Creation vs. Evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

iouae

Well-known member
False

There are many commentators who add confusion to God's Word. You are one of the many who add confusion and twist God's Word.
How about you quote Genesis 1 and just let it stand?
Or ....Ex.20:11 "For in six days, God created the heavens and the earth and everything in them"

I do believe that in six days God created the present heavens (atmosphere, sun, moon distances etc) and the earth (with its present continents and flora and fauna) and everything in them (with its biome).

Do you think it is a coincidence that the sun and moon are EXACTLY THE SAME SIZE looking at them from earth?
The reason. To be a type of the Father (sun) and the Son (moon). If you have seen the one, you have seen the other - they only differ in glory. What is the likelihood that by pure chance, sun and moon appear the same size? All this was set up from the beginning.

And when God creates a new heaven and earth in the future, He may also choose to do it in 6 days.


Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
I do believe that in six days God created the present heavens (atmosphere, sun, moon distances etc) and the earth (with its present continents and flora and fauna) and everything in them (with its biome).

Do you think it is a coincidence that the sun and moon are EXACTLY THE SAME SIZE looking at them from earth?
The reason. To be a type of the Father (sun) and the Son (moon). If you have seen the one, you have seen the other - they only differ in glory. What is the likelihood that by pure chance, sun and moon appear the same size? All this was set up from the beginning.

And when God creates a new heaven and earth in the future, He may also choose to do it in 6 days.


Isaiah 65:17 For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.

Isaiah 66:22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your name remain.

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.




It won't be physical reality as we know it. Likewise there won't be marriage as we know it etc. Rev. 21-22.
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hi Michael

I am not requiring you to stop believing the world is 6000 years old with my explanation. You can believe Gen 1:1 occurred 6000 years ago or 5 billion years ago or 13.75 billion years ago.

I am adamant that Gen 1:2 is describing the state earth was in, 6000 years ago. And you do too. So are we really that far apart?

In my next post, I discuss the 7 days of creation, which all happened in 1 week, 6000 years ago.


Dear iouae,

Oh, I believe the world is 6,000-7,000 years old. No, we are not at all that far apart!! You are my comrade on this thread.

May Jesus Always Be In Your Heart!!

Michael
 

iouae

Well-known member
Dear iouae,

Oh, I believe the world is 6,000-7,000 years old. No, we are not at all that far apart!! You are my comrade on this thread.

May Jesus Always Be In Your Heart!!

Michael

Hi Michael

I was half way through my post describing what happened on each creation day when I thought of you and scrapped all I had written and started again, this time emphasising what we have in common.

And what we have in common is that in 6 days God created the (current) heavens and earth. And I leave it open to believe the current heavens and earth were the only heavens and earth.

One can believe that Gen1:1 ALSO occurred on day 1 (6000 years ago), or....

One can believe that Gen 1:1 did not also occur on day 1, and therefore is an indeterminate time earlier than 6000 years ago.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
A while back I caught a video on youtube where a fundamentalist Christian said: If the Bible said 2 + 2 equalled 5 then I would take that as true and just work it out.. :mad:

I've been trying to find it but can't remember which it was. Been a while back.

Isn't it a strange phenomenon? When black can be white and 2 + 2 can = 5, profound religious beliefs are really more important than actual reality.

I sometimes have to pinch myself :confused:



I appreciate your frustration with that, but that is not how Genesis 1-11 sounds.

Let me give an illustration. Many people seem to be fine going through the account--they don't know mechanically how God created, but OK, he created. The problem that derails so many is when they get to the so-called talking snake. Let's notice several things here, though.

1, There is an understanding that is not exhaustively explained in the text. That is that there is a serpent, which meant Satan, and that he is a deceiver, and that he has certain powers etc. So, no, it is not that the next snake in the area could talk either. This was Satan, and there is (unstated) backstory about him. That backstory may be found in the expression in 1:2 about formless and void, maybe not. But there is other backstory.

2, One of the features of the 'formless and void' expression is that it relates to, or is echoed in, other ancient near east cosmology. In India, there is a major player in a creation story and it is a huge sea-going snake who is cut to pieces by a redemptive creator deity. The pieces become the material from which earth or land is made. Likewise Persia. A few references to this survive in the Bible, re Leviathan. He may also have been flying, which brings to mind the 'griffin' or a 'chupacabra' and other creatures. But after deceiving Adam and Eve, he is cursed and confined to the ground. After that account, it doesn't seem to matter what form he is in; he seems to be a person when seen next. But its not 2+2=5.

