For those who have a good grasp of the theory of evolution as well as the gospel...

[bbyrd009]

They're presenting evidence, and interpreting it to fit their theory. There are a number of mathematicians, micro biologists, and others who have pointed out just within the last ten years that the theory is seriously flawed. Hundreds of scientists are jumping on the bandwagon, and rejecting the theory.

It's a beautiful theory, but it simply doesn't work any more. It needs to be abandoned. Those who refuse to look at the newest evidence have crossed the line from science into faith in the theory. This is a great reason to use it on them as a metaphor for the gospel.

i would say that the theory has um evolved quite a bit in the last 20 years, and hardly resembles the one of that era any longer? Micro-macro is now encompassed, etc

What other similarities do you see between these two ideas?

so imo "change your mind" might be a big similarity

or put another way, no one is required to make up their minds today or right this minute as to either theories or beliefs, imo. There is no judgement for either!

 

[Windmillcharge]

They're presenting evidence, and interpreting it to fit their theory. There are a number of mathematicians, micro biologists, and others who have pointed out just within the last ten years that the theory is seriously flawed. Hundreds of scientists are jumping on the bandwagon, and rejecting the theory.

It's a beautiful theory, but it simply doesn't work any more. It needs to be abandoned. Those who refuse to look at the newest evidence have crossed the line from science into faith in the theory. This is a great reason to use it on them as a metaphor for the gospel.

Hardly a beautiful theory. It has needed rejection ever since mendle published on genes.

 

[Windmillcharge]

And anyone who will not "permit" anything is not worth your time anyway, imo, they would be more like armchair evolutionists anyway, right

I'm talking about universities science facalyies.

 

[bbyrd009]

I'm talking about universities science facalyies.

well, dna is pretty hard to deny i guess; what is your argument against evolution?
Do you think God cares whether you believe we evolved or sprang forth whole?
Practically speaking, isnt "i dont know" a perfectly acceptable answer?

why is it we feel required to hold a belief one way or another, do you think?
this is a very evil thing to me.
but anyway Academia, meh

 

[bbyrd009]

tbh imo this is what comes from reading the Bible like It is jusy any other book, from our own limited perspectives, imagining an earth with only two living naked souls walking around in a garden and whatnot. But Scripture destroys that pov in a half day if one will allow it. Eve is the mother of all life, right. So was Eve giving birth to badgers too or what

 

[shnarkle]

Hardly a beautiful theory. It has needed rejection ever since mendle published on genes.

It is an incredibly amazing theory. It ranks up there with The Lord of the Rings for depth and magnitude. Even though it is woefully insufficient in proving its claims, the vast amount of information will always be quite valuable, perhaps priceless.

 

[Windmillcharge]

well, dna is pretty hard to deny i guess; what is your argument against evolution?
Do you think God cares whether you believe we evolved or sprang forth whole?
Practically speaking, isnt "i dont know" a perfectly acceptable answer?

why is it we feel required to hold a belief one way or another, do you think?
this is a very evil thing to me.
but anyway Academia, meh

Evidence against ewvolution= that durring creation God called every step and the final completion all 'good'. Death is an intrical part of evolution and no where is death called goiod in the bible.

Does it matter whether we believe in creation or evolution?
Yes and No.
It has no bearing on whether we are saved or whether we are following Jesus but it does have a bearing in that as evolution denies the truth of genesis it starts a critical comparison of the bible against mans views and this has lead to many Christians compromising/giving up on their faith.

 

[Windmillcharge]

It is an incredibly amazing theory. It ranks up there with The Lord of the Rings for depth and magnitude. Even though it is woefully insufficient in proving its claims, the vast amount of information will always be quite valuable, perhaps priceless.

Jesus said 'by there fruits you will know them.'
Lets look at the 'fruit' of believe in evolution.
primarily it is the rejection of God.
followed by the rejection of Godly morality. break up of marriage, sexual permissivness, confusion over what sexuality is and of course child abuse.
Regarding people as expendable( yes rulers have always done this, now they have a 'scientific' reason for doing so. ) Leading to the biggest killing of people since records begain by goverments of there people.

Non of this is against what evolution teaches it is all in accordance with evolution.

