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

Belief In Evolution

Why do some Christians believe in Evolution?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Evolution Bible Quiz
 ---jerry6593 on 12/4/15
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



If God created the earth last week man will still use his measuring devices, computers and calculations to measure the earth as being billions of years old.
---Steveng on 1/19/16


jerry6593:

You wrote: do you see any validity at all in the concept of creation by evolution?

Genesis is extremly brief about creation, and supplies next to no details. These days, we understand more and more about details of how the world works, so it's natural to be curious about those things that aren't explicitly written down. Even though we can't directly observe evolution, many of the required processes have been observed (e.g. natural selection, how chimpanzee's 48 chromosomes relate to human's 46, primordial soup with inorganic chemicals developing into basic organic components in mere decades, etc.)
---StrongAxe on 1/19/16


StrongAxe: "I was just replying to your comment, not starting a tangent of my own."

And I was just responding to my old nemesis, cluny - not to you. If you'll notice, I always address the person to whom I'm commenting, as do you. It is annoying how many on this site do not specify whom they are addressing, and one must read many unrelated blog entries to find out.

Back to the topic, do you see any validity at all in the concept of creation by evolution?



---jerry6593 on 1/19/16


jerry6593:

You wrote: StrongAxe: What? No apology? I don't expect any from cluny, but I thought you were of a higher character.

Some people have lives that include other activies besides hitting REPLY one second after a message is posted. I hadn't yet decided how to answer.

This site's posting and archiving rules are archaic. Unlike any other blog I have seen, only the most recent few comments are visible, so it's often impossible to see just who mentioned something first. Even if you didn't mention EGW first, you mentioned her before I did. I was just replying to your comment, not starting a tangent of my own.
---StrongAxe on 1/18/16


StrongAxe: What? No apology? I don't expect any from cluny, but I thought you were of a higher character.


---jerry6593 on 1/18/16


Well, that's certainly a mistake. At times, I think Cluny may even be of higher moral character than StrongAxe. While Cluny often resorts to childish attacks and name-calling and cannot be reasoned with using logic and scripture, StrongAxe just flat out lies. Parsing word's is StrongAxe's game. Personally, I think practicing deceit is a little worse than childishness.
---Jed on 1/18/16




StrongAxe: What? No apology? I don't expect any from cluny, but I thought you were of a higher character.


---jerry6593 on 1/18/16


StrongAxe: "I didn't bring her up. You did."

Not at all true! If you would take the time to look, you'd find that it was CLUNY who brought her up. He always uses her as his fallback whenever he is cornered logically. Pathetic.

As for your assertions about her false prophecies, you would do well to read her actual writings rather than out-of-context hit pieces on hate-SDA websites. You might actually learn something.


cluny: The only difference between yours and Darwin's beliefs is that you think God helped self-creation along and Darwin didn't.



---jerry6593 on 1/16/16


Cluny, "Some people are not, however." True.

Its the Lords word that matters.

Once I posted a question about the need for studying Hebrew, at the time having been turned off by much pontificating by some in academia. However, I have begun to appreciate the value of studying not just Hebrew, but ancient Hebrew and it is in part because of a plethora of translations and interpretations which may confuse. Ultimately the Lord is who we seek for truth, as He is its source.
---chria9396 on 1/16/16


\\Cluny, "chria, the lexica in the back of Strong's Concordance are NOT the last words in Biblical lexicography,"

I am aware of that, and never stated otherwise.
---chria9396 on 1/15/16\\

Some people are not, however.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/15/16


\\Some proof! I have refuted your false assertions about EGW every time you make them, but you seem unable to learn. \\

YOu claim that, but **I** am self-deluded?

\\But I know that you can't quite let go of Crazy Uncle Charlie's fantasy,\\

I've told you many times I don't believe in Darwin. You still accuse me of it, but **I** am self-deluded?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/15/16




Cluny, "chria, the lexica in the back of Strong's Concordance are NOT the last words in Biblical lexicography,"

I am aware of that, and never stated otherwise.
---chria9396 on 1/15/16


jerry6593:

You wrote: EGW is not the subject of this blog, Evolution is.