3, The serpent belongs to a number of unusual features about the earth in those days. If you look at geo-mythology research (which is sort of like reading how ancient people understood fossils and legends in their own times, see A. Mayor), you find so many things that validate what we would call unusual at that time: longevity, giantism, technology, supernatural encounters, sophisticated cities. There are many, many indications that humans had conflicts with and lived around dinosaur creatures. The sheer amount of it gets overwhelming. I have put the bibliography here. It obviously conflicts with orthodox evolution.

I mentioning all this to say that rather than departing from reality, even the serpent (Satan) interaction with humans is very much part of that time of earth, though Genesis is stingy about details.

There are several other things that add 'unnecessary' detail (the names of four key rivers, the minerals). Unnecessary to the redemptive point of the text (Gen 1-11 quickly takes us to the promised divine Seed through Abraham), but mentioning enough detail to ground it in reality. It is not fantasy, fiction, hallucinogenic, psychedelic. Not 2+2=5.
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hi Michael, I just PM'ed you some chat.


Dear alwight,

Got your PM. Thanks Tons!! I hope that you are doing well this morning!! I know you wont' be up for a few hours. I don't plan on staying up tonight until 4:30a.m. It's only 9a.m. here, so I got to get on TOL earlier this time. Cool, eh?

I believe in everything that the Creation story says in the Bible, including there being a different light previous to there being Sunlight, for reasons I explained above. I know that evolution beckons me to believe in man's adaption from an 'ape or chimpanzee,' but I cannot accept that. God made man in His image and God is not a monkey. Jesus said, "He who hath seen Me, hath seen the Father." So, we can figure that God looks like Jesus. So if we know that we are created in God's Image, then we are not derived from chimps, but instead, from Man.

No one is going to sway me from that. I could possibly believe in Neanderthal man, but that is as far back as I would go. I do prefer that he looked like man does look like now, though. He's more advanced than we give Him credit for. There you go. I learned in school how man used to be an ape, they never mentioned a chimp. And they showed the various ways that he looked while morphing into modern-day man, but even though I accepted in when I was younger, I don't accept it now that I am older. So, I have been on both sides of the fence already.

God Bless You All In Your Hearts!!

Michael
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Dear Michael,

Welcome back from your existential crises. Friends should be truthful with friends, so I will be truthful with you. I disbelieve in your God, and in the role Jesus played as depicted in the Gospels, perhaps for much the same reasons you are not a follower of Islam. I am not intentionally mocking your deities, but you seem to take offense when I ask very natural questions about declarations you make (“no male or female in heaven” type comments from you). Sorry if that offends you, but remember that you have no obligation to even read what I post if you don’t like it.

We are kinda close together right now, yesterday we were much farther apart. But I haven’t moved in that time. For some time now I have largely ignored your trivial dismissals of scientific ideas that are widely accepted in the scientific community. Some streams are just plain naturally muddy, and you have to live with it. I might relax on the banks of what you say, and listen to the murmur, but I see no point in bathing in it, and haven’t the time or interest to keep trying to purify it.

That’s where I am. You will need to come to where I am, I am not coming to you.


Dear DavisBJ,

I am not coming to you where you are, but I did give you some good rep pts. to add on to your reputation. I do care about you, and you are a formidable 'foe' on this thread, but I can't agree with everything you say. Call me YEC! Heheheheee!

Warmest Blessings Upon You,

Michael
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
You need to read Genesis to see what it really says.
God created light on day1 and called it good...not a seemingly distant light.
Then continue reading... On the 4th day God created the sun, moon and stars.


Dear 6days,

No disagreement here. You are always right on it!! That's what I love about you!! It seems like we are ALWAYS in agreement and, of course, I like that!!

May God Increase Your Countenance,

Michael
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
A while back I caught a video on youtube where a fundamentalist Christian said: If the Bible said 2 + 2 equalled 5 then I would take that as true and just work it out.. :mad:

I've been trying to find it but can't remember which it was. Been a while back.

Isn't it a strange phenomenon? When black can be white and 2 + 2 can = 5, profound religious beliefs are really more important than actual reality.

I sometimes have to pinch myself :confused:

Dear Hedshaker,

You said you couldn't find it nowhere, so I don't believe 2 + 2 = 5, but instead 4. Heaven isn't a backwards place, so I do know what you are trying to say, but you only need pinch yourself from listening to the moron who said 2 + 2 = 5. I do know what you are trying to say. That we believe the Bible irregardless of what might be real. But I don't believe that way, so it's cool!!

I'm going to pinch you!! Heheheeheee!!

Michael
 

Hedshaker

New member
I appreciate your frustration with that, but that is not how Genesis 1-11 sounds.