Because of its consquences I cannot see how anyone can call it amazing or have a high regard for it.

 

[bbyrd009]

Evidence against ewvolution= that durring creation God called every step and the final completion all 'good'

yet we do not perceive ourselves as living in a Garden, do we. Id have to ask for a Quote for that "final completion" concept, what gave you that impression? Bc increasing Order out of Entropy--every mountain levelled, every valley filled--is to me a central proof of God. To put that another way, evolution itself is a proof of God, as every other thing we know deteriorates? We even have a phrase for this, indicating value, "brand new"

Death is an intrical part of evolution and no where is death called goiod in the bible.

imo this concept is left vague on purpose, as it serves to allow those who wish to believe in Jesus as Apollos (waters) to do so? So then death in Scripture--which Is after all a spiritual Book--surely refers to spiritual death, let the dead bury the dead, while obviously (or not) organisms cannot both be immortal and propagate indefinitely, surely?

So, there might not be anywhere that death is called "good," but there are certainly many places where that is inferred, he was gathered to his fathers, old and full of years etc?
There is only One Immortal, Who dwells in unapproachable light

 

[bbyrd009]

Does it matter whether we believe in creation or evolution? Yes and No.
It has no bearing on whether we are saved or whether we are following Jesus but it does have a bearing in that as evolution denies the truth of genesis it starts a critical comparison of the bible against mans views and this has lead to many Christians compromising/giving up on their faith.

well i'm not sure why evolution could not be the mechanism of creation, myself. You say it denies "the truth" of Genesis as if wadr you were aware of what that was, that truth, correct? Which i mean you are certainly allowed to make that claim, but i dont; i do not know, and i doubt i ever will.

And critical comparisons of Scripture to our perceptions, imo that is what it is all about? Test everything, and keep what is good right? The theory of Evolution is maintained precisely bc you cannot assail it with truth, and if it falls it will be bc you have provided some unassailable truth, that withstands all attack? Which i guess the model has undergone major alterations since i was a kid, anyway.

How disingenuous is it to say "imo evolution is bad bc my interpretation of Scripture is ___________," once you think about it a little? I know this maybe seems sacrilegious--hmm, why are the i and e flipped there, i always wondered, lol--due to our programming, but really there is a way to understand Genesis that does not violate our theory of evolution.

And there is also a way--actually several ways, which is kinda the point--to insist upon ones private interpretation of Genesis that denies evolution, whilst also denying test everything...which is patently what "theories" are for, right, and for the inevitable balking at "private interpretation" there, as what we call "creation" is admittedly a widely held theory, any number of examples of widely held theories that turned out to be private interpretations might be invoked i guess.

The point i hope to make here is that the theory of evolution is the way we test everything, and keep what is good, and there is no other way, at least that i know of, to do such? I know we are pitted against the Scientific Method early on in our walks, but i suggest that that is an evil thing, which allows for private interpretations from day 1! Which is imo why we goto Lubys and celebrate our ego-inflating baptisms, and completely ignore Christ's plain instructions for what to do next.

So wadr "many Christians compromising/giving up on their faith" might be perceived as a bad thing, but the heir is under servants until he inherits nonetheless, imo. Iow if one believes that Jesus is shuvu (Apollos) to take them somewhere, then what we now deem "church" is the perfect place for them, a 501c3 corporation, 666, and dont get me wrong i still go too, for I have never seen such faith from anyone in Israel. Mithraists are not ev...well, sure not any more evil than me lol.

 

[bbyrd009]

which btw i do end up dividing congregations, but i dont seek to do this now, like i used to...fortunately it seems like most congs are completely dead now...which i dont mean like it reads, i mean the split has already completed in some fundamental way, for now anyway, and suddenly no one there is...hearing anymore? Everyone is talking iow, saying what they know, to everyone else, often both talking at each other at the same time, which i love bc i dislike large crowds and attempting to interact socially anyway.

But a point is that the Church seems to have moved on in some way, and our congregations are all devoutly seeking immortality now, unabashedly Marketing God and talking apollos stuff, excited about going to Mars (of all places lol) and whatnot, and full of very earnest ppl nonetheless, dont get me wrong. I looked down on them for a while, then resisted them actively for a while, and now thank Yah i am able to just shut up and let them drive so to speak. Right off a cliff imo--virtually none of the ppl in my present cong will even be there in two years--but then that is ezackly where i was trying to lead congregations anyway! Ha!

