Evolution & Creationism: Why can't people believe both?

[charles cure]

That is very interesting, and I wouldn't be surprised if it were the case. But it doesn't alter the fact that it is considered a book of the bible, and there are many others that have literary value. Ecclesiastes and Psalms immediately jump to my mind.

you know what, this may sound weird but one time when i was on tour and staying in a hotel i tore the entire song of solomon out of the bible in the nightstand drawer and ever since then i carry it around in my wallet with me. its like a love letter, to me its the most non-christian part of the bible and its really got some depth and poetry to it.

 

[Lerxst]

^ Cool. I agree, it really seems out of place in the bible.

I feel similarly about Ecclesiastes. I read it all the time. It is so damn dark. And for some reason I'm attracted to dark, brooding, moody things.

 

[seekeroftheway]

The problem with religion is what parts of it do you take literally? Nobody appears to take the slavery parts literally but they take the homosexual ones literally even in modern society.

Moderates and fundies in this respect can not win. Moderates aren't true to their good book and fundies are simply idiots.

So in essence, you really can't reconcile creationism with evolution unless you make another religion that combines it.

Universism, perhaps? (go here if you have no idea what that is)

 

[SnakeLord]

That' silly - you dismiss it because you subjectively don't care for it.

Inaccurate. I think it's great from a historical point of view. My statement merely pointed out that if it's wisdom you want, there are a billion books that would be better read.

It's fine if you don't like it from a literary standpoint, but your subjective value judgements are just that - subjective opinion.

Your opinion of my opinion is fine, but I don't see where I implied my statement was anything other than opinion. I saw several people give their opinions, so I gave mine. The problem is what exactly?

Here I am being scalded by someone's opinion because she objects to me giving my opinion. Bizarre.

 

[GeoffP]

Er...right then.

 

[Saquist]

Where in the Bible does it specify exactly HOW God placed Adam and Eve on earth? Ever source I've queried so far either doesn't know or says it doesn't. So, who's to say he didn't have one celled organisms evolve into Adam and Eve? It certainly doesn't contradict that idea.

After Darwin made the theory of evolution popular many Christitan denomination started looking for ways to marry their belief in God with it. Today many religious groups religious groups accept God must have used evolution in some way to create life. It is coupled with the belief tht God preprogramed the universe to self develop and that it eventually produced man. The teaching is called thesit evolution. Others believe that God stepped in occasionaly to guide the process.

Is it compatible with the teachings of the bible? If it were then the bible account of creation would be at best a story, not to be taken litterally. That was not Jesus point of view. At Matt 19:4-6 Jesus refered to that creation as the reason man will leave his parents and stick to his wife as one flesh. he was quoting Genesis Chapter Two.

Telling stories to symbolize is called a metaphor and it is often executed by Jesus. His Disciples frequently asked him to explain his symbolism and he obliged them accordingly to expand there knowledge. The Bible also used symbolism in prophecies for the purpose of warning...and for obscuring "sacred secrets" from those with out the wisdom to comprehend including adversaries to his people on the Earth. However according to John 17:17 God's word is truth. Thus if this is neither a prophetic warning nor an a metaphorical lesson explained and Jesus Christ refered to the event as though historical, not metaphorical...

If Luke aswell traced man's lineage as too history back to one man to verify Jesus Christ's authority as King through the line of David then what point would there be if the story was fictional? (Luke 2:23-38) When did this genealogical list have turned from fact to myth? As a result Jesus would have no claim to being the messiah.

Adding evolution to the equation undermines the Foundation of Faith that a christians should build from the available facts. Evolution and the teachings of Christ are completely incompatible.

 

[Myles]

After Darwin made the theory of evolution popular many Christitan denomination started looking for ways to marry their belief in God with it. Today many religious groups religious groups accept God must have used evolution in some way to create life. It is coupled with the belief tht God preprogramed the universe to self develop and that it eventually produced man. The teaching is called thesit evolution. Others believe that God stepped in occasionaly to guide the process.

Is it compatible with the teachings of the bible? If it were then the bible account of creation would be at best a story, not to be taken litterally. That was not Jesus point of view. At Matt 19:4-6 Jesus refered to that creation as the reason man will leave his parents and stick to his wife as one flesh. he was quoting Genesis Chapter Two.

Telling stories to symbolize is called a metaphor and it is often executed by Jesus. His Disciples frequently asked him to explain his symbolism and he obliged them accordingly to expand there knowledge. The Bible also used symbolism in prophecies for the purpose of warning...and for obscuring "sacred secrets" from those with out the wisdom to comprehend including adversaries to his people on the Earth. However according to John 17:17 God's word is truth. Thus if this is neither a prophetic warning nor an a metaphorical lesson explained and Jesus Christ refered to the event as though historical, not metaphorical...

If Luke aswell traced man's lineage as too history back to one man to verify Jesus Christ's authority as King through the line of David then what point would there be if the story was fictional? (Luke 2:23-38) When did this genealogical list have turned from fact to myth? As a result Jesus would have no claim to being the messiah.

