Jesus didn't believe Evolution - neither should we

Well that's a foolish question, now isn't it.

Perhaps because there wasn't room for them on the ARK where all the other animals were spared?

Pro 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

Actually... you've got that wrong as well. Clearly, the corruption of the original design happened at the Fall, not the flood. The flood came as judgement on all flesh for that corruption.

AiG: The Bible makes a clear distinction between the status of plants and animals. People and animals are described in Genesis as having, or being, nephesh (Hebrew)—see Genesis 1:20–21, 24 where nephesh chayyah is translated ‘living creatures,’ and Genesis 2:7 where Adam became a ‘living soul’ (nephesh chayyah). Nephesh conveys the basic idea of a ‘breathing creature.’ It is also used widely in the Old Testament, in combination with other words, to convey ideas of emotions, feelings, etc. Perhaps nephesh refers to life with a certain level of consciousness. Plants do not have such nephesh, and so Adam eating a carrot did not involve death in the biblical sense.

Some species in the piranha group of fish use their jaws and teeth entirely for plants. So it is extremely concieveable that this extends also to fish.

See more on plant eating carnivores.

This is also incorrect. You do not seem to have any familiarization with Romans 5. Clearly from the context we can see that man is being spoken of here as it relates to salvation. However, death is not exclusive to humanity. If we know when death entered this world for man, then we know when death entered this world period. Remember, man's role at the time was to be 'in charge' or have dominion over the earth. It is clear that you do not understand the Bible and the repeated 'body-head' relationships. Also, we can see in Genesis that many areas of science were influenced by The Fall.

Gen 3:14 And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou [art] cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Gen 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire [shall be] to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed [is] the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat [of] it all the days of thy life;
Gen 3:18 Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou [art], and unto dust shalt thou return.

We can see that animal biology was effected. It says in verse 14 the serpent was cursed above all cattle, and above every other beast. In other words - they are all cursed ... but you are cursed more.

We see pain and sorrow enter the world v16. Plant life and geology is also cursed in v17 and v18.

And finally, we see the curse of death in v19 "... till thou return unto the ground. For out of it wast thou taken, dust thou art, and unto dust shall thou return."

So we see all 'areas of life' touched by The Fall in Genesis. Romans 5 speaks about redemption of Christ from the SAME CURSE listed here in Genesis 3. It says that death entered by Adam. Romans connects Jesus as a type of Adam. It links Jesus' redemptive work DIRECTLY to Genesis. Romans 5 talks about people and their redemption, not animals. However, it connects Jesus' redemptive work with the fall - confirming the fall as a real and physical event. One so devastating that God's own son was sacrificed to correct it.

Additionally, we know that while the corruption of all life came about through the actions of one man, the redemption of all MEN is through one man, but is not the same. This redemption has the pre-requisite of belief (faith)... a capability animals do not have.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:

For animals are not triune beings, like people are. People have a body, mind, and spirit. Romans 5-6 tells us that Jesus condemned death to our mortal bodies that our spirits may live forever with him (in new bodies) in the resurrection when our mortal bodies die (remember God is also just, and there must be a penalty for sin) - this is why 'getting saved' is called getting 'born again'. This is why God literally becomes our 'father' as we are heirs together with Christ according to the promise. Where do you think the new bodies come from? From God. We are no longer decendents of Adam... but decendents of Christ. Physically and spiritually.

Like I said before, at the fall dominion of this earth was taken from man and became Satan's. He became the 'prince of this earth'.

Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Clearly our bodies no longer function the way they were originally designed to. For example, Adam lived 930 years. Clearly people don't live that long anymore, so we can safely say that our bodies do not function in the same way as their's once did. Their bodies were clearly superior, and it makes sense, as there has been far more time for mutation and loss of information to effect our genomes. Our genomes are the result of 6000 years of degradation of the original design.

Regardless of your stance on creation, the uniformitarian principles of 'what we see today is what existed in the past' is shattered by the long life spans recorded in the Bible.

