Featured Is the Bible compatible with the theory of evolution?

Thread title: "Is the Bible compatible with the theory of evolution?"

No.

 

evolution is, as you said, Jordan.
THEORY.
It is full of "could be", "might be", "possibly", and many such inconclusiveness.

the Bible is FACT.
It has none of the inconclusiveness of THEORY.
Fact: In the beginning, God. (it didn't say, in the beginning, perhaps God).

Fact: All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. (it didn't say, this is possibly because all have sinned.....)

Fact: and if I go to prepare a place for you, I WILL COME AGAIN ( not, well, we might see each other again).

Fact: He is risen. (not, could that have been the tomb ?).

I say these with no disrespect.

 

I see we have some who proclaim the theory of evolution is not compatible with the bible. Which begs the question, are there other theories of evolution that are compatible with the Bible.

For example, if we define "evolution" as evolving or changing, then the Bible does tell us of changes. For example pre-fall and post-fall.

Or could we define evolution as life coming from non-life accidentally.

In our efforts to proclaim our truth and disparage the views of others, why not define our words and try to avoid talking past one another?

Evolution is a fact and not a theory if the "evolution" in view is the change from the life forms found in fossils to the life forms found today. Darwin's theory of evolution, however, has been completely discredited by...science. Babies do not have gills.

 

Although, I would be likely to agree with you, YOU cannot prove the Bible and it narratives as fact, anymore than a biologists can support evolutionary theory. Also, I suggest you are most likely using the word "theory" incorrectly. But it supports your message, so I guess that is why you do it.

 

Thank you for your attention to the term "heretic" et al. I certainly understand the definition of the term, but I sense it is often used, for not much more than its "sting" value. Personally, I save its use for exceptional denial of essentials of theism and christianity.

I do not think (personally) that all view points of any website or group should be whole sale accepted. I, and I expect others as well , to think and analyze for themselves.

 

The question should be: Is the theory of evolution compatible with the Bible? The answer is NO!

 

There are other ways at looking at "death" which you mention.

1. Death brought on by the sin of man references the separation of mankinds relationship with God brought on by Adam's disobedience\
2. William Dembski (ID propoponet) suggests a Kairological rather than a chronological interpretation
3. There are others.

Note, Adam was told that he would die.....and yet he lived. To me this suggests something other than what many believe to be the obvious.

 

I don't completely understand your point, but yes death (physical death) I believe existed long before Adam. It may be "obvious" to you....not to me. Quite the contrary, it is quite obvious to me that death was part of creation long before what we know as the event of the Fall.

 

For one, the scriptural record stated that Adam would die on the day he partook of disobedience.....he did not.

Scripture does not speak to the age of the earth, science speaks pretty loud and clear. The earth is quite old, and life has been a big part of earth, particularly since the "cambrian explosion" of life.

It is my conviction that the scriptural record of the creation narrative is not meant to be a scientific journal, rather a simplistic statement of theological significance that it was God (YHWH) who is responsible for that is, not some other god of the caananite world.

 

Yes, Yes, Yes, there is solid evidence for a cambrian explosion of life. What do you mean science cannot "prove" the age of the earth. Multitudes of dating methods provide confirmation as to approximate age of the earth. Science always remains "open" in that it allows its hypotheses, theories and predictions to be altered and adjusted as more data and information is learned and processed. The estimate for a 4.5 billion age of the earth is quite compelling.

I respect your right and your YEC position, but I do not subscribe to it.

 

Where does the Bible say that an animal was killed for Adam and Eve's clothing?

 

Yes, brings both types of death to HUMANS, not necessarily the world.

 

http://www.livescience.com/28098-cambrian-period.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120418131429.htm

 

I tend to agree with you here, that the skins provided did come from the death of animals. But again, there is nothing in Genesis that suggests that death as a reality of the physical, did not exist prior to the fall. You also mentioned "type", would that be the practice of "biblical typology"? Is so, remember that there is very little difference in typology and allegorical interpretive methods.

 

God just got done creating the world out of nothingness. Isn't it more reasonable, more likely and safer to infer that God created coats of animal skins as well? The text says "the Lord God did make coats of skin." Hmmm...