I believe in Creation ...and Evolution

[Passerbye]

No particular reason - other than the fact that it stands in sharp contradiction to the findings of science, which is simply to say that one cannot embrace "Creation...and Evolution".

Can you explain further or is this another "as a matter of fact" thing?

 

[Pah]

The bat is bird part is one thing... the ostrich egg thing is another. Let's deal with one thing at a time pah. While the "bat is or isn't a bird" problem is about language the "ostrich egg" problem is about observed habits of a creature. Two unrelated problems.
The bat problem is that humans decided to make a more well defined definiton of bird. Man has changed its definitions repetedly and decided on a system a few hundred years ago. God simply filled the sky with flying things. God simply said to some people in the desert don't eat the bat. Using the old definition of bird it fit in the group that it was put in. These days it does not fit. Because of what? Because we changed the definition.

I don't know why you still think the Bible says an ostrich is a bad parent. I thought I listed a site that shows the habits of an ostrich. The habits are what the Bible discribes. What is the problem?

Those who will not see can not see.

 

[Passerbye]

Those who will not see can not see.

True... but who is the blind one, you or me? Also, you didn't say anything about any of what I said. Do you have a comment?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Can you explain further ...

There is widespread if not universal scientific agreement that birds are relatively late vertebrates and that vertebrates were preceded by invertebrates - including insects.

... or is this another "as a matter of fact" thing?

That science in general, and evolution in specific, reject a schema whereby 'flying' things precede 'creepy crawly things' is a matter of fact.

 

[Passerbye]

There is widespread if not universal scientific agreement that birds are relatively late vertebrates and that vertebrates were preceded by invertebrates - including insects.

That science in general, and evolution in specific, reject a schema whereby 'flying' things precede 'creepy crawly things' is a matter of fact.

Thank you "Deut. 32.8". I'm glad we can agree that evolution and the Bible cannot be mixed.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Thank you "Deut. 32.8". I'm glad we can agree that evolution and the Bible cannot be mixed.

As am I.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Dear Passerbye,

where in the holy scriptures do you see it proclaimed that the Bible and evolution can not be mixed?

It's not there, because it's not true.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

where in the holy scriptures do you see it proclaimed that the Bible and evolution can not be mixed?

Were birds created before or after ants and worms?

 

[Passerbye]

Besides the time frame insertion there is the problem "Deut. 32.8" is presenting. Evolution shows that things went up from land things to birds. Genisis says birds came first.

20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

This says birds came first. That is against evolution.

Evolution says that things have always been killing and eating eachother. The Bible says:

29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so.

They were given plants to eat in the begining.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The Bible says: ... They were given plants to eat in the begining.

Just note how well the raptor's talons and beak are adapted to salad.

 

[Passerbye]

Just note how well the raptor's talons and beak are adapted to salad.

Ever thought they could be adapted to harder to eat plants, like tree bark or something like it.
Also... God changed the serpent after he was already made, God introduced thorns and weeds after creation was done, and so on. Why would he not have added certain evil mechanisms or curses to each creature he made to assist in their new life?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Ever thought they could be adapted to harder to eat plants, like tree bark or something like it.

Never.

Also... God changed the serpent after he was already made, God introduced thorns and weeds after creation was done, and so on. Why would he not have added certain evil mechanisms or curses to each creature he made to assist in their new life?

God's assistance is a curse? I guess I've never thought of it quite like that before. Thanks.

 

[Passerbye]

God's assistance is a curse? I guess I've never thought of it quite like that before. Thanks.

In the animal kingdom is a curse upon one creature not a blessing to another? God's assistance can come in the form of a curse.

 

[Passerbye]

Oh, and before someone starts hounding on the "evil mechanisms" I was referring to things like poison, spikes among other things. Not necessarily evil, just a way to categorize them. Sorry if there was a misunderstanding.

