Posted on 10/11/2009 6:56:59 AM PDT by OneVike
special thanks to hanna548 for the artwork
There is a disturbing trend that has taken hold of the modern day Christian community, and it is my opinion that this trend is causing a schism as big as the one that was addressed at the Council of Nicea over the Trinity. Now this is not a debate for those who have no faith in Christ, for what accord has Christ with Belial? No, this is strictly a debate for those who profess Christ as their Lord and Savior. Unfortunately, those who attempt to address the problem are usually labeled as rabble-rousers who only wish to spread discontent within the ranks of Christendom. This trend I speak of, is the compromising of the Word with the idea of evolution known as theistic evolution or Old Earth Creationism. I say “compromise”, because in the 150 years since Darwin offered his theory of evolution, the only side in the argument that has offered to compromise its position has been the Christian side. I have yet to see the evolutionary camp temper it's teachings to include God anywhere in the equation of creation.
If I am wrong, then I challenge someone to prove to me that the godless Darwinists have ever compromised their position on evolution. If anything they have stiffened their resolve to convert all mankind to their atheistic system that excludes a Creator other than random chance. The evolutionary thinkers are not struggling to find a way to harmonize the events of Genesis 1-11 with the words of Darwin or Stephen J. Gould. They are beating the drum of "science" versus "religion" so loud that they cannot hear the evidence that some Christian apologists would try to get them to consider. Too often, those who present any evidence that makes a case for the Biblical account of creation are even ridiculed by Christians who believe in theistic evolution. In many cases they are ridiculed in the same way the ungodly Darwinists ridicule them. Well allow me to present a few reasons why I do not have enough faith to believe in the OEC's theistic evolutionary theory.
As I said, my article is not directed at anyone who does not claim to be a Christian, so I will not be addressing the scientific or geological particulars of evolution or of space and time. This is strictly a debate between Christians who claim to be Biblical “Young Earth Creationists”, and Christians who hold to the views of “Old Earth Creationism”, “Theistic evolutionism”, or the “Gap Theory”. However, before I present my reasons why I believe these beliefs are all wrong, I must distinguish the difference between "Macro-Evolution", and "Micro- Evolution".
Micro-evolution is not really evolution at all, it is just the simple variation within a species. What scientists describe as the prominence of genes being displayed within that species. This is what allows a family to have one child with blond hair and blue eyes, while the other has brown hair and brown eyes. The children have not evolved (they are still human), they simply differ in their dominant genes. In like manner, Christian micro-evolutionists believe that all dogs in the world today have evolved within the species from two dogs Noah brought onto the Ark, and all canines would be similar to every other animal of that species existing on the planet today.
Macro-evolution on the other hand refers to major evolutionary changes over time, the origin of new types of organisms from previously existing, but different, ancestral types. Examples of this would be fish descending from an invertebrate animal, or whales descending from a land mammal. The evolutionary concept demands these bizarre changes, and this is the bases for which Darwin's theory has been propagated.
Now back to my reasons for disagreeing with theistic evolutionists. I find it sad that any Christian who would claim to hold to the truths of the Scriptures, could then turn around and say that they question the most basic and foundational truths revealed in the Scriptures such as: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" Genesis 1:1. In doing so, they are not merely questioning the curious mechanics and unique events of the creation week, but they are debating the very words and message of that week. Furthermore, to deny God created everything through Christ in a normal 6-day period is to question the very character and nature of God. It attributes to Him the evil, wasteful, chaotic, random, purposeless, death-filled processes of evolutionary "creation", that would make Him (God) the very Author and Sustainer of all that the theory of evolution demands. In my opinion those who attribute to the power of Satan any miracles which Christ performed, or generally those works which are the result of the Holy Spirit, are in danger of committing Blasphemy. Matthew 12:31-32; Mark 3:28-29; Luke 12:10
Another disturbing fact about having a belief in theistic evolution, would be the denial of the doctrine of Original Sin. Think about it, if suffering, death, and extinction are inevitable components of the evolutionary process, then it only follows that the doctrine of Original Sin makes no sense. Humans would had to have evolved into a world that was already filled with suffering and other forms of imperfection, such as hurricanes, floods, pain, and suffering. Ultimately, death would not be a punishment for sin because death would had to have always been a part of the cycle of life wich would have been needed for evolution to exist on earth. Taken to its inevitable conclusion, if humans are not responsible for suffering and evil, but instead death is simply a natural process rather than a punishment, what need is there for atonement and redemption? After all if man is not responsible for sin as the Bible says, then the Bible is wrong, and if the Bible is wrong why live by it's precepts?
Now I need to address the debate over the Hebrew word “Yom” or יום. Those who disagree with the literal translation of the Bible that claims God created everything in six literal earth days, use the argument that “yom” is sometimes used to describe an age or an era. I offer six reasons theistic evolutionists and OEC's are wrong in their interpretation of the record of Genesis.
