind, and of the one species. Therefore both of these dogs are the descendants of the original dog kind God created. Do poodles when bred with poodles produce dobermans?
---Warwick on 2/25/13


Warwick on 2/25/13

Nice post
So God took two people and made of these two all the races.

OK, so why is it that we do not see negros coming from caucasians, or asians coming from hispanics?

Do humans still have the ability to create different races from two people of same race?
---francis on 2/25/13


francis:

You said: years ago I did a calculation.

Archibishop Ussher did the same thing, using literal times from all the "begats" in the Bible, and calculated the date of creation as 4004 B.C.

6163 is still fairly close to 6000 (i.e. less than 3% off). Each "begat" might vary 1-2 years since months aren't mentioned but there aren't thousands of generations.

"missing years between kings" may be unknown, but we thus can't assume any specific value. Why do you assume 2000 years? Or is it just that your new figures now more closer match those of others than the ones you remember having done years ago (which would make sense). (In contrast, Eloy always used to insist on 10000 years).
---StrongAxe on 2/25/13


430 years in egypt
450 years of judges ( acts 13)
520 years of kings
70 years of captivity
400 years between return and birth of jesus
2009 years from bith of Jesus till now

~6129 years
what is missing is years between kings, and actual month of birth dates
6163
---francis on 2/25/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Marc on 2/23/13

I will use the word "character of God" is that better.
To put it into context if you were an Israelite you would only know that Abraham said "God would bless you and make you a mighty nation." that quote was over 400 years old to Israelites and they had just been free from slavery. You would not have any knowledge of God.
In the beginning God, (God exist athesim not true) created the heavens and the earth (polytheism not true because creation created by opposing forces and many gods). All other options of God are destoryed.
In todays context we can see God is good, wonderful, perfect. See sermonaudio app Art Neurnberg "Introduction to God"
---Scott1 on 2/25/13


~ -AGE OF THE EARTH
Genesis 5:3 Seth: 130
Genesis 5:6 Enos 235
Genesis 5:9 Cainan: 334
Genesis 5:12 Mahalaleel: 404
Genesis 5:15 Jared: 469
Genesis 5:18 Enoch: 631
Genesis 5:21 Methuselah 696
Genesis 5:25 Lamech 883
Genesis 5:28 Noah 1065
Genesis 5:32 Shem 1565.
Genesis 11:10 Arphaxad 1665
Genesis 11:12 Salah: 1700
Genesis 11:14 Eber 1730
Genesis 11:16 Peleg: 1764
Genesis 11:18 Reu 1794
Genesis 11:20 Serug 1862
Genesis 11:22 Nahor 1856
Genesis 11:24 Terah 1885
Genesis 11:26 Abram 1955
Genesis 21:5 Isaac 2055
Genesis 25:26 Jacob: 2115

2115 this is as far as we can go with birth dates
---francis on 2/25/13


Francis, God's word (Acts 17:26) says God made all nations of men from 1 man. Therefore all of us, of all the so-called 'races' (not a Biblical term), are closely related. That all peoples can breed and produce viable offspring means we are not only the 1 kind (human kind) but also the 1 species. What about Eve? Genesis 3:20 says that Adam named his wife Eve because she would become the mother of all living. Therefore Adam and Eve are the original pair from whom all peoples have come.

We also need to remember there are not different skin colours but different shades of the one colour, all effected by the one pigment melanin. As well the genetic differences between the people groups are tiny and mostly differences of appearance.
---Warwick on 2/25/13


God confused their language so they could not communicate. that strongly suggest different people and different language.
---shira4368 on 2/24/13
It started different languages yes, but as someone else pointed out, the different skin tones did not come about until people moved to different parts of the world

If simply changing languages could create a new ethnic group, then those who are bilingual have the potential to create babies of their second language

Different ethnic groups / races,. came about by people being subject to different environments for long periods of time
---francis on 2/24/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Verses


francis, God can do anything He wants to whenever He wants to. all I know is what my bible says. God confused their language so they could not communicate. that strongly suggest different people and different language.
---shira4368 on 2/24/13


"...years ago I did a calculation.
Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth:
Genesis 5:6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:
From these two text i came up with and earth ago of 1035 when Enos was born..."-francis on 2/24/13
-You need to take math again.
-130 + 105 = 235 not 1035.
-You are already 800 years off in the first 5 chapters of the Bible.
---micha9344 on 2/24/13


As for the separation of races, it is by mendellian genetics - not by Evolution.
---jerry6593 on 2/24/13

Lets say that you are right, and that is it by mendellian genetics, If a negro couple fave 4 children should noty one of them be Asian?