Let me give an illustration. Many people seem to be fine going through the account--they don't know mechanically how God created, but OK, he created. The problem that derails so many is when they get to the so-called talking snake. Let's notice several things here, though.

1, There is an understanding that is not exhaustively explained in the text. That is that there is a serpent, which meant Satan, and that he is a deceiver, and that he has certain powers etc. So, no, it is not that the next snake in the area could talk either. This was Satan, and there is (unstated) backstory about him. That backstory may be found in the expression in 1:2 about formless and void, maybe not. But there is other backstory.

2, One of the features of the 'formless and void' expression is that it relates to, or is echoed in, other ancient near east cosmology. In India, there is a major player in a creation story and it is a huge sea-going snake who is cut to pieces by a redemptive creator deity. The pieces become the material from which earth or land is made. Likewise Persia. A few references to this survive in the Bible, re Leviathan. He may also have been flying, which brings to mind the 'griffin' or a 'chupacabra' and other creatures. But after deceiving Adam and Eve, he is cursed and confined to the ground. After that account, it doesn't seem to matter what form he is in; he seems to be a person when seen next. But its not 2+2=5.

3, The serpent belongs to a number of unusual features about the earth in those days. If you look at geo-mythology research (which is sort of like reading how ancient people understood fossils and legends in their own times, see A. Mayor), you find so many things that validate what we would call unusual at that time: longevity, giantism, technology, supernatural encounters, sophisticated cities. There are many, many indications that humans had conflicts with and lived around dinosaur creatures. The sheer amount of it gets overwhelming. I have put the bibliography here. It obviously conflicts with orthodox evolution.

I mentioning all this to say that rather than departing from reality, even the serpent (Satan) interaction with humans is very much part of that time of earth, though Genesis is stingy about details.

There are several other things that add 'unnecessary' detail (the names of four key rivers, the minerals). Unnecessary to the redemptive point of the text (Gen 1-11 quickly takes us to the promised divine Seed through Abraham), but mentioning enough detail to ground it in reality. It is not fantasy, fiction, hallucinogenic, psychedelic. Not 2+2=5.

I know you want it all to be real, after all, you've built a world view around it, but is it not possible that the whole story is, you know, made up? We know that people make stuff up all the time and if ever a story was a good candidate for such then that one is a classic example.

I'm not going around the loopy pole with you on this, I've already discovered what a pointless exercise that is, so that's really all I have to say about it, apart from the fact that in the universe I occupy there is no such thing as Satan, or pixies, or fairies.

Cheers
 

MichaelCadry

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I appreciate your frustration with that, but that is not how Genesis 1-11 sounds.

Let me give an illustration. Many people seem to be fine going through the account--they don't know mechanically how God created, but OK, he created. The problem that derails so many is when they get to the so-called talking snake. Let's notice several things here, though.

1, There is an understanding that is not exhaustively explained in the text. That is that there is a serpent, which meant Satan, and that he is a deceiver, and that he has certain powers etc. So, no, it is not that the next snake in the area could talk either. This was Satan, and there is (unstated) backstory about him. That backstory may be found in the expression in 1:2 about formless and void, maybe not. But there is other backstory.

2, One of the features of the 'formless and void' expression is that it relates to, or is echoed in, other ancient near east cosmology. In India, there is a major player in a creation story and it is a huge sea-going snake who is cut to pieces by a redemptive creator deity. The pieces become the material from which earth or land is made. Likewise Persia. A few references to this survive in the Bible, re Leviathan. He may also have been flying, which brings to mind the 'griffin' or a 'chupacabra' and other creatures. But after deceiving Adam and Eve, he is cursed and confined to the ground. After that account, it doesn't seem to matter what form he is in; he seems to be a person when seen next. But its not 2+2=5.

3, The serpent belongs to a number of unusual features about the earth in those days. If you look at geo-mythology research (which is sort of like reading how ancient people understood fossils and legends in their own times, see A. Mayor), you find so many things that validate what we would call unusual at that time: longevity, giantism, technology, supernatural encounters, sophisticated cities. There are many, many indications that humans had conflicts with and lived around dinosaur creatures. The sheer amount of it gets overwhelming. I have put the bibliography here. It obviously conflicts with orthodox evolution.

I mentioning all this to say that rather than departing from reality, even the serpent (Satan) interaction with humans is very much part of that time of earth, though Genesis is stingy about details.

There are several other things that add 'unnecessary' detail (the names of four key rivers, the minerals). Unnecessary to the redemptive point of the text (Gen 1-11 quickly takes us to the promised divine Seed through Abraham), but mentioning enough detail to ground it in reality. It is not fantasy, fiction, hallucinogenic, psychedelic. Not 2+2=5.