Adding evolution to the equation undermines the Foundation of Faith that a christians should build from the available facts. Evolution and the teachings of Christ are completely incompatible.

That's your problem, chum. Of course evolution undermines faith in the bible because we are talking belief versus empirically supported knowledge. THe problem is that thereligious mind, and I use that word loosely, cannot come to terms with reality; hence the need for a biblical comfort blanket.

Let's not overlook the fact that the bible is riddled with contradictions and "mysteries" which are not open to a critical analysis.

You have changed your stance since a recent post in which you said that evolution and the bible could be compatible. Do you remember your claim that, because god rested on the seventh day, it showed his creation was not finished; hence compatibility with evolution. What has changed since then ?

 

[Norsefire]

Creationism and evolution can exist side-by-side; for instance, you could say God created the universe, but does not govern it, and rather created a series of laws which do govern it, and over time nature had formed life, and eventually Humanity.

It leads back to the greatest mystery: not the creation of Mankind, but the creation of the Universe.





I have sometimes wondered that, if there is a God, perhaps science is nothing but an illusion; as is the entire world?
Perhaps, should He exist, science would be to fool us of what was before, to give us a different outlook, and to seperate the faithful from the unbelieving.


Of course, this is only a thought; ah well, I shall make no claims 'till I am long and dead.

 

[Myles]

Creationism and evolution can exist side-by-side; for instance, you could say God created the universe, but does not govern it, and rather created a series of laws which do govern it, and over time nature had formed life, and eventually Humanity.

It leads back to the greatest mystery: not the creation of Mankind, but the creation of the Universe.





I have sometimes wondered that, if there is a God, perhaps science is nothing but an illusion; as is the entire world?
Perhaps, should He exist, science would be to fool us of what was before, to give us a different outlook, and to seperate the faithful from the unbelieving.


Of course, this is only a thought; ah well, I shall make no claims 'till I am long and dead.

Don't leave it too long !

 

[davewhite04]

After Darwin made the theory of evolution popular many Christitan denomination started looking for ways to marry their belief in God with it. Today many religious groups religious groups accept God must have used evolution in some way to create life. It is coupled with the belief tht God preprogramed the universe to self develop and that it eventually produced man. The teaching is called thesit evolution. Others believe that God stepped in occasionaly to guide the process.

Is it compatible with the teachings of the bible? If it were then the bible account of creation would be at best a story, not to be taken litterally. That was not Jesus point of view. At Matt 19:4-6 Jesus refered to that creation as the reason man will leave his parents and stick to his wife as one flesh. he was quoting Genesis Chapter Two.

Telling stories to symbolize is called a metaphor and it is often executed by Jesus. His Disciples frequently asked him to explain his symbolism and he obliged them accordingly to expand there knowledge. The Bible also used symbolism in prophecies for the purpose of warning...and for obscuring "sacred secrets" from those with out the wisdom to comprehend including adversaries to his people on the Earth. However according to John 17:17 God's word is truth. Thus if this is neither a prophetic warning nor an a metaphorical lesson explained and Jesus Christ refered to the event as though historical, not metaphorical...

If Luke aswell traced man's lineage as too history back to one man to verify Jesus Christ's authority as King through the line of David then what point would there be if the story was fictional? (Luke 2:23-38) When did this genealogical list have turned from fact to myth? As a result Jesus would have no claim to being the messiah.

Adding evolution to the equation undermines the Foundation of Faith that a christians should build from the available facts. Evolution and the teachings of Christ are completely incompatible.

Do you think it's possible that there were two creation stories?

We know that Jesus was a descendant of David who was a descendant of Adam, and not through Cain.

What was Cain afraid of in this verse(after he killed abel)?

Genesis 4:13

13 And Cain said to the LORD, “My punishment is greater than I can bear!

Which lead to this:

Genesis 4:15

15 And the LORD said to him, “Therefore,[a] whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the LORD set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him.

There seemed to be beings that Cain was afraid of in the "outside" world.

Who were these beings?

I heard it's possible that it was his brothers and sisters but that doesn't make sense to me, and I have an inclination that the world is really old, I mean Jesus didn't oppose that theory.

I believe the genealogy of the Bible is essentially a key stone, if that is false then it is all false, like you have stated.

I agree with you, but is there room for evolution if there are two creation stories?

 

[Saquist]

That's your problem, chum. Of course evolution undermines faith in the bible because we are talking belief versus empirically supported knowledge. THe problem is that thereligious mind, and I use that word loosely, cannot come to terms with reality; hence the need for a biblical comfort blanket.

Let's not overlook the fact that the bible is riddled with contradictions and "mysteries" which are not open to a critical analysis.

You have changed your stance since a recent post in which you said that evolution and the bible could be compatible. Do you remember your claim that, because god rested on the seventh day, it showed his creation was not finished; hence compatibility with evolution. What has changed since then ?

I have no problem, Miles.
You have the problem. This is as much about the empircal as it is about faith. Both are involved.