 

[bbyrd009]

The World-Mind Hypothesis

 

[shnarkle]

Evidence against ewvolution= that durring creation God called every step and the final completion all 'good'. Death is an intrical part of evolution and no where is death called goiod in the bible.

Adam and Eve are given every tree bearing fruit as food. The herb of the field as well. Pray tell, how does one eat fruit without that fruit dying? That fruit is alive until it is plucked from the vine and eaten. Then it must necessarily die. That is part of God's creation, and necessarily good. The logical conclusion is that only fruit produced can die? Even if we assume this, the fact is that death is part of God's creation, and therefore it is pronounced "good".

evolution denies the truth of genesis

Fallacy of Begging the Question. Evolution is right in line with the truth of Genesis. In fact, a number of atheists have noted that the sequence of events in Genesis is right in line with evolutionary theory. They're biggest question is: How did these people come to the same conclusion without ever observing any of this happening?

it starts a critical comparison of the bible against mans views

A critical comparison which has led a number of evolutionary biologists, physicists, mathematicians, etc. to become believers in biblical truth. What they see, and are so astounded by is the fact that the bible supports what they already observe through their respective sciences.

and this has lead to many Christians compromising/giving up on their faith.

The theory is quite amazing, and has the capacity to deceive, but deception is always a matter of the heart. Deception is always self deception.

 

[shnarkle]

Jesus said 'by there fruits you will know them.'
Lets look at the 'fruit' of believe in evolution.
primarily it is the rejection of God.

Non Sequitur, and blatantly false. Nowhere in the theory is God even mentioned, much less rejected.

followed by the rejection of Godly morality.

Again, nowhere in the theory is morality ever mentioned. Science can't begin to speak to the merits of morality.

break up of marriage, sexual permissivness, confusion over what sexuality is and of course child abuse.

Pure unsupported fantasy. You're conflating the theory of evolution with social Darwinism.

Regarding people as expendable( yes rulers have always done this, now they have a 'scientific' reason for doing so. ) Leading to the biggest killing of people since records begain by goverments of there people.

We see the same thing among the feverishly religious as well. Do we then abolish the bible because people misuse it?

Non of this is against what evolution teaches it is all in accordance with evolution.

The bible is also used to support anti Semitism, as well as to justify a blatant disregard for God's commandments. This is especially the case among professing Christians who will blatantly ignore God's commandments by quoting scripture.

Because of its consquences I cannot see how anyone can call it amazing or have a high regard for it.

Skeptics, atheists, and agnostics say the exact same thing about the bible and for the exact same reasons. They will point out the numerous examples of God condoning genocide, homophobia, bigotry, etc.

 

[101G]

GINOLJC, to all. Good topic
Addressing the OP only, have not read all the post. two point we make.

Point #1. evolution is of God, and it occurred in the natural world even from the beginning of creation. it was the earth that was involved in the microevolution of the plant life here on earth. notice what God "SAID", Genesis 1:11 "And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so." so it was the EARTH that brought forth. but understand, it was God who supplied all the ingredients for any cross pollination of the variety of plaints that we have since the earth was formed. the grasses flowers ect.....

Point #2. animals. microevolution of God, notice I said of God, and I'll give the scriptures later in supportive of what I saying. animals
evolved by God command, Genesis 1:20-23 "And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven." 21 "And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good." 22 "And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth." 23 "And the evening and the morning were the fifth day."
two things to take note. A. it was the earth waters that bring forth, but it was God guiding hand that allowed all the creatures to exist.

now the scriptures that makes this very clear of the fact that it was God who guided all the existence on this planet, and allowed it to flourish in diversity, here it is, John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."
it is God who is the source of all existence, and "without him was not any thing made that was made". this is the same person, the same one God in Isaiah 44:24, who "made all things". so it is God guiding hand that anything that was made, it is he who allow it to come forth, meaning in changes, variety, and diversity, hence the microevolution of God.

forgive me, there is a Point #3. MAN. who is in God IMAGE, since God change not, so man do not change. for man did not evolved from any plant, nor animal, but of God. for man was formed "BEFORE" any plant was on the earth, or before any animal life. for God formed man first on day 3, (the gender/the sexes on day 6), so that eliminate any one's (human, man) having any monkey's as uncle, or any aunties that was hanging from any trees. so we're no one monkey uncle. my point is, man was here "BEFORE" any animal. scriptures to support this is bible based, Genesis 1:9-13 vs Genesis 2:4-7 by comparing these scriptures one can determine when man, (what day he was formed on) came into existence.