Dear Interplanner,

Satan spoke 'through' the serpent telepathically and the serpent spoke to Eve telepathically. It's not like the serpent could speak English or Hebrew or whatever. Back then, they did not need their mouths to speak. Just like, when we go to Heaven, we won't have a mouth to speak with. In Heaven, they don't speak with a mouth, but they speak instead telepathically. You'll see later.

The serpent got cast to the ground by God removing his four legs and caused him to lick the dust as a snake does, so in other words, God changed that serpent into a snake. That's why we have some snakes, but we also have some serpents, like the bearded dragon in the pet stores. Do you know what all I am saying here??

You are a good friend and ally!! May God Always Be With You!!

Michael
 

iouae

Well-known member
It won't be physical reality as we know it. Likewise there won't be marriage as we know it etc. Rev. 21-22.

But the new heavens and new earth do not discard the old heavens and earth, only renew them.

Likewise Gen 1 was describing the creation of a new heaven and earth from what was left of the old one. And this took God literally 6 days.
 

Hedshaker

New member
Dear Hedshaker,

You said you couldn't find it nowhere, so I don't believe 2 + 2 = 5, but instead 4. Heaven isn't a backwards place, so I do know what you are trying to say, but you only need pinch yourself from listening to the moron who said 2 + 2 = 5. I do know what you are trying to say. That we believe the Bible irregardless of what might be real. But I don't believe that way, so it's cool!!

I'm going to pinch you!! Heheheeheee!!

Michael

The point this guy was making is the same one as 6 days makes with his black would be white if God said so comment. In other words, it would be true if the Bible said so.

Personally I have a deep and meaningful relationship with reality
 

iouae

Well-known member
The land was probably what is called pangaea, and the sea was the Epeiric. All of that was seriously reformed and reconfigured, including vertical tectonic movement, in the deluge.


I agree that the continents may have been torn apart during the deluge.

And I agree with you that mythology has allusions to the original creation of the universe.

The problem with mythology is that it is the demons telling the story. And they are liars. There are elements of truth together with a lot of error. Mythology with its gods and demigods, and interactions of the gods with mankind are what I believe is being referred to in Gen 6:4. There seemed to be much greater literal demon interaction with mankind pre-flood.

And if Satan came to Eve in the form of a talking snake, then we have Baalam arguing with his talking donkey which I also take as literal.

If my cat started talking back to me, I might take him back to the shelter from where he came :)
 

6days

New member
I do believe that in six days God created the present heavens (atmosphere, sun, moon distances etc) and the earth (with its present continents and flora and fauna) and everything in them (with its biome).
I think you believe God recreated from pre-existing material.
But God tells us that in six days He created the heavens, the earth and everything in them.
He tells us death entered the world because of sin.
I think you believe that millions of years of death existed, along with a previous creation.....a belief that destroys the gospel, and a belief that destroys the purpose of Christs physical death and resurrection.
 

6days

New member
1, There is an understanding that is not exhaustively explained in the text. That is that there is a serpent, which meant Satan, and that he is a deceiver, and that he has certain powers etc. So, no, it is not that the next snake in the area could talk either. This was Satan, and there is (unstated) backstory about him. That backstory may be found in the expression in 1:2 about formless and void, maybe not. But there is other backstory.
Perhaps in the chapters you want to add to God's Word.
There is no back story... God calls it the beginning...
You call a a beginning.
 

6days

New member
No disagreement here. You are always right on it!! That's what I love about you!! It seems like we are ALWAYS in agreement and, of course, I like that!!
The agreement is with what God's Word plainly says. Most of the others on here in this thread argue that God didn't speak plainly...They believe there was previous creations, contrary to the gospel message.
 

iouae

Well-known member
I think you believe God recreated from pre-existing material.
But God tells us that in six days He created the heavens, the earth and everything in them.
He tells us death entered the world because of sin.
I think you believe that millions of years of death existed, along with a previous creation.....a belief that destroys the gospel, and a belief that destroys the purpose of Christs physical death and resurrection.

The Gospel is sent to humans and is about humans.

When Paul wrote that sin and death entered the world by one MAN, Paul was speaking of human death, not all the other animals which lived and died before Adam.

Animals cannot sin, therefore sin and resulting death does not apply to them.
 

6days

New member
But the new heavens and new earth do not discard the old heavens and earth, only renew them.
So, you think God just worded things poorly?
You would like to make changes to Gods Word such as... 'Once upon a time, God decided to renew one of His previous creations'???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top