1.) Moses repeats, “And there was evening and there was morning, one day” Genesis 1:5, Genesis 1:8, Genesis 1:13, Genesis 1:19, Genesis 1:23, Genesis 1:31.
2.) In the context of a 24 hour day, Moses again defines what he means by ”yom”, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy” Exodus 20:11; Exodus 31:17.
3.) The Hebrew word for day, or “yom”, is used 1480 times in the Old Testament, and it is translated by some different 50 words. It can mean an indefinite time, but it is not used as an age of millions or billions of years. When "yom" is used with a numerical adjective, it always refers to a literal 24 hour day.
4.) The Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament, the “Septuagint”, uses "hemera" or ἡμέρα, which normally means a 24 hour day such as, “And He was in the wilderness forty days”, not forty ages or eras. Mark 1:13.
5.) Furthermore, if Moses meant a period of long eons or ages, then the translators should have used the Greek word, "aion" or αἰών. which is the word Christ used when he gave His followers their marching orders for the great commission in Matthew12:20
“teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen
"Moses permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce, and to dismiss her." And Jesus answered and said to them, "Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation, God MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE. FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH SO THEN THEY ARE NO LONGER TWO, BUT ONE FLESH. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
So, from this exchange you can see that Jesus obviously agreed with Moses in his interpretation of the creation story, thus rejecting macro evolution and the Old Earth theory. Jesus specifically said, “from the beginning He made them”. He did not say, “In the beginning he started the process”. Jesus believed there was a definite beginning and that Moses did not write an allegorical story because the Israelites were to primitive to understand the truth. So if Jesus said so, why would anyone want to disagree with Him?
Also, those of you who are proponents of theistic evolution are walking a very thin line, because you also must deny the very existence of the Trinity.
”For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.” John 5:7
”In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Genesis 1:1
“yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things, and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him” 1 Corinthians 8:6
”He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.” Colossians 1:15-17
“You send forth Your Spirit, they are created; And You renew the face of the earth.” Psalm 104:30
”And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” Genesis 1:2.
The Scriptures, and an understanding of the texts, should be enough to prove to Christians that the Bible is right. When it comes to the debate with the godless Darwinists, we Christians are living in great times. Every day we find more evidence that proves the Scriptures are historically, archeologically, and scientifically correct. Now is not the time for us Christians to compromise our faith in God, for ultimately that is how we will be judged. Do you have enough faith in God to believe He is who He says He is, and that he can do what He said He would do? The faith of a mustard seed is all you need to throw a mountain into the sea, could you imagine the trembling of the Godless if we Christians had such faith?
I pray that those who have ears to hear will hear His voice and call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Amen
Why does it bother you that some people don’t think it’s an appropriate subject for political activism?
No, the more appropriate question is why does this continue being ignored?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2347175/posts?q=1&;page=301#323
It’s an old tactic. Just amounts to alot of projection about attacks and so forth, you’re better served ignoring it and saving your time.
And yet again, cottshop says more in one paragraph than you’ve contributed.
Do not trust your spell checker. This advice is not just for witches and warlocks, but for everyone. The spell checker will insert words that are not your words. Beware ...
Another new word!
You've walked onto thin ice here.
I have pointed out on previous threads that Young Earth Creationism implies that Yahweh acts like Loki the Trickster. That is, the overwhelming evidence of the earth's old age is either real, or God is misleading us.
Secondly, if God "doesn't do wasteful," then life can't begin at conception--since many millions of zygotes are created but discarded from the womb before the mother even knows a conception has occurred.
Moses is the one who penned Genesis and was as well the one God elected to teach these unlearned newly free slaves out of Egypt. And IF Moses was going to be teaching them about how long Methuselah 'lived' and how that by Genesis 6 the Heavenly Father said I will shorten the time span of flesh living upon this earth. Then that would be by necessity mean the difference in what a day with the LORD means versus what a day means to flesh beings.
And that would also mean that Moses who penned Genesis 1:1 and 2 would have had to explain to these unlearned in the WORD that there had been two different floods for two totally different reasons.
The Bible does NOT say sin first took place with 'flesh' it say that 'the' Adam was the first flesh to sin.
We in these flesh bodies were NOT in flesh bodies when Satan rebelled. At Christ tells Nicodemus in John 3 that just to 'see' the kingdom of God one must be born from above. Christ did not say that all that are born in flesh would enter the kingdom of God but they would see it. As we are told in Revelation about those 7,000 that would be instantly killed at the return of Christ. Those are the ones who polluted the 'daughters' of 'the' Adam in Genesis 6 and those who the book of Jude among other places describe.
Those dinos left the evidence that this earth is millions upon millions of years old, else Noah would have been required to have built a bigger ship to house them when the polluted bloodline to Christ was removed from this earth.
Hardly evidence. Some people believe global warming and alot of the charade that is evolution are science, but that's not "evidence" that they're not mutually exclusive.
For all the liberal demands of "evidence" it makes me wonder why people should bother accomodating them.