True, but earlier you wrote: My doctrine comes from the Bible alone. Since EGW got hers from the same source, I believe her as well.

I didn't bring her up. You did. I was only challenging the validity of the above comment.

Google: "ellen g white" "false prophet".
There are many links, but the first one suffices. Near the top, it quotes EGW's vision of seeing a temple in the Holy City, contradicting John's vision where he saw that there is no need for a temple there, because God himself is there. (There are many instances of her false prophecies there also.)
---StrongAxe on 1/15/16


cluny: "Both StrongAxe and I have many times."

Some proof! I have refuted your false assertions about EGW every time you make them, but you seem unable to learn. EGW is not the subject of this blog, Evolution is. But I know that you can't quite let go of Crazy Uncle Charlie's fantasy, so you start diversionary discussions and descend into childish name calling. Pity.


Thanks StrongAxe for the defense.


---jerry6593 on 1/15/16


Jerry, the reason they believe in evolution is because they have no faith in the Word of God, Scripture. What other reason would there be?
They believe in something not in the Bible.
---Luke on 1/15/16


Cluny:

You wrote: When StrongAxe pointed out that EGW had issued false prophecies, stupid said, ...

Even if one is sure such terminology is justified, one should still be very careful when using it:

Matthew 5:22
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.
---StrongAxe on 1/14/16


chria, the lexica in the back of Strong's Concordance are NOT the last words in Biblical lexicography, as I have frequently said here.

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/14/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


evening: H6153 ereb
evening,night, sunset, mingled,Arabia, dusk

from H6150 - arab. primitive root [identical with(H6148) through idea of covering with a texture]
evening, darkened,to become evening, grow dark,spend the evening, do at evening,grow dusky at sundown:(toward) evening.
Strongs notes: To set, as the sun,depart far away, wander, hence, to draw towards evening
H6148 - arab
pledge, exchange,engage, undertake for, have fellowship with, share. primitive root, to braid, i.e. intermix, technically, to traffic (as if by barter), also or give to be security (as a kind of exchange):engage, (inter-) meddle (with), mingle (self), mortgage, occupy, give pledges, be(-come, put in) surety, undertake
---chria9396 on 1/14/16


Cont
Hebrew words given, using our alphabet, are sometimes spelled the same. Are these or other words always correctly translated, interpreted? How was it decided what pronunciation should be used if the only record of a word is a particular artifact? If translation, interpretation is based upon pronunciations of a particular time, how does one know changes have or have not occurred given certain variables, such as Babylonian captivity and any influences???
Ex: evening: H6153 ereb
From from H6150 arab
""rather identical with H6148"" arab
All three consist of the same 3 Hebrew letters, and without marks or points, would be identical but all have different meanings or nuances of meaning which may be significant.
---chria9396 on 1/13/16


trey asked: 1st, concerning your comment about the 24 hour day and how did they know since there was no sun.

Genesis 1:
1: day 1
8: day 2
10: earth
13: day 3
16: sun


chria9396:

Strong was only a man, and capable of error. His notes are not the Infallible Word of God.

"day" usually used "in the usual way", but 24 hours is not the definition, as there is at least one time it took more (i.e. Joshua's Long Day). Rather, it is a phenomenon based on how long it takes the earth to rotate once with respect to the sun.

However, even THAT definition had no meaning when neither the sun nor the earth existed (which was the case during the first few creation days.
---StrongAxe on 1/13/16


When StrongAxe pointed out that EGW had issued false prophecies, stupid said,

\\Prove it! \\

Both StrongAxe and I have many times.

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/13/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


Cluny "How were "evenings and mornings" determined?"