If you believe the Bible to be divinely inspired, then you would know that it is a first hand account - there is little need for God to 'prove' his point with science... He created the earth... told us exactly how He did it... it only happened one way - the way he said he did it. Now whether you know how an internal combustion engine works or if you are a person living in BC times, this is universal. God spoke and said what he meant. He created the world in 7 literal days, created animals discreetly which only reproduce after their own kind, and created man as a completely different and separate entity than any animal.

So let me ask you a question. In a public school, what age does a child first hear that the earth is billions of years old and that we all came from monkeys? Is it 2nd grade? Is it first garde? Is it Kindergarden? Even sooner? Kid at home asks his daddy - "daddy... how did the world begin... how did all the peopel get here?" and the daddy says 'well you see son, a few billion years ago there were no people, there was a pond full of goo. That goo eventually turned into little plants, which eventually turned into little animals... those animals grew and mutated and eventually turned into other animals... first from fish, then to frogs and lizards... then to birds and eventually monkeys turned into people.

How old do you have to be to understand that and believe it? Three years old maybe?

So what you are trying to tell me is that God, having known everything before it happened... having inspried the whole bible in all it's wisdom and mastery... giving us details about events that still havent' happened yet... this God didn't think we were on the intellectual level of a three year old, so he gave us a grand fairy tale that fit what we already thought before we asked the question so as not to confuse us? This is what passes for Truth in your home is it?

That's an example of willful ignorance right there. Men may have penned the Bible, but God wrote it, authored it. As I said, there are things in there that still have not yet come to pass. Clearly, it was written so that it would make sense to us today, us in the past, and us in the future... knowing what we would know in any tense. The plainest clearest reading still ... after all our technology and intellect... says that the earth is ~ 6000 years old and God created man discreetly on the 6th literal ~24 hour day of creation.

The Bible confirms this over and over again. Everything in the Bible points to that as the only true and correct interpretation, and it is the clearest, simplest, most straight forward interpretation.

2Ti 3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

It boggles my mind the lengths some christians will go through so that they can avoid ridicule from secular humanists regarding creation. Well you know what - you don't have to. There is overwhelming physical evidence to back up the irrefutable Biblical evidence. It starts by believing the Bible is true. The Bible is God's word, and God does not lie.

Hbr 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which [it was] impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

2Ti 3:12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.

Here's a hint - when you are doing what God wants you to do, those who hate and dispise God will persecute you. It's a fact of life.

Here's a clue - the biggest holiday on the humanism calendar is Darwin Day. Why? Because those who hate God celebrate that which does away with his ownership of their lives. That which makes the Bible untrue is that which makes them free to follow the lusts of the flesh.

It is AMAZING how much Biblical authority is restored once we return to believing it's truth over the truth of humanistic scientists. There is plenty of science and evidence that supports the bible's version of a young earth, and it's time that the Church take back our history and legacy from the secular world and start re-affirming the truth of God's word.

What is the ONLY thing that can meet human need? God's word. As a nation we can't give out enough money, humanitarian aid, etc to solve the problems of the world, but I guarantee that God can meet human need. The Bible has been relegated to some fairy tale religious book and it is because of Christians like UTEOTW and MERCURY who are content to let the world stomp out the Bible's ultimate authority. It's time to get back to believing the Bible is true, and show the world that it is indeed ultimate truth. Where it touches on science and history it is accurate. It may not be classified as a science textbook, but I will guarentee that it has more truth about science in it than any public school textbook.

How can we expect the lost to believe the Bible and get saved when we, as christians, don't even believe it?

 

In fact the world does not display these signs... they are manufactured by those who hate God and disbelieve the Bible.

The framework of evolution discounts automatically that the account of creation in Genesis is even possible. Therefore all conclusions drawn under that framework follow logically the original pre-supposition. Therefore, there is no way for data interpreted under an evolutionary mindset to support the creation of the Bible (young creation) as it is dismissed by the very interpretive framework before even being considered.

