Evolution... Do we believe?

popsthebuilder

New member
It isn't me that speaks of it.

God tells us He created light on the first day, which had a evening and morning. He created the sun on the 4th day.

Also the Hebrew ... and the text itself demand that these were literal days as we now experience. Although 'yom' / day can have various meanings, it ALWAYS refers to a literal day when the word is associated with a number. (Jonah was not in the fish 3 periods of time). Also throughout the OT, whenever words like evening or morning are associated with the word 'day', it ALWAYS refers to a normal day.
The morn and eve you speak of are in reference to the force of pure or light, and the absence, void, or opposing negative force that are evident throughout all existence.
 

popsthebuilder

New member
Hey pops,

Why fight against what the Bible says about what God did? Why can't you just believe that God created EVERYTHING in six days, and rested on the seventh?! God knew how long a day was because He knew that on the fourth day, it would be roughly 23-some hours. Why fight against believing in the Creation account? Would you rather that God was lying?

Michael
Firstly I do not disagree with the creation in Genesis. Secondly I sincerely take offense to you saying that I think the creation theory in the Bible is a lie. Because there was a morning and evening does not mean it was 6 literal days. Because you think God refers to sometime as roughly 23 hours does not mean it was 23 hours as we know it today. It is known that time has spead up exponentially since the big bang or since creation as we know it. It can be manipulated throughout space time which is one and the same thing and interconnected just like positive and negative is related to all balance, duality, and existence. The day and night or morning and evening God refers to in Genesis in the very beginning or the first five to six days refers to a Balance a positive and negative a light and a void if you will. Thank you.
 

6days

New member
The morn and eve you speak of are in reference to the force of pure or light, and the absence, void, or opposing negative force that are evident throughout all existence.

Pffft..... daft :nono:psychobabble:nono: newage:nono: revisionist:nono: compromising :nono:evolutionist :duh:

Genesis 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
 

6days

New member
6days says "did God really say?"
Actually that is not what I said...
I will quote myself

"God says He created light on the first day and the sun on the 4th day.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says That there was morning and evening the first 3 days, even though there was no sun.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says He created the great sea creature before the land animals.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says the earth was intially all water.
.....Can you accept it?
* God said plants were created the day before the sun
.....Can you accept it?
* God says He created everything in six days.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says woman was created from man's rib.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says the highest mountains under the heavens were covered in Noah's flood.
.....Can you accept it?
* God says death entered our world because of man's sin.
.....Can you accept it?
* Jesus says male and female were from the beginning of creation.
.....Can you accept it?

Barbarian... Can you accept what God says without trying to spin it?
 

popsthebuilder

New member
Pffft..... daft :nono[emoji14]sychobabble:nono: newage:nono: revisionist:nono: compromising :nono:evolutionist :duh:

Genesis 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
You shouldn't criticise yourself in such ways. Right after that you showed understanding. Don't be so hard on yourself. In case you we're peaking of me; it would behoove you to not assume things of others or situations. Thanks.
 

popsthebuilder

New member
Pffft..... daft :nono[emoji14]sychobabble:nono: newage:nono: revisionist:nono: compromising :nono:evolutionist :duh:

Genesis 1:5 God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
Compromise and comprehend may sound similar grammatically, yet have to very different meanings. Perhaps next time you can come out and say what you mean like a man as opposed to being slippery, and manipulative.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame

Nope.

Plenty of times the definition of kind has been shared with evolutionists. However, they still refuse to accurately represent the idea. Meanwhile, no definition for "species" has been forthcoming. But I'm sure post No. 666 says something about it. :rolleyes:
 

popsthebuilder

New member
A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms where two hybrids are capable of reproducing fertile offspring, typically using sexual reproduction.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Evolutionary theory says that there can be no universally-applicable definition of "species." Creationism requires that there be one.

This is a major reason why scientists don't accept creationism. As you have noticed, no creationist can show us a testable definition that works for all organisms.

Which is what Darwin predicted in The Origin of Species.
 

Ben Masada

New member
Evolution...do we believe?

Evolution...do we believe?

If you interpret the first six days of creation in Genesis as the first six eons then it easily places the age of existence as we know it at roughly six billion years. Thank you.

Wait a minute Popsthebuilder, not that I care. As I am concerned, the analogy of the six days of Creation in Genesis is only the Jewish way to give origin to the weekly cycle with the intent at establishing the Sabbath as it seems to be, so to speak, the most important commandment of the Decalogue as a real lot of credibility is laid on this commandment and on the fundamentalist way religious Jews observe it. Therefore, it doesn't matter to me if the six days is a reference to six eons or to 6000 literal years. That was not the point of the allegory. So, the discrepancies in the order of happenings as Science is concerned, are not to be taken as contradictions but, in the sense that the Genesis allegory of Creation does not obey the chronological development of the time but psychologically.
 
Top