My question is our interpretation of evening and morning.
"The evening and the morning were the first day."
Considering Strongs definitions for evening, morning, first, day..all words one might not look up since they are common, with what may be fixed definitions in ones mind, its interesting to note that several of these, are given a number with a Hebrew word and definition derived from another Hebrew word,number and definition, both consisting of the same characters, the only difference being the marks added (dagesh?). It was my understanding marks were added during a particular time period for purposes of pronunciation. cont
---chria9396 on 1/13/16


Cluny,

1st, concerning your comment about the 24 hour day and how did they know since there was no sun. Please bring that up with the Holy Spirit since it was God who inspired all scripture - 2 Tim 3:16

2nd, concerning the leap seconds, you are exactly correct. This is due to the earth's rotation slowing as the earth ages. The whole of creation is suffering death due to the sin of Adam in the garden. This also means that days were slightly shorter in the beginning of time.
---trey on 1/12/16


axe: "EGW has done this multiple times."

Prove it!




clooney: "How were the first two day [sic] determined to be 24 hours long when the sun did not exist at that point?"

This is another one that you have been shown several times. Evenings and mornings are set by the earth's rotation - not by the light source. God was the light source.

Again you demonstrate your lack of Bible knowledge. The sun and moon were created on day 4 - not day 3. If you are implying that the first 3 days might have been enormously long, you have 2 problems. 1) Destruction caused by sudden change in rotational speed, and 2) Death of day 3 vegetation due to very long days and nights.


---jerry6593 on 1/13/16


How were the first two day determined to be 24 hours long when the sun did not exist at that point?

How were "evenings and mornings" determined?

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/12/16


Send a Free Get Well Ecard


jerry6593:

You wrote: My doctrine comes from the Bible alone. Since EGW got hers from the same source, I believe her as well.

The same bible that you and EGW both cherish says that you should not listen to a prophet who makes a prediction that does not come to pass. EGW has done this multiple times. So if you want to honor the same book she honored, you should have nothing to do with her. (This would not apply to most people, but by saying that anyone who rejects her words rejects the word of God, she places herself on the same level as prophets.)

God wrote SIX DAYS (of the approx. 24 hour sort).

No. The "24 hours apart" is what people read between the lines, because God never actually said it.
---StrongAxe on 1/11/16


/Actually, not all days ARE 24 hours long.
That's why leap seconds have to be inserted every so often.\-Cluny on 1/10/16
-Ironic that even the days that have "leap seconds" are still 24 hours in length.
Something even more ironic is that ordinal numbers were used for days 2-7.
And the discussion is whether these were ordinary days.
Ordinal and ordinary having the same root and origin.
---micha9344 on 1/11/16


monk: "Jerry said, 'Note: The evening and the morning were the first day. This is a 24 hour period.'"

You have become extremely tedious. I can't find that quote, but it is essentially correct. The fact is that the earth's rotation rate is indeed slowing due to tidal drag forces. (The same forces that caused the moon to lock phase with the earth.) But it is about 24 hours - not millions of years - as required for Darwin to be right. Even cluny's leap second can't do that.

God wrote SIX DAYS (of the approx. 24 hour sort). Why do you not accept that? Does your superior (from whom you get your beliefs) also believe Darwin rather than God?



---jerry6593 on 1/11/16


Actually, not all days ARE 24 hours long.

That's why leap seconds have to be inserted every so often.

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/10/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


Jerry said, "Note: The evening and the morning were the first day. This is a 24 hour period."

There is nowhere in the Sacred Scriptures that says that! If there is, please give me BCV.

Why are you so intent on a 6 day creation, with each night/day period being exactly 24 hours, each hour being 60 minutes, and each minute being 60 seconds?

I have already agreed with you on 6 days, but I have tried to point out to you that each day did not have to be 24 hours as we reckon time in this fallen world.

I'm praying for you,
Monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/10/16


monk: "Try to pay attention to what I am saying, Jerry, and not what you want to think that I am saying."

Perhaps you should try actually reading what you write. Better yet, have your superior explain the logic of your words to you.



cluny: Looks like your memory is slipping again. My doctrine comes from the Bible alone. Since EGW got hers from the same source, I believe her as well.

And when our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ said, "I am the vine, you are the branches," He didn't really mean it.



---jerry6593 on 1/9/16


Monk, in reading one of your earlier posts, the scripture says:
Ge 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Note: The evening and the morning were the first day. This is a 24 hour period.

