Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope the moderators will allow this thread to remain open unless or until ignorant statements about evolution start being made, which unfortunately will likely happen sooner or later.
As a Christian you don't have to choose between Christianity and evolution. You don't have to accept the young earth creationist view. You don't have to take the Genesis creation account literally. Old earth creationism and evolution do not compromise the authority of Scripture. The Genesis creation account reads more like metaphorical poetic language rather than historical narrative which suggests that the author of Genesis didn't intend for the creation account to be understood as a literal historical event.
The points mentioned above, and which I agree with, are covered in this short eleven minute video by InspiringPhilosophy (a Christian apologetic organization). If you are a young earth creationist Christian I hope you will try to be open minded and objective enough to at least give it a hearing while putting your bias on the back burner.
From watching the video and reading your OP, it appears the emphasis is more on potentially poetic or metaphorical time and nature of God's creation. I have no problem with that or of God's older or younger earth creation. However, I see nothing in Scripture that gives us the liberty to disbelieve that God is the ultimate creator of the heavens, earth and mankind.
Along these lines, Darwin's 'theory of evolution' and 'natural selection' have largely been discounted by most of the scientific community. For one thing, all of the purported man-ape intermediary species have been shown to be contrived hoaxes - or either human or ape (not both). Again, the issue is, 'Did God create mankind' - or did God somehow use 'evolution' to produce mankind out of a lower species (... or did mankind simply evolve out of the mud and slime). In the creative respect, God's creation and Darwin's theory of evolution are still a contradiction of one another, regardless of poetic language or metaphors. -- Have I missed something of what you are actually saying?
The Genesis creation account reads more like metaphorical poetic language rather than historical narrative which suggests that the author of Genesis didn't intend for the creation account to be understood as a literal historical event.
It appears that many of the writings were never intended to be taken literally.
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 3 days ago)
35,606 posts, read 17,935,039 times
Reputation: 50634
Evolution and the Creation of the Earth are really two separate concepts.
To be an educated population, we MUST teach evolution to our students, and the concept of survival of the fittest, and the concept of the "selfish gene", where evolution favors the gene, and not the individual. Genes are fighting to be passed on, sometimes at the peril of the individual animal. Otherwise they would be completely baffled why pesticides and antibiotics stop being effective after a time. First world humans have evolved a LOT in the last 150 years or so - we have become much taller and broader. Anyone visiting an antique store will be surprised at how tiny the women's shoes are.
Although I am baffled by how the earth was created - it's wild to me that solar systems look just like atoms - but anyway.
Teaching evolution and survival of the fittest is necessary for so many things. Policies, medical care, etc.
From watching the video and reading your OP, it appears the emphasis is more on potentially poetic or metaphorical time and nature of God's creation. I have no problem with that or of God's older or younger earth creation. However, I see nothing in Scripture that gives us the liberty to disbelieve that God is the ultimate creator of the heavens, earth and mankind.
Along these lines, Darwin's 'theory of evolution' and 'natural selection' have largely been discounted by most of the scientific community. For one thing, all of the purported man-ape intermediary species have been shown to be contrived hoaxes - or either human or ape (not both). Again, the issue is, 'Did God create mankind' - or did God somehow use 'evolution' to produce mankind out of a lower species (... or did mankind simply evolve out of the mud and slime). In the creative respect, God's creation and Darwin's theory of evolution are still a contradiction of one another, regardless of poetic language or metaphors. -- Have I missed something of what you are actually saying?
Your 2nd paragraph has almost as many lies as words.
Every living thing is connected. I do not want to argue about the beginning or the Creation, but I don't think Genesis was meant to be a literal account of the beginning, rather a spiritual account of what God's intention is.
From watching the video and reading your OP, it appears the emphasis is more on potentially poetic or metaphorical time and nature of God's creation. I have no problem with that or of God's older or younger earth creation. However, I see nothing in Scripture that gives us the liberty to disbelieve that God is the ultimate creator of the heavens, earth and mankind.
Along these lines, Darwin's 'theory of evolution' and 'natural selection' have largely been discounted by most of the scientific community. For one thing, all of the purported man-ape intermediary species have been shown to be contrived hoaxes - or either human or ape (not both). Again, the issue is, 'Did God create mankind' - or did God somehow use 'evolution' to produce mankind out of a lower species (... or did mankind simply evolve out of the mud and slime). In the creative respect, God's creation and Darwin's theory of evolution are still a contradiction of one another, regardless of poetic language or metaphors. -- Have I missed something of what you are actually saying?
I certainly believe that God is the ultimate creator of the universe and all that is in it. But in keeping with the current evidence, the big bang theory appears to be best explanation for how the universe began.
The idea that most of the scientific community has discounted Darwin's theory of evolution and natural selection is a misconception. While some of Darwin's views may no longer hold up in view of our increased knowledge concerning how evolution works, that is not the same as saying that evolution has been discounted. The following is a quote from Berkeley University of California's website which was created to provide an in-depth course on the study of evolution.
MISCONCEPTION: Evolution is a theory in crisis and is collapsing as scientists lose confidence in it.
CORRECTION: Evolutionary theory is not in crisis; scientists accept evolution as the best explanation for life's diversity because of the multiple lines of evidence supporting it, its broad power to explain biological phenomena, and its ability to make accurate predictions in a wide variety of situations. Scientists do not debate whether evolution took place, but they do debate many details of how evolution occurred and occurs in different circumstances. Antievolutionists may hear the debates about how evolution occurs and misinterpret them as debates about whether evolution occurs. Evolution is sound science and is treated accordingly by scientists and scholars worldwide.
MISCONCEPTION: Most biologists have rejected 'Darwinism' and no longer agree with the ideas put forth by Darwin and Wallace.
CORRECTION: It is true that we have learned a lot about evolution since Darwin's time. Today, we understand the genetic basis for the inheritance of traits, we can date many events in the fossil record to within a few hundred thousand years, and we can study how evolution has shaped development at a molecular level. These advances — ones that Darwin likely could not have imagined — have expanded evolutionary theory and made it much more powerful; however, they have not overturned the basic principles of evolution by natural selection and common ancestry that Darwin and Wallace laid out, but have simply added to them. It's important to keep in mind that elaboration, modification, and expansion of scientific theories is a normal part of the process of science. For more on how evolutionary theory changes, see our misconception on this topic above.
I don't have a problem with God using natural selection to bring about all the various species of life on earth, including man, and then selecting two persons (Adam and Eve) and setting them apart for His purposes, or something along those lines, however that works out exactly.
I don't have a problem with God using natural selection to bring about all the various species of life on earth, including man, and then selecting two persons (Adam and Eve) and setting them apart for His purposes, or something along those lines, however that works out exactly.
Christians believe Adam was made by God from dust, and Eve from his rib. "Selecting two persons" is crap not found in God's word.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