Lastly, I believe, based on the word of God, microevolution of God, but not macroevolution. genes play a role in small changes, and those small changes can happen within a lifetime, or a few generations.

again, a Good topic.

PICJAG

 

[bbyrd009]

The "Hobbit" at 15

 

[Windmillcharge]

yet we do not perceive ourselves as living in a Garden, do we. Id have to ask for a Quote for that "final completion" concept, what gave you that impression? Bc increasing Order out of Entropy--every mountain levelled, every valley filled--is to me a central proof of God. To put that another way, evolution itself is a proof of God, as every other thing we know deteriorates? We even have a phrase for this, indicating value, "brand new"
imo this concept is left vague on purpose, as it serves to allow those who wish to believe in Jesus as Apollos (waters) to do so? So then death in Scripture--which Is after all a spiritual Book--surely refers to spiritual death, let the dead bury the dead, while obviously (or not) organisms cannot both be immortal and propagate indefinitely, surely?

So, there might not be anywhere that death is called "good," but there are certainly many places where that is inferred, he was gathered to his fathers, old and full of years etc?
There is only One Immortal, Who dwells in unapproachable light

Where does the bible say we live in a garden?
Evolution might be concieved as evidence/proof of God if the idea of a God who could create with a word over 6 days an intyre universe.
To me this is far more impressive evidence.

Death is not called good in the bible, the quote you made celebrastes a long life.

 

[shnarkle]

Where does the bible say we live in a garden?

Start at the beginning of Genesis. It shouldn't take you too long to see where God places Adam in the garden of Eden.

Evolution might be concieved as evidence/proof of God if the idea of a God who could create with a word over 6 days an intyre universe.

This isn't necessary at all. You're missing the whole point of this topic which is to reveal the gospel message in the theory. The gospel message doesn't set out to prove the existence of God, and the theory doesn't need to do that either.

To me this is far more impressive evidence.

I think what you mean to say is that it is a far more impressive theory. The evidence is applicable to either theory.

Death is not called good in the bible, the quote you made celebrastes a long life.

There can be no life without death to this world. Victory over death comes through death itself. It is the destruction of the flesh which leads to salvation of the spirit(1 Corinthians 5:5). That's a good thing. If Adam had not been prevented from access to the tree of life, he would have been immortally damned. That's Satan's deal. Our deal allows us to die to sin in the flesh that we may live in Spirit and truth.

The bible spotlights that living a long life is the result of honoring one's parents, but eternal life is not long at all. Eternal life has nothing to do with biological life, hence it is that next step in the evolutionary process, or as the new testament authors put it; "a new creation". A new species is simply the homeomorphic equivalent of the new creature in Christ.

 

[bbyrd009]

Where does the bible say we live in a garden?

you were in Eden, the garden of God
perhaps

Evolution might be concieved as evidence/proof of God if the idea of a God who could create with a word over 6 days an intyre universe.
To me this is far more impressive evidence.

well, so, then that which you have no actual evidence for at all, the literal Reading iow, comes to take precedence over test everything? Does that "6 days" have to be literally 6 24 hour periods as you currently understand them?

Death is not called good in the bible, the quote you made celebrastes a long life.

granted, but literal death is certainly not being a cause for shame or whatever anywhere that i can find? Is your premise that Adam was designed to be immortal?
for you are dust, and to dust you shall return ("afar" dust, not ketit nor rupou iow; not "dirt")

 

[Truth OT]

evo is just a theory

Please don't say "it's just a theory." A theory is actually a very different thing than an idea or a guess. What a scientific theory is is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.