Now let me ask you this: How old was Adam the first day he was created?
Answer: He was not an infant but a full grown man.
God did not make the earth in it's infancy. He made a "full grown" mature earth.

Let us rely on God's word not our imagination.
---trey on 1/9/16


\\God's Word NEVER changes! He said SIX Days and He meant it\\

And when our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ said, "This IS My Body, this IS My blood," He didn't really mean it.

Right?

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/8/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Education


\\ So you admit that you trust in the opinion of a mere man more than in the actual handwriting of God? There\\

Well, you trust the opinion of mere woman, jerry--and a medium who channelled religious spirit/s on top of it.

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/8/16


Jerry said, "I realize that you don't like to have your beliefs challenged, but that's no reason to descend into childish name calling."

Like you haven't?

"You first claimed that you go with the opinion of your superior if he (or she) agrees with your conscience. Now you claim that the check is God's Word. That logically would make your conscience God's Word."

No, I am saying that my conscience has been formed by the Word of God.

Try to pay attention to what I am saying, Jerry, and not what you want to think that I am saying.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/8/16


monk: "Meaning that what competent spiritual authority says has to line up with God's Word, idiot!"

I realize that you don't like to have your beliefs challenged, but that's no reason to descend into childish name calling. You first claimed that you go with the opinion of your superior if he (or she) agrees with your conscience. Now you claim that the check is God's Word. That logically would make your conscience God's Word. And you call me the idiot?

Here IS God's Word once again:

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.

Will you go with it now?

---jerry6593 on 1/8/16


Jerry said, "So you admit that you trust in the opinion of a mere man more than in the actual handwriting of God? There is no longer any use in corresponding with you as we have no common frame of reference."

BTW, that is not what I said! I used the phrase as "long as it does not clash with my conscience." Meaning that what competent spiritual authority says has to line up with God's Word, idiot!

The only verses that God wrote down were the Ten Commandments. He did not write the rest of the Bible by Himself. He used inspiration to motivate the various writers. And He did NOT write in Tudor diction English, as is used in the KJV.

I'm praying for you,
Monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/7/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Home Equity Loans


****************************

monk: "I will accept as day of rest whatever my monastic superior and or competent spiritual authority tells me is a day of rest as long as it does not clash with my conscience."

So you admit that you trust in the opinion of a mere man more than in the actual handwriting of God? There is no longer any use in corresponding with you as we have no common frame of reference.

****************************
---jerry6593 on 1/7/16


Gen. 1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.' Surely this must refer to an ordinary day otherwise there would have been thousands of years of light then thousands of years of darkness.

I've always found that it is wiser, safer and more educational to accept God's Word as it is rather than mess about with it.

When parables are spoken we know they are stories with a message - not necessarily having happened literally but, other than that we are unwise to say "Ah, it might say this
but it really means that." We mess with God's Word at our peril.
---Rita_H on 1/7/16


//is there any reason not to believe... heavens and the earth were not created in 6 ordinary days?// micha9344.

Yes. Genesis 2:4 uses "day" to mean the whole period of creation when it says, 'in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens'- KJV.

So the word "day" does not arbitrarily mean a 24hour period, especially in reference to Gods activity. Gods ways are not mans- Is.55:8.

Moses, who was inspired to write the Genesis creation account, was also inspired to write at Psalm 90:4 regarding creation, "A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night" (NIV).
---David8318 on 1/6/16


Nicole, "Where did Protestants get the famous saying 'God walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the Evening'?" Genesis 3:8 tells us that 'He walked in the Garden in the cool of the DAY' and that Adam and Eve hid themselves from Him (so they must have been in the same area).

It is not for us to add, take away from or change any of that.
---Rita_H on 1/6/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Interest Rates


God can do almost anything.
One thing God cannot do is lie.
God could have created in microseconds or billions or years, but He said He created in 6 days.
The days in which He created everything had a morning, and evening, a daytime, and a nighttime: everything necessary for an ordinary day.
God told Israel that He created in 6 days.
God created the ordinary day on day 1 and showed us how to tell it was an ordinary day.
God created the sun, moon and stars on day 4 to be able to measure time(signs and seasons), even before man was made.
Now, is there any reason not to believe by record, since it is written, and by faith, since we were not there, that the heavens and the earth were not created in 6 ordinary days?
---micha9344 on 1/6/16


monk: "You misquoted me. ..."

