Yep- ‘oh Ye of little faith’- Dontchaknow it’s unscientific to disbeleive in the creative, miracle workign power of nature? Dontchaknow that faith in unguided , biologically, chemically, and naturally impossible evolution is perfectly combatible with hte bible? Stop questioning whether nature is capable of producing miracles that violate nature, and put your faith in evolution, because everyone knows that blind faith is what drives evolution, and that blind unquestioning faith in natural miracles is perfectly compatible with God’s word- Stop questioning the fact that God specifically said He created man and woman, and that He breathed life into their nostrils- Stop questioning the fact that the bible says there was NO spirit death BEFORE the fall of man- Stop questionign the fact that God looked aroudn the garden for a mate for Eve- found none that were compatible, and thus had to create one in His image for Adam- Yes- Stop quesitonign the scientific viability of Macroevolution, and just take it wholly on faith- don’t ever question whether nature is capable of creation- just accept it- to do otherwise is ‘unscientific’ by golly
Woopsie- Science itself REFUTES the hypothesis of evolution- but meh- just ignore all that and put your undying devoted blind faith to work and beleive- Yes people- Beleive nature violates it’s own principles, beleive that nature created life from dirty chemicals- Beleive Beleive Beleive! Never question!
God apaprently LIED to us when He said Physical, spiritual death and sin came into being AFTER the fall of man- apparently we’re to ignore these facts because ‘God was only ‘Joshing us’ when HE described the historical events of Genesis. (Oh, that’s right- the theistic evolutionists don’t beleive God’s word is God’s word, they simply think it’s man’s written testimony of ‘good writings and sayings handed down through the ages’- Yep- there’s no conflict with God’s word AS LONG AS you are comfortable DENYING God’s word is God’s word!)
“As some degree of apeman, Adam was going to die, so what was the use of God’s warning to Adam, ‘In the day you eat of it, dying you will die’? (literal translation). Did God give Adam the ability to live for ever and then after Adam’s sin take it away?”
Lol- musta been one heck of a crowded world IF species lived forever for billions of years while they evovled and avoided physical death
“In Scripture we read ‘for since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead, for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive’ (1 Corinthians 15:22, 23). If Adam was the end of the evolutionary line, then thousands of evolving men had already died, and death did not come by Adam. Chapter 15 also tells of the second Adam, who was Christ. If the first Adam ‘ex–apeman’ was as real a person as the second Adam, then there came a day when God must have said: ‘You are of this moment man, Adam!’”
Again- Apaprently God LIED to us by saying Death came into hte world THROUGH ONE MAN- Yep- By golly, there’s no conflict whatsoever with evolution and God’s word- oh Ye of little faith!
“Suddenly, everything was different. Now he is sinless and can sin, but as an ‘apeman’ or part ‘ape-like creature’ he couldn’t have sinned. Now he couldn’t take the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, or he would be sinning, and would die. A moment ago there were no restrictions; now there are. For years he had gone without clothes, and of course he would not have been ashamed. But now he is a man. When did he lose his ape hair? A moment ago he had mates, now he has none!
If we make some allowances and jump these hurdles, the women of that day would present a problem. Let us set the stage again. If the theistic evolutionist believes Adam to be descended from ape-like creatures, but a creation of God, then what about the woman Eve? If Adam was a theistic evolution ‘creation’—a literal, though stretched, interpretation of the Genesis account—then what about Eve? God Himself said, ‘It is not good for man to be alone’.
What an incredible situation: Adam’s mother and father, sissy and brothers, aunts and uncles, cousins, nephews and nieces, and his grandparents, perhaps, were all around him, and he was lonely! Maybe God left them out of Eden, or was this first man ‘called out’ even as Abraham was in Genesis chapter 12?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v11/i2/evolution.asp
Fot htose claiming there is no conflict between God’s word and the hypothesis Macroevolution- this is an assinine statement to make, and one htat shows a ignroance of God’s word for the sake of meshing two diamtetrically opposed viewpoints- I’m not sure what ‘bible’ you folks who claim this are reading- but it certainly isn’t hte actual word of God that you’re reading!