In the least.
Only because you know it will have to be that way on the religion forum anyway.
“While I am a Bible believer, I see nothing in scripture that proves there was not a gap between Gen. 1:2 and Gen. 1:3...Plus, there is scripture that does bolster that idea...”
Nor is there any indication of the amount of time between “In the beginning...” and the earth as described in verse two, which simply says the earth was existing in a water covered state.
Nonetheless, what Scriptures would, as you say, bolster that idea?
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
Really. How do you discuss religion when only one side is allowed to discuss it.
OTOH, it was your buddies that crossed the line with the personal attacks on this RELIGION thread.
Hi OneVike,
I just moved to TX from CA this Sat so missed this thread until now. I’m also responding via iPhone so this is a short response.
I almost became an Astronomy major before I came to my senses and swiched to CompSci LOL. So I am (currently) an OEC. There is just too much evidence that the Universe is more than 6,000 years old. I’ve also really enjoyed Dr. Hugh Ross’ work of squaring Gen with scientific data.
But let me clear: I do not believe in evolution, and neither do any of the OEC folks that I know. Neither does Dr. Ross or any other OEC person I know personally. I do not appreciate being lumped in with the evo crowd.
Thanks for the ping.
I am pretty much in full agreement with your position. The Bible is a wonderful document, and explains many mysteries of life and this world for those who are open to its truth. However, the Bible doesn’t explain every detail of creation, and there are many matters the Lord has left for us to ponder ourselves. On some points though, I feel that the Bible is exceedingly clear, and to ignore the plain statements therein, in favor of the “wisdom” of the world is to turn one’s heart away from the truth the Lord has graced us with.
Once one starts down the path of attempting to ignore or explain away the historical narratives of the Bible in favor of man’s imperfect accounts, you will soon arrive at a quandary. If some of these passages, which are written in the particular style of Biblical history, may be rendered as parables or non-historical traditions, then how does one determine which, or indeed if any, of the other historical passages are to be taken as literal fact or not? If Genesis is not to be taken literally, then who can say that Exodus is historical? Likewise, if Exodus is not historical, then perhaps the stories of Judges are simply parables as well.
Even for Biblical events where we have extra-Biblical writings, or archaelogical evidence for corroboration, it seems universal that the Bible explains these events in much greater detail than any other source. To toss out the validity of the Bible as a historical document therefore effectively leaves us in the dark about nearly all of the events recorded therein, including, most significantly, the life and work of the Saviour. The enemies of truth know this well, and they have used it to their advantage, especially in recent history, as they have attempted to gradually undermine faith in the accuracy of the Word even amongst believers.
The prominence of these beliefs on evolution amongst the faithful, I believe, are only one example of the fruit their work has borne. Amongst other claims, you will now find it fairly commonplace for those claiming to be Christian to believe that the Bible was simply an oral tradition for centuries or millenia before being written down. Knowing our modern civilization’s inherent distrust of “myths” and “legends”, what better way to cast the shadow of doubt on the Lord’s Word, than to convince people that instead of the most ancient example of literature, the Bible is just a collection of tribal stories, collated and edited at a much later date?
Likewise, how many Christians have been seduced by those who, under the guise of science, attempt to pick apart the Bible with subjective “literary analysis”? Their claims to be able to divine a diverse body of human authors, not only contradict the Bible’s own attributions, but by inference cast doubts on the very notion of divine inspiration itself.
Surely, we should all agree that matters of faith in our Lord Jesus and his redemptive accomplishment are the most important facts for Christians to agree on. There are many other points of contention amongst believers that we should not let overshadow that principle which unites us. Notwithtanding, I believe that in light of my observations above, every Christian should consider that the work of the enemy is not divided, but unified in their attempt to destroy the fundamental faith in the Word. Their work is doomed to failure of course, but that does not excuse us from being vigilant to speak out against the erroneous doctrines that they teach.
“To believe in the 6-day creation and the devolution of man attributes a failure in design by God. God is perfect. Why would he create the evil in the world.”
I can’t really agree with this statement. First of all, what man can know fully the purposes of God when he set about to make His creation? Unless one is sure that the Lord has revealed all of his plans and purposes, then how can one attribute a failing to God based on any observation of the creation, without knowing His intent? Perhaps evil itself serves a purpose of which God is aware, but of which you are simply ignorant?
Second, regarding the creation of evil, I believe it’s altogether too simplistic to say that God created evil. I believe the best definition of evil is disobedience to the will of God. God cannot disobey His own will, therefore, God cannot, by that definition, commit evil. Only a creation of God, with the ability to choose obedience or disobedience, could originate evil. If you wish to ascribe to God responsibility for creating the ability to choose evil, then I think you would be able to make a more sensible argument.
Thanks for the ping.
Are you referring to the serpent that talked?
Permit me to make a simplistic argument (that avoids a lot of complicated discussion): You either believe in God, or not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.