No. I copied your words exactly. Making it a question doesn't change the meaning. If you don't believe it why do you write it, and why not honestly state your beliefs? And slipping EGW into the conversation appears to be an act of desperation.



cluny: "proof that the days of Genesis 1"

Exo 20:11 is a parallel verse which refers back to Gen 1 and proves earth days.


"time dilation"

No, time dilation refers to an observer traveling at near light speed. The 14+ B year number derives from the Hubble Constant and the ASSUMPTION that red shift is Doppler, rather than gravity induced.



---jerry6593 on 1/6/16


\\He said SIX Days and He meant it. \\

You've offered no proof that the days of Genesis 1 are earthly days. Reason for your believing it, yes, but no proof.

But I have another question to ask you, as you've studies physics and I have not.

Is there any way that time dilation might fit into this discussion?

Glory to jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/5/16


Jerry said, "
Brendan: "518,400 seconds can NOW appear to be 14.5 billion years"

You misquoted me. It was phrased as a question, not a statement.

Are you so deluded by Ellen G White and her vain prophecies that never came true that you cannot even allow a question to be asked in a reasonable manner without throwing a fit?

"God's Word NEVER changes!...Why do you fight against Him"

I will accept as day of rest whatever my monastic superior and or competent spiritual authority tells me is a day of rest as long as it does not clash with my conscience.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/5/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Marketing


Brendan: "518,400 seconds can NOW appear to be 14.5 billion years"

NO, they don't. False science has deluded you.

1Ti 6:20 O [Brendan], keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

God's Word NEVER changes! He said SIX Days and He meant it. Why do you fight against Him so? Do you love Darwin more? Or is it that you can't accept the seventh day as your day of rest?



---jerry6593 on 1/5/16


Jerry said, "This is getting tedious...

I apologize.

But you still haven't proven that God took 518,400 seconds (as humanity reckons time in this fallen and imperfect world) to create the heavens and the Earth.

And speaking of time, could it be that when Adam sinned, and the world fell, the day/night cycle changed? Remember, in Gen. 2:5,6 the way that God originally caused the earth to be watered was to cause a mist to come up.

Well, God changed the way the earth got moisture, could He have also changed the way day and night were perceived, so that only 518,400 seconds can NOW appear to be 14.5 billion years?

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/4/16


monk: "Where in the 10 Commandments does it discuss the length of time God took to create the world?"

This is getting tedious.

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.

Now that you've seen it, will you believe it and live it?



---jerry6593 on 1/4/16


Jerry said, "God did write the Ten Commandment Law with His own finger in stone. Any other scripture is not germane to this blog, since we are discussing the duration of the Creation process, and He wrote SIX DAYS."

Where in the 10 Commandments does it discuss the length of time God took to create the world? Using ONLY the Ten Commandments, prove that God created the universe in six days.

Also, look at Exodus 34:27-29 Here it says that Moses wrote those words on the tablets.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/3/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Life Insurance


monk: I see that you're confused again. God did write the Ten Commandment Law with His own finger in stone. Any other scripture is not germane to this blog, since we are discussing the duration of the Creation process, and He wrote SIX DAYS.



nicloe: The scripture you are looking for is:

Gen 3:8 And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden.



---jerry6593 on 1/3/16


Well since we quote more of the Bible than Protestants, I would say were are VERY familiar with Bible.

We don't just give our opinions of what we think is in the Bible, but what isn't in the Bible.

I asked StrongAxe, but he didn't answer me. I think I asked Kathr as well.
Still no answer.

Where did Protestants get the famous saying 'God walked with Adam and Eve in the cool of the Evening'?

Jerry, with your knowledge of the Scriptures, please tell me.

And don't try to claim you never heard that saying before.