Beyond this, I have shown in my posts in this thread how the Bible declares, confirms, re-affirms again and again the impossibility of evolution. Therefore, taking the Bible as absolute and ultimate truth, we can decisively say that evolution did not take place.

Let me ask you a question. Do you believe that the geneologies and chronologies in Genesis are untrue? Do you believe that Adam was the first and only man, as the Bible says he was? Do you believe that Eve is truely the mother of all human beings?

The real issue here is whether you believe the Bible to be true. The science can come later... there is plenty of it to keep us busy forever... but do you believe the Bible is ultimate and absolutely true?

Next I anticipate you will give me some story about believe it to be absolutely true, but not believing that specific interpretations are true. My next question then is, if we are able to determine without a doubt the correct interpretation, and it disagrees with evolution, could you still believe the bible to be true. Because that is precisely the situation you are in now. The bible affirms repeatedly that evolution didn't happen. You have to throw out and disbleive scores of passages to make evolution remotely plausible with the Bible. You have to make a fairy tale out of a great deal of scripture, in fact, to 'fit' evolution into it.

My friends, you are in the position that you have the choice to either believe what the Bible says ... that the earth is young and that creation is young... or believe what the world and humanism tells you - that we evolved from animals over millions of years.

There is so much science on this issue that we could go back and forth till all of us are so exhausted and none of us would be remotely convinced of the opposing view... there is THAT MUCH EVIDENCE for both views. Why? Cause it's all the same evidence interpreted under different worldview.

However, the most damaging evidence to evolution is the Bible. It clearly leaves no room for evolution, and I think you guys know it because you have avoided the subject for six pages of this discussion... returning constantly to evolution science 'as a dog returns to it's vomit'.

SHOW ME IN SCRIPTURE WHERE EVOLTION IS POSSIBLE, OR CHANGE YOUR BELIEF.

You will not be able to - why? Because you believe that Gensis is a fairy tale, and you think that every other book in the bible only quotes that fairy tale and repeats it because they were mislead and misunderstood what God 'really meant'. This doesn't look so intellectually stimulating when it's openly said, does it? In fact you guys are willing to dismiss gobs and gobs of scripture to the authors not having the same intellect and understanding as your advanced evolutionary brains.

Do you see it? Do you see how deep the deception runs in evolution? You guys have dismissed holy, God breathed, and annointed scripture... removed it's credibility an authority... you have essentially called God a liar in order to reconcile your faith with humanistic belief.

The sad thing is that it is so senseless and unwarrented. YEC upholds above all else the authority of scripture. We believe that science ALWAYS confirms the word of God because the Bible is 100% infallible and authoritative. We can show through real science this is true. Yet you guys still resist. Why? So that you are the brunt of less Jesus freak jokes at the watercooler? So that you can try to lend some secular credibilty to the Bible?

Let me tell you guys something. God doesn't need secular humanists to inflate his ego. Neither does the church. We can stand proudly and firmly on the word of God... even in the face of persecution or disbelief because we have faith that God is who he says he is... and that he knows more than we do.

In the end I would rather be seen as wrong by the world and stand firm on God's word, then be seen as right by the world and reject God's word. With YEC, I can see how the world around me confirms God's word, and so can every other reasonably thinking person. Those who reject it do not reject you, but reject the author and Creator.

 

Oh yeah? You know for a fact that Adam didn't know that the earth revolved around the sun? You think Adam never just asked God that? Well since your so certain, lets see some irrefutable evidence that Adam didn't know this.

Let me give you an alternative. Lets say Adam did know that God created the earth in 7 days, and that everything in Genesis is true because he was there. Now lets say he passed that information on to his children and they in turn passed it on to theirs. Eventually a guy named Moses wrote all this down. However, a few thousand years later some guy named Darwin comes along and decides he doens't want to believe in God or the Bible. He loses his daughter and curses God and doesn't understand how a loving God could let that happen to someone he loves. He popularizes another theory on how the world was created. He says God didn't make it in 7 days... it took millions of years and animals evolved into people.