“God brought all the animals before Adam, and the Bible recounts that there was not found among the animals a suitable mate or helper for Adam. Did all the animals not include his mother and father, sisters and brothers, aunts and uncles, cousins, nephews and nieces, and his grandparents? Did God only bring a couple of every kind of animal and did he leave Adam’s relatives out? Why couldn’t he marry one of them? What was wrong with one of his distant relatives, or the closer ones?
Even if, amazingly, only one family had become the proto-man type, surely there must have been others near enough, well up in the evolutionary tree. Surely if the line-up of eligible spinsters included his unmarried female relatives, Adam would have said, ‘This one will do!’. And God would have said, ‘No Adam. you can’t marry that sort, you are a new sort of creature, you are a new creation. Or rather a new evolution … She is not your sort!’
So, some allow that God evolved man, yet at a definite point declared: ‘Ape, you are now man! Adam is your name!’ And at that point, God invested him with God-likeness and the opportunity to live for ever as well. But, did he omit to evolve Eve? Is this why he had to create Eve? The Bible is very explicit as to how God made Eve. She was made from Adam’s side.”
Yep- all you need is blind faith (plus a WHOLE LOT of biblical manipluation, until the bible is no logner recognizable as God’s word) in order to beleive there’s no conflict between the bible and Evolution!
What do you need to have civil discussion with someone who has doesn't share your religious beliefs?
CAN WE TRUST THE BIBLE?
In accepting evolution, liberal theologians reject a number of key Christian beliefs. They reject the traditional date and authorship of many books in the Bible, which in itself represents a drastic undercutting of confidence in Scripture. If we cannot trust the Bible when it makes simple claims about when and by whom it was written, can we trust it when it makes much more important spiritual claims?
In treating the Bible as though it must be cut and patched to convey a ‘true’ picture, liberal theologians are saying it is full of errors. If the Bible is full of errors, it obviously cannot be revelation from God.
Take Genesis, for example. Liberalism rejects the Bible’s own claim that God told Moses what to write (Exodus 24:4; Numbers 33:2; etc.). Instead, it assumes that Genesis is a collection of writings by authors living much later. These hypothetical authors (dubbed J, E, D, and P) were writing merely out of their own experience and convictions. An example can be found in Conrad Hyer’s book, The Meaning of Creation. He attributes the content of Genesis 1 and 2 not to God’s revelation, but to the life experiences and religious purposes of its hypothetical authors, presumably writing hundreds of years after Moses.1
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v17/i1/god_evolution.asp
“Biblical Evidence Against Theistic Evolution
By Bob Dutko
God and Evolution may sound like an acceptable mix, but this concept of Theistic Evolution, or the belief that God guided a process of evolution during the Genesis Creation does not stand up to science or the Bible. So many Christians have been sold the lie of evolution that they feel they must accept itas truth or else they are somehow denying science. In fact, if you boldly declare that God created the Heavens and the Earth in 6 literal 24 hour days just about 6000 years ago, you will likely be laughed at and accused of also believing the Earth is flat. (By the way, the Bible does not say the Earth is flat. It describes it as a sphere suspended upon nothing, which of course, is true. It also does not claim the Earth is the center of the Universe as Galileo’s persecutors believed)
If you believe Genesis can be interpreted to say God used evolution, then you might as well throw out the whole Bible. After all, if “man was made from the dust of the ground” can be interpreted as “man was born from part monkey parents”....or if “woman was created from man’s rib” can be interpreted as “woman grew up the child of part monkey parents”....or if “God breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life and he became a living being” can be interpreted as “man was already a living being before he even developed embryonic nostrils to breath into”.....then why believe anything the Bible has to say at all?
Why take anything Moses said seriously? Or David? Or Solomon? Or Paul? Or Jesus? If interpretation of Scripture can be twisted that far from what it really says, you can twist anything in the Bible to say whatever you want it to. Maybe we should just trust what God told us instead of trying to twist Scripture to fit what we think science tells us.”
http://toptenproofs.com/article_theisticevolution.php
Yep- just throw out compelte sections of God’s word, Deny they mean what they say, and Walla- Theistic evolutionm is ‘perfectly compatible with the bible’, and anyone not agreeing, is simply ‘unscientific’ for darign to question the assinine beleif that macroevolution and the bible are compatible