I went to Church with my Baptist Grandmother sometimes and I heard the saying before. From her and the Preacher.
So much, I started saying it until a Priest questioned me about it.
---Nicole_Lacey on 1/2/16


Jerry said, "Exo 31:18"

Okay, you got me on ONE verse. However, He Himself did not write down in His own Hand anything else. The only record we have of Jesus writing anything is ...But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. John 8:6 KJV And in that, we don't even know what He wrote.

So, outside of the one time He wrote in tablets of stone, do you have any other SCRIPTURAL evidence that God actually sat down and with paper and ink WROTE any of the Bible? Much less the KJV?

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/2/16


monk: "Do pay attention to what you are saying."

Good advice!

"God Himself did NOT write.."

Exo 31:18 And he gave unto Moses, when he had made an end of communing with him upon mount Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.

You Catholics aren't all too familiar with the Bible, are you?


---jerry6593 on 1/2/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


//God Himself wrote that He took six days// jerry.

But remember, 'Gods ways are not mans ways'- Is.55:8. Gods way of doing things including the count of time is vastly different to mans.

Moses, the writer of the Genesis creation account, was also inspired to write regarding creation at Psalm 90:4, "A thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night".

The Genesis account of creation uses ordinal numbers (1st, 2nd 3rd etc...) to represent the creative days as opposed to cardinal numbers. The use of ordinal numbers stresses the order in which events occurred. Time was not the issue.
---David8318 on 1/1/16


\\But a law of Science which I studied in my Text book stated life only comes from preexisting live. \\

According to Genesis, mankind came from lifeless dirt that God breathed live into.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/1/16


Jerry said, " monk: Once again, the issue is not whether Creation took mere seconds, it is whether it took six days as God Himself wrote or millions of years as Darwin ASSUMED."

I am not defending Darwin. As far as I am concerned, he was a loon!

BTW, God Himself did NOT write the Bible. It is the work of some 50 or so men that were inspired of the Holy Spirit to write, using their own personalities. Peter does not write like Moses, nor David like Isaiah. Do pay attention to what you are saying.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 1/1/16


cluny: "Evolution has nothing to say about the origin of life, but only about its development."

You have been shown several times that Darwin did indeed conceive of life springing from non-life in "some warm pond". Why can't you remember that?



---jerry6593 on 1/1/16


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Evolutionist always start with single cell organisms that developed from non living matter. That is their Genesis.

They then go on to try to figure out how these cells became the tree of live from which all things on earth descended.

Without the Bio Genesis there is not single tree of life.

By the way the tree changed a couple of decades ago.

We are now more closely related to Mushrooms then we used to be. So some of our relatives are fungi.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 12/31/15


Evolution has nothing to say about the origin of life, but only about its development.

Christ is born! Glorify Him!
---Cluny on 12/30/15


I used to believe in Evolution. Scientist seemed so sure and told me they were right with such authority.

But when I looked at the facts. I found a lot of conjecture and guess. Plus a lot did not make sense.

Living cells supposedly came from non living matter. But a law of Science which I studied in my Text book stated life only comes from preexisting live.

A Engineer at A & M loaned me some books about problems with Evolution. The Lord was ready with the Answers.

Praise the LORD.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 12/30/15


Trav: You are as fanatical as radical muslims. You are so overcome with man's created doctrines you cannot allow scripture to speak to you.

The Bible says what it says, not what you and Darwin want it to say. God Himself wrote that He took six days (Exo 20:11). Why don't you believe the Bible?

Sorry, but I can't find any "third option which the Bible does suggest, science and a minimum amount of common sense supports". Perhaps you can be more explicit.


---jerry6593 on 12/29/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


monk: Once again, the issue is not whether Creation took mere seconds, it is whether it took six days as God Himself wrote or millions of years as Darwin ASSUMED.

Why do you not accept the Bible version?
---jerry6593 on 12/27/15

You are as fanatical as radical muslims. He posted a third option which the Bible does suggest, science and a minimum amount of common sense supports. You are so overcome with mans created doctrines you cannot allow scripture to speak to you. Ellen is your prophet, and any man that will honor her.
Accept this Bible Version: Heb_8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
---Trav on 12/28/15


monk: Once again, the issue is not whether Creation took mere seconds, it is whether it took six days as God Himself wrote or millions of years as Darwin ASSUMED.