Now, is it that men never believed that the earth was created in 7 days, or did someone come along and change the belief at some point so that another belief became the primary or dominant belief?

So then, how can you say that men believed the sun revolved around the earth until scientists discovered the truth? Were you there at the dawn of time? Do you know that people believed before written history? Do you know that God told Adam?

 

Are you insisting that fish are incapable of eating plants?

Well for a couple of reasons. We were created as the 'head' of creation... just as Christ is the head of the body. If the head be cut off, the body cannot live without the head.

Also, up until Adam sinned, there was no death. God created things and declared them good. We see from the rest of the Bible that death is the physical result of sin.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;

Jhn 10:10 The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have [it] more abundantly.

We see then, that death is evil and bad. It is certainly not something God would declare "Good". God declared all the days of creation good... for each animal group leading up to, and including the creation of man. How then, is there death before.

It seems inconsistent of you, being an evolutionist, to make any distinction between human and animal. While this also goes against the Bible, evolution proclaims that man is not a separate entity from animals, but that man is derived and evolved from animals. If, indeed, it were the case that evolution happened - and man is the apex of evolution from single cell organisms to animals to humans - then we are all one creature. There would be no real distinction between 'human death' and 'animal death'. In fact, humans are simply more evolved animals according to evolution. Therefore, the death which was the result of The Fall would still be the first point at which death entered into the animal gene pool.

Whether you believe the Bible or believe evolution, there is no getting around this. There was no death before the fall, and therefore no mechanism of 'selection'. Therefore, yet again, and even in evolutionist terms, evolution is impossible according to the Bible.

Clearly, (how could I resist) we don't know everything as we are not God. However, there is an obvious difference between the life spans of Adam and his immediate progeny and the lifespans we see today. Therefore, while we can speculate on the reason, we can safely assume the Bible is true, and thusly, something is different between then and now biologically.

An interesting way to sidestep the point. However it remains unchallenged. The fact of the matter is, you can 'dummy down' anything to the point of understanding with a 3 year old. There is no need to lie to them - why? Because regardless of whether or not they fully understand everything you say, they believe you. They have complete faith in what you say. Therefore, there is no reason to lie. There is no reason to make up something that didn't happen. A 3 year old has the ability to understand the concepts you are telling them if you say a fish turned into a beast which turned into a man. They may not understand how, or why, but they understand what you are saying, and believe you.

In the same way, God authored the Bible so that all men could understand. He gave the actual true account. He didn't distort the facts or truth. He accurately recounted it and expected that while we may not yet understand how or why we could see the exact 'what'. Even if we didn't understand it, we could believe by faith until we could understand it.

Nowhere in scripture does God even theoretically or remotely advocate evolution.

The heart of this issue is YOUR EVOLUTIONIST CLAIMS that the Bible is untrue. You say it's untrue in Genesis... you imply that the multitude of verses in the Bible (literally thousands) that propagate the account of Genesis are untrue, and you don't believe the Bible to be truth. This is the problem, not our opposing scientific views.

What other portions of scripture are you willing to dismiss? Do yo think, for example, that healing is not for today? Do you think that the Holy Spirit no longer lives within us? Do you think that we can no longer talk with God? What other parts of scripture are you willing to dismiss because it doesn't agree with your humanistic worldview? You see, the foundation to the Bible is Genesis. Without a solid foundation, the house cannot stand. It is like the man who built his house on the rock and the man who built his house n the sand. If you allow genesis to be rendered a fairy tale, then you are open to dismissing anything in the whole of the Bible.

So you don't think that Adam could have simply said "hey God.. you know yesterday, when you finished creating this world that I live on... how did you do that?" Or perhaps Adam was created with this knowledge. He was created with the ability for language, for example... why shouldn't he also be given this knowledge at creation and then teach that to his children when they asked. What child has never asked how the world came to be? Remember that Enoch walked so closely with God that God took him from the earth. Do you honestly think that people with access to God like that would never ask?