 

[Passerbye]

I would like to know if there is anyone who can logicly put together evolution and the Bible, and how it is done. Please bring a theory forth.
Thank You

 

[Ceridwen018]

I would like to know if there is anyone who can logicly put together evolution and the Bible, and how it is done. Please bring a theory forth.
Thank You

Certainly. Here is the idea, (I don't like referring to unscientific things as "theories"), that I used to believe:

There are two ways that one could go about this. The first would be to consider the creation stories of the Bible to be copmpletely fictitious and mythological, and interpret them as "old wives' tale" sort of stories, as can be found in nearly every religion, past and present. The purpose of these sorts of stories, and consequently, the reason why they might be included in the Bible, is that they present moral ideas and sometimes teach lessons. The idea here is that God created all living things, and that humans were severely punished for disobeying God.

Obviously, evolution fits in quite easily with this first scenaio.

Secondly, for those sticklers who insist on taking the Bible literally on all counts, there is an alternative. In the creation stories of the Bible, the word "day" is actually an incorrect translation. The correct translation comes out to mean approximately, "a period of work", as in, a full workday, or the amount of work one would do in one day, (for all of you Hebrew buffs out there, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but that is what I was always taught). The translators of the Bible simply assumed that God's "period of work" was the same as a human's "period of work", and concluded that the seven defined areas of time were actually days.

Obviously, it is safe to assume that God is not bound by time, and therefore his "period of work" could actually be millions of years instead of just one day. If you think on that scale, it seems quite possible that God could have used evolution as his mechanism for life, as he continues to do today.

Haven't you ever heard the saying, "A thousand years is but one second to the Lord"?

 

[Passerbye]

There are two ways that one could go about this. The first would be to consider the creation stories of the Bible to be copmpletely fictitious and mythological, and interpret them as "old wives' tale" sort of stories, as can be found in nearly every religion, past and present. The purpose of these sorts of stories, and consequently, the reason why they might be included in the Bible, is that they present moral ideas and sometimes teach lessons. The idea here is that God created all living things, and that humans were severely punished for disobeying God. Obviously, evolution fits in quite easily with this first scenaio.

It fits but this one does not acknowledge that the Bible is fully true and God's word. I guess I should have been more specific.

Secondly, for those sticklers who insist on taking the Bible literally on all counts, there is an alternative. In the creation stories of the Bible, the word "day" is actually an incorrect translation. The correct translation comes out to mean approximately, "a period of work", as in, a full workday, or the amount of work one would do in one day, (for all of you Hebrew buffs out there, please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but that is what I was always taught). The translators of the Bible simply assumed that God's "period of work" was the same as a human's "period of work", and concluded that the seven defined areas of time were actually days.

I don't know the language but let me quote something for you.

The “Days” of Genesis 1

What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of “day” in Genesis 1? A word can have more than one meaning, depending on the context. For instance, the English word “day” can have perhaps 14 different meanings. For example, consider the following sentence: “Back in my father’s day, it took ten days to drive across the Australian outback during the day.” Here the first occurrence of “day” means “time” in a general sense. The second “day”, where a number is used, refers to an ordinary day, and the third refers to the daylight portion of the 24-hour period. The point is that words can have more than one meaning, depending on the context.



Christians should base their thinking on the Bible

To understand the meaning of ”day” in Genesis 1, we need to determine how the Hebrew word for “day,” yom, is used in the context of Scripture. Consider the following:

• A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range of meanings: a period of light as contrasted to night, a 24-hour period, time, a specific point of time, or a year.
• A classical, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon1 (a one-way dictionary) has seven headings and several subheadings for the meaning of yom – But defines the creation days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days under the heading “day as defined by evening and morning.”
• A number and the phrase “evening and morning” are used for each of the six days of creation (Genesis 1:5,8,13,19,23,31)
• Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with a number 410 times, and each time it means an ordinary day.2 Why would Genesis 1 be the exeption?3
• Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word “evening” or “morning”4 23 times. “Evening” and “morning” appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exeption.5
• In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word “night.” Outside of Genesis 1, “night” is used with yom 53 times – and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception? Even the usage of the word “light” with yomin this passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.6

The Hebrew word for “day,” yom, is used in several ways in Genesis 1 that show that the days were ordinary days.