Why do you not accept the Bible version?



---jerry6593 on 12/27/15


I am more of the opinion that the six days is about the earth. Since it says the Spirit of GOD moved over the face of the waters.

Genesis 1:2
And the earth was without form, and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

But why he took six days? I do not know and He did not says. But He did say to rest the seventh day.

Genesis 2:2,3
And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made, and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.

Before becoming a Christians I believed in evolution.
---Samuelbb7 on 12/27/15


Steven G said, "God says he created the universe in six days just by speaking it into existence."

I can say all the words in the creation story in a few minutes. What took Him six days? Did He stutter?

"Don't you believe what God says? Didn't God work though Jesus to do all those miracles? Those miracles were immediate. It didn't take weeks or months to get healed."

Not all healings are immediate. Some take months, even years to be completed.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 12/18/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Steve: "More and more Christians are siding with science and technology"

I disagree. In fact, more and more Christians and scientists are siding with the Bible as new developments in science and archaeology are discovered. If only Christians would question the validity of evolutionary "science" the way they question the validity of the Bible, none would fall for Crazy Uncle Charlie's Magic Animal Show.


---jerry6593 on 12/7/15


cluny: "This would be different."

I never disappoint you, do I cluny? Nor you me.



---jerry6593 on 12/6/15


It is unbiblical to believe in evolution. Evolution theorizes that a simple organism become more complex and thus improve as time goes by and generation pass. The scriptures teach the opposite. Man may be growing in information and technology but in reality he is devolving as time goes by due to sin entering the world. Even the earth is dying note that it's rotation is slowing.
---trey on 12/5/15


More and more christians are siding with science and technology because it can prove by their scientific instruments and calculations that the age of the universe is such and such and evolution fits right in.

Monk_Brendan wrote: "...and neither can the Bible. (literal 24 hours/500 million years)

God says he created the universe in six days just by speaking it into existance. Don't you believe what God says? Didn't God work though Jesus to do all those miracles? Those miracles were immediate. It didn't take weeks or months to get healed. How long would it take man to bring a person back to life?
---Steveng on 12/4/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


monk: I will pray for you. I will pray that you read, meditate upon, and ultimately believe God's Word that says:

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.

There exists no other reason for you or anyone else to seek to expand the definition of the time required for Creation in the Bible except as to allow for the long ages predicted by Evolutionists for nature to create itself.

Scientists are no more trustworthy than are preachers.


---jerry6593 on 12/5/15


jerry, are you building up to a 144 earthly hour week of creation to build a case for the Saturday sabbath for a change?

This would be different.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 12/5/15


There are people in religious groups, who believe things that scientists claim have to fit with what they believe in their religion.

But some amount of things claimed by scientists are only their interpretations of things they have done and discovered.
---Bill on 12/4/15


When you say, "evolution," jerry, do you mean pure Darwinism?

Or some other form?

There are several, you know.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 12/4/15


Read These Insightful Articles About Bible Study


Here is what I believe. God created the heavens and the earth in 6 days. Whether those days were literal 24 hour days or each one was 500 million years, I cannot prove, and neither can the Bible.

I believe that in God's creation, He used an orderly process, allowing microbes, plants and animals time to multiply, differentiate, and populate the world.

In this way, God transformed the shapeless mass that was void into the whole universe, including man.

Pray for me,
the unworthy monk Brendan
---Monk_Brendan on 12/4/15


"Why do some Christians believe in Evolution?"
I do not personally know of any follower of Christ, or disciple of Christ that does. Unless of course one is referring to the formation, development and growth of a person from embryo to fetus, fetus to newborn, newborn to childhood, childhood to teen, teen to adult, adult to a senior who will eventually die, and whose corpse, which will over time, return to the dust from which the first man was made. An evolution of the body, brought about through the evolution of time.
---Josef on 12/4/15


Before our use of sunrise and sunset to measure time God freely applied his power over matter and motion.
---Geraldine on 12/4/15


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