"they'd be so shockingly different from what people believed at the time ..."

People believed at the time? There is absolutely no indication that people ever believed anything other than what God told them. In fact, had they believed a lie, God would have set the record straight, not incorporated a lie into his Holy, infallible Word.

Uty - that's a misrepresentation. While we were told we could eat meat after the flood, that was part of the corruption of all flesh leading up to the flood. Meaning that animals and people were doing things that they were not supposed to do. They had corrupted the original design.

After the flood God tells Noah that he now has the liberty to eat animals as well as plants.

I would maintain that there was T-Rex on the Ark. However, there was no need to bring a 'senior citizen' dinosaur. One as big as a sheep or cow would have sufficed. It would make no sense to take ancient dinosaurs, young adults would have been more likely and better suited to re-population. Also, you are forgetting the concept of "kinds". There may have been a master kind dinosaur from which T-Rex later speciated. So T-Rex may not have, in it's popular form, been on the ark. Furthermore, we can see that it was God's will and command that all animals eat plants. So any t-rex representative on the ark would have been a plant eater.

Do you agree that Noah and the Ark are a real event? That would be an interesting stance for an evolutionist.

Yet Bob and I agree that the Bible is true, whereas you do not. So we are both many billions of times closer to the truth that any evolutionist will ever be. Multiple theories and disagreements should be welcome for it serves to sharpen the truth as all avenues are explored. However, this should ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS happen within the framework that the Bible is 100% true - which just so happens to be opposite of evolution.

These two sentences contradict one another, and this is what I have been trying to get you to see this entire thread. You believe the Bible is ultimately wrong because the guys writing it didn't know what you now know. You assert the Bible is true if we assume what we think to be more true than what is actually written. I believe the Bible is true just as it is written.

We agree that the plainest interpretation is young creation, yet you assert that this is simply because the men who penned the Bible didn't understand the truth as you claim now to do. This is quite sad.

In actuality, the Bible is true as it is written. It's infallible and ultimate and absolute truth. Nothing in it is wrong. Evolution tries to say otherwise.

This attitude has been seen before. Let me show you the author of your belief that God's word isn't true.

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

Satan's first tactic is to question the Word of God and it's authority/integrity/truth. He plants the question - questioning the Word of God.

Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Eve gets this right. She quotes the word of God to Satan - in it's plainest clearest sense.

Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:

Satan, faced with the Truth of God's word, has no recourse but to directly contradict God's word. This is the lie. How does he convince Eve of the lie? First by enticing eve with prideful thoughts (in this case again betraying God's word. Humanism is born here in the thought that we can be as God, controlling our own fate and destiny... deciding what is right and wrong for ourselves), and then by letting her physical senses (aka the evidence she can see) betray her.

Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree [was] good for food, and that it [was] pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Note that part of Eve's deception was in looking at the world around her, and the 'evidence' before her - that the fruit looked good for eating, so therefore it must be good. This also is a direct contradiction to God's Word. God said that it should not be eaten. Had she approached this fruit with the framework that God's word is true, her eyes would not have been deceived by the apparent 'goodness' of the fruit. She would have seen it for what it really was. This is EXACTLY the approach that YEC take. We first assume that God's word is true, and then we interpret what we see according to His Word.

In the same way as Eve, those who believe in evolution have been lied to by Satan. You have been fooled into first questioning God's word. You have then been fed a direct contradiction to God's word. You now have taken a humanistic look at the physical evidence and decided to believe the lie over God's word.

[ June 28, 2004, 01:49 PM: Message edited by: Gup20 ]

 

So, like Eve, you are going to place the evidence of the world around you over the evidence of God's word? I would submit that is your first mistake. As with eve, we see that the Devil seeks to obscure the truth by taking your eyes off God's word, and focusing on the world outside of the framework of God's word.

Only within the framework of God's word can the truth about the things we see around us be revealed.