The "facts" you imply are non existent, myths, if you will, for those that have not applied the appropriate amount of research and wisdom into the issues.

YES...Your memory is good Miles.
I did say God did NOT close out the Seventh Day of Rest of the Creative Days. However you might note he did close out the Sixth Day. In Genesis 2:3 it states specificly God rested from the work of creation.

Further the Bible says...After each task that the creation was good, identifying the task was complete. Evolution is an on going task, there is no completion.

You have a good memory, Miles, What you lack is a full comprehension.
I can not claim to have a complete comprehenion Myles but I allow myself to be corrected if the bible gives some other indication that these events are not true and accurate. However it does not. It leads me to the conclusion that evolution IS completely incompatible with the Bible.

 

[Saquist]

Do you think it's possible that there were two creation stories?

We know that Jesus was a descendant of David who was a descendant of Adam, and not through Cain.

What was Cain afraid of in this verse(after he killed abel)?

Genesis 4:13

13 And Cain said to the LORD, “My punishment is greater than I can bear!

Which lead to this:

Genesis 4:15

15 And the LORD said to him, “Therefore,[a] whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” And the LORD set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him.

There seemed to be beings that Cain was afraid of in the "outside" world.

Who were these beings?

I heard it's possible that it was his brothers and sisters but that doesn't make sense to me, and I have an inclination that the world is really old, I mean Jesus didn't oppose that theory.

I believe the genealogy of the Bible is essentially a key stone, if that is false then it is all false, like you have stated.

I agree with you, but is there room for evolution if there are two creation stories?

I briefly did some research on this. But I want to do a little more.
What I've seen is that this refers to the First recorded murder, this seems to be a warning and perhaps...the FIRST warning to mankind not to take vengence and retribution for the loss of loved ones. That judgement belong to God alone...but I wish to see what else i could find.

 

[Myles]

How much biblical research is needed and how can you know you are wise. The bible has been studied for the last two thousand years and what we have is hundreds of interpretations as evidenced by disparate sects. I assume the wisdom is needed to know whose judgement to accept. Meantime there are millions of Muslims and Jews whose views must be taken into account.

 

[davewhite04]

I briefly did some research on this. But I want to do a little more.
What I've seen is that this refers to the First recorded murder, this seems to be a warning and perhaps...the FIRST warning to mankind not to take vengence and retribution for the loss of loved ones. That judgement belong to God alone...but I wish to see what else i could find.

What we have to bear in mind is context. Genesis 1 is like poetry, Genesis 2 is not(Adam is a historic figure). The lesson Cain learned did not create a commandment he literally killed his brother, so that isn't meant to be only a lesson (Moses got the commandments) it is meant to be history (if you think about how important genealogies are).

 

[davewhite04]

How much biblical research is needed and how can you know you are wise. The bible has been studied for the last two thousand years and what we have is hundreds of interpretations as evidenced by disparate sects. I assume the wisdom is needed to know whose judgement to accept. Meantime there are millions of Muslims and Jews whose views must be taken into account.

The Jewish (obviously) and Islamic (perhaps obvious too) creation accounts are very similar to the Christian one, no conflict.

 

[GeoffP]

The bible has been studied for the last two thousand years and what we have is hundreds of interpretations as evidenced by disparate sects.

...hundreds?

Hardly.

 

[nova900]

Adding evolution to the equation undermines the Foundation of Faith that a christians should build from the available facts. Evolution and the teachings of Christ are completely incompatible.

How can we be sure they are facts?
What if the original teachings of Christ were changed to suit the needs of the authors? How can we be sure they didn't embellish the 'teachings" or just outright lie in their accounts?
After all, the NT does stress the sinfull nature of man. Why should these unknown authors be exempt from this line of thinking?
Evolution appears to have massive amounts of available evidence. A six thousand year old earth appears to have .....zero evidence.

 

[nova900]

...hundreds?

Hardly.

Your right....it's more like millions as everyone has their own take on it according to their own personal bias.
My experience with Christians is almost everyone sees it slightly differently...not all of course...but most.

 

[davewhite04]

How can we be sure they are facts?
What if the original teachings of Christ were changed to suit the needs of the authors? How can we be sure they didn't embellish the 'teachings" or just outright lie in their accounts?
After all, the NT does stress the sinfull nature of man. Why should these unknown authors be exempt from this line of thinking?
Evolution appears to have massive amounts of available evidence. A six thousand year old earth appears to have .....zero evidence.

The only empirical evidence science has for evolution is micro evolution which has somehow transformed into a theory that everyone accepts because they can see a virus transform.

Do you know how many human like skulls have been found that apparently fit the non existent fossil record? Did you know that the fossil record is based on the geological column and vice versa? Did you research the Cambrian explosion?

 

[GeoffP]

Multiple viewpoints are to be expected, because people are different. There's loads of (largely pointless) rivalries in bio sci regarding evolution also - used to be the old adaptationist-neutralist schools fighting - but a variety of opinion is normal. Not millions, but a variety. There are really only a few different programs, of course.