Or if a causasian couple have four children, should not one of them be negroid?
---francis on 2/24/13


--StrongAxe on 2/23/13
years ago I did a calculation.

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth:

Genesis 5:6 And Seth lived an hundred and five years, and begat Enos:

From these two text i came up with and earth ago of 1035 when Enos was born

I did this for all of Genesis, the 430 years in Rgypt, 40 years in the wilderness, the length or reign of each judge, and between judges, length of reign of each king, length of time in captivity, length of time from return to captivity to Jesus, and length of time from Jesus till today.

It was ~8000 years.
---francis on 2/24/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Arthritis


francis: I would also like to know where the extra 2000 years came from. As for the separation of races, it is by mendellian genetics - not by Evolution. When Noah's family left the Ark, and when the builders of the tower of Babel inhabited Mesopotamia, they were all of one skin color - a light brown - as indeed the people of the Middle East are today. When God scattered those people by languages, those who migrated south into Africa became darker, and those who went to Nordic areas became lighter. It's that simple. It doesn't take Evolution to change skin color. Evolution supposedly takes eons, but one can get nearly the original (Noah's Ark) color in nine months when a black and a white make a child.



---jerry6593 on 2/24/13


francis:

I am curious how you, who seem to be a strict Biblical literalist (since you always argue for the plain literal interpretation of Genesis 1) come up with the idea that man has been around for 8000 years, when a literal interpretation of Biblical genealogies comes up with a figure much closer to 6000 years? For example, Archibishop Ussher calculated that the earth was created in 4004 BC (making this the year 6017), and the Jewish calendar lists this as around year 5700? Where did you get those extra 2000 years from?
---StrongAxe on 2/23/13


---shira4368 on 2/23/13

How did the races come about if all came from ONE person.
Can Caucasians living in north america produce a different race?

Under what contitions and time can we get one race to have offspring of an entirely different race which is what must have happened since all came from Adam and Eve
---francis on 2/23/13


Marc: Maybe it was irrelevant, if so I'm sorry.

I just mean there are times when the Bible does not actually use the phrase (like 'nature of God') but someone might be able, reading the passage, to still understand more about what God is like.

You do say 'read into it', which is OK, but the use of the term 'preconceived reason' is a bit too heavy, I'd say.

It may be a reason that was worked out while reading the passage, not preconceived

I know I can be long-winded sometimes!
---Peter on 2/23/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Asthma


francis, God separated the races at the tower of babel. I'm surprised you don't know that but after all it isn't one of the laws.
---shira4368 on 2/23/13


Did man evolve from fish -> frog -> monkey then man. NO
God made man fully formed from the dust

Can you see a difference between a Japanese, a Korean, a Vietnamese, a Chinese, a Native American, an African, a Causation, and and Eskimo?

They all look different, different nose, cheek bone, hair, different eyes, different forehead, and yet they all came from one man, Adam.

Ever wonder what caused them all to look so different after only 8000+ years on earth?

In a little over 8000+ years we have so many ethnic groups, every wonder what caused this?

Ever wonder why it is that we do not see Caucasians making negro babies yet we all came from one man: Adam?
---francis on 2/23/13


Peter,

Can't quite follow your point. You seemed to have omitted something from your argument.

In any case, it appears to me that you've committed the Fallacy of the Irrelevant Analogy. That is, you imply that the Gospels' non-mention of The Passion is analogous to Genesis' non-mention of God's nature. I really can't see the common feature between the two except for your word "non-mention".