• The plural of yom, which does not appear in Genesis 1, can be used to communicate a longer time period, e.g., “in those days.”7 Adding a number here would be nonsensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11 where a number is used with days, it unambiguously refers to six earth-rotation days.
• There are words in biblical Hebrew (such as olam or qedem) that are very suitable for communicating long periods of time, or indefinite time, but none of these words are used in Genesis 1.8 Alternatively, the days or years could have been compared with grains of sand if long periods were meant.
• Dr. James Barr (Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University), who himself does not believe Genesis is true history, nonetheless admitted as far as the language of Genesis 1 is concerned that:” …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 Gen. 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, (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story, (c) Noah’s flood was understood to be a worldwide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.”9

In like manner, 19th century liberal professor Marcus Dods, New College, Edinburgh, said: “ …if, for example, the word “day” in these chapters does not mean a period of twenty-four hours, the interpretation of Scripture is hopeless.”10





1. Brown, Driver, and Briggs, A Hebrew Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1951), p. 398.

2. Some say that Hosea 6:2 is an exception to this, because of the figurative language. However, the Hebrew idiomatic expression used, “After two days… in the third day…” meaning “in a short time,” only makes sense if “day” is understood in it’s normal sense. See M. Van Bebber and P.S. Taylor, Creation and Time: A Report on the Progressive Creationist Book by Hugh Ross, Films for Christ, Mesa, Arizona, 1994; Page 74-75, for more details.

3. James Stambaugh, “The Days of Creation: A Semantic Approach,” Proc. Evangelical Society’s Far West Region Meeting, The Masters Seminary, Sun Valley, California, April 26,1996, p.12.

4. The Jews start their day in the evening (sundown followed by night) –obviously based on the fact that Genesis 1 begins the day with the “evening”

5. Stambaugh, (see footnote 3 above), p. 15.

6. Ibid., p. 72.

7. Ibid., p. 72-73.

8. Ibid., p. 73-74; Russell Grigg, “How Long Were the Days of Genesis 1?” Creation, 19(1):23-25, 1996

9. James Barr, letter to David C.C. Watson, April 23, 1984.

10. M. Dods, Expositor’s Bible (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1888), p.4., as cited by D.F. Kelly, Creation and Change (Fern, Scotland, UK: Christians Focus Publications, 1997), p. 112.

 

[Passerbye]

Obviously, it is safe to assume that God is not bound by time, and therefore his "period of work" could actually be millions of years instead of just one day. If you think on that scale, it seems quite possible that God could have used evolution as his mechanism for life, as he continues to do today.

Where in the Bible does it say that?

Haven't you ever heard the saying, "A thousand years is but one second to the Lord"?

Oh... I already answered this in post 219 of this thread. I will quote it here so you don't need to look all around for it.

Where in the Bible does God say He lives outside time? It says that "a day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day" but that was refering to Jesus saying he would return soon. Given it has been about 2000 years since it was said I would say that is pritty decent forsight, wouldn't you agree? The books of the Bible can be broken down to what they are. The poetry is poetry. It can be used to tell what was going on at the time, but it is ment as poetry and songs. The letters of Paul often use metaphors. The history books of the Bible are history. Just as Acts is writen as history so is Genisis. Where does it imply otherwise? Oh, and refering to your comment on the Garden of Eden... why do you see it as a metaphor? Is Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob also a metaphor? Although creation serves as God leading by example for the 7 day week. If we remove what backs it up (creation) what backs up God's rest? Why would he say that is how he created it if he didn't do it that way? God has always shown physical to back up spiritual and what he commands.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Hey Passer bye,

have you ever made a cake? Or seen it done?

 

[Passerbye]

I have not made a cake, but I have watched people make them.... Why do you ask?