Genesis 1 is about creation. If you want to read into it God's attributes, fine, but to say that this is what Genesis 1 is primarily speaking about seems far too tendentious.
---Marc on 2/23/13


Warwick: I think that so-called evolutionary scientists are in a major quandary these days. From mathematics to genetics to the geologic sciences, everywhere they turn, they are met with yet another roadblock to their pet theory. Like the Cosmologists and their Big Bang Theory, they just keep adding band-aid after band-aid to their failed theory in the vain hope of keeping it alive. My favorite is "Punctuated Equilibrium", which on the surface looks more like fiat creation than classic darwinian Evolution.


born: I think you are right on about the educational system indoctrination. In the US, that system is politically left wing, and they are a Godless bunch.


---jerry6593 on 2/23/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Cholesterol


Warwick, you have a point.... At this point, the scientific papers are either micro-evolution (which could occur if there was enough time, I guess - you know, people getting taller or suchlike) or just a description of what changed, but not HOW

The how seems to be from just a few 'hardcore evolutionary nuts' who still try to prove that 'it all happened by chance'. But I don't see many of their research papers being quoted by others much, so I think the idea is getting less and less
---Peter on 2/22/13


Marc: Your complains to Scott1 about 'nature of God' is a bot simplistic. It is true that 'nature of God' does not occur in the passage, yes.

But then, the four terms in the four gospels of the crucifixion of Christ have traditionally, by most Christians, been know as the Passion of Christ, or sometimes the sufferings of Christ (in old English descriptions) - but neither is actually used in any translation, although I have the impression that Tynedale (1534), who did the first English Bible, used 'Passion' somewhere

But not all the words that have a meaning are actually used in the text - we have to understand what is meant
---Peter on 2/22/13


Each person has one's own character with motives for what one believes. So, I can't speak for all who believe in evolution.

I am studying how immune cells work. How many mutations would it take, and this in the right timing, to make one immune cell that is able to follow a chemical scent trail in body tissue to a germ, then take a bit of it and show that germ's chemical bit to another immune cell so it gets another kind of cell to make antibodies, and then mutations also make cells and proteins which destroy germs marked by those antibodies?

Does this sound statistically realistic, in ten or so billion years??
---willie_c: on 2/22/13


Scott1,

You say that Genesis 1 is not about creation but about the nature of God. I can't find the words 'nature of God' in the text so that must be something you've read into it for a preconceived reason.

However, I do read the word 'create' several times in the text.

You might be missing something by reading something that's not there.
---Marc on 2/22/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Lasik Surgery


Why is the anti-biblical concept of creation by Darwinian evolution so appealing to some Christians? Because it is being taught in school and taught on TV and taught in college, and taught on nature programs and in magazines. I think "INTELLIGENT DESIGN" wins over evolution as there is no way that this is random or by chance. DETAIL DETAIL DETAIL. No accident. Now some athiests agree to Intelligent Design (only these maintain that the intelligent designer could not be God, but some alien intelligence).
---Born on 2/22/13


Jerry, does any scientist consider Darwinian evolution to be fact? Today they talk of NeoDarwinism because increasing knowledge of genetics showed Darwin's idea invalid because there was no mechanism to provide the massive amounts of totally new, unique, and specific genetic information which would be needed to turn one kind (e.g. reptile) into another kind (e.g. bird). Evolutionists then added mutations to the 'brew' but that doesn't help as mutations do not add the new genetic information, as described above.

Christians and others accept it as it is widely taught as fact by socalled experts. It is like the emperors lack of clothes. The onlookers were so intimidated they were not prepared to point out he was naked.
---Warwick on 2/22/13


The Bible is very vague in terms of what actually happened especially in the creation story. The main reason is that the creation story is not about creation but about the nature of God. We also have a very scientific mind, cause and effect, even for none science people. Thus we make up stuff in our mind to fill in the gaps. Another example is history in the Bible especially wars and geography of trying to imagine ourselves in the biblical time for context and meaning. How much we dive into context and filling in the gaps is difficult to determine.
---Scott1 on 2/22/13


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