In The Beginning God, Not Darwin, Created

Post Scripts ^ | 10/11/09 | One Vike

[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

6.) The creation of Genesis involves Jesus Himself, because He was there when it happened. Jesus even stated that Moses interpretation of the record of Genesis was correct, and who are we to claim Jesus is a liar? Consider what happened the day the Pharisees confronted Him regarding marriage and asked Him about the legality of divorce in Mark 10:4-9;

"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

[tacticalogic]

Lol- arguing ‘theological differences’ to determien what is and is not science- precious!

You have a theological difference of opinion with the USGS.

[Iscool]

First off, there is no scripture that supports the gap theory, secondly, when children grow up thinking God is not the Creator and man is not the first to sin and thus death did not enter the world through Adam’s sin, you have made Go sand Christ a liar.

Who sinned against God first, Eve or Satan???

2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Is God telling us that the heavens were there first???

2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Noah's flood??? Did the world perish at Noah's flood??? Or did 'much' of the life vanish during Noah's flood??? Nothing to indicate that all the sea creatures and fish died off...Doesn't sound like Noah's flood to me...

2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

The heavens and earth which are now??? The heavens and earth are not the same ones that God made before Noah's flood??? The earth is the same isn't it??? It was just void of a lot of life after Noah's flood??? The heavens didn't get destroyed in Noah's flood...And the earth is the same one we had in Gen. 1:1...No way this could be Noah's flood...

I'd be interested in seeing your proof that the 'gap theory' is out of contention...

I wholehearted agree that the death of the inhabitants of our world came from the fall of Adam...And it's very clear to me that evolution is a myth...And I have no doubts whatsoever that Adam and Eve, the animals, birds, stars and the heavens we see were created just over 6 thousand years ago...

But there are so many things that don't fit into that 6 thousand year period...

So I'd appreciate you prooving that nothing existed prior to 6 thousand years ago...

[tacticalogic]

The scientific method is not religious.

Modern day science as it's practiced and promoted, has become religious.

It is your contention that all scientists practice a religion called "science"?

[CottShop]

[[You also fail at capitalization and punctuation.]]

You’ve added so much to htis topic=- thanks for your contributions- they’ve been spellbinding- well done- I think that it’s clear that if all you’ce got to offer to the topics are complaints about spelling, that it’s not my posts that ‘aren’t worth reading’ but yours.

[OneVike]

Imagine all you must deny to accept the idea that God used evolution instead of Christ, as in the idea of theistic evolution, OEC, or the Gap theory? The general idea of evolution is quite different then what the Bible says about creation week in the book of Genesis. Consider what you claim about Jesus saying is so. Then If Christ is wrong then how can He be God?

The Bible	Evolution theory	Exact opposite?
1) Earth before sun.	1) Sun before earth.	Yes
2) Oceans before land.	2) Land before oceans.	Yes
3) Light before sun.	3) Sun before light.	Yes
4) Land plants first.	4) Marine life first.	Yes
5) Fruit tree before fish.	5) Fish before fruit tree.	Yes
6) Fish before insects.	6) Insects before fish.	Yes
7) Plants before sun.	7) Sun before plants.	Yes
8) Marine animals before land animals.	8) Land animals before marine animals.	Yes
9) Bird before reptiles.	9) Reptiles before birds.	Yes
10) Man brought death in the world.	10) Death brought man into the world.	Yes
11) God created man.	11) Man created God (out of need).	Yes
12) Atmosphere between 2 layers of water.	12) Atmosphere above water.	Yes
13) All life was created by God.	13) All life just happened, and evolved.	Yes
14) There is a Creator.	14) There is no Creator.	Yes

There is no middle ground in exact opposites. Because you cannot accept one without totally denying the other. Because like I said in my article, when you choose evolution you also deny the trinity shown below:

Please answer my assertions before bringing more to the table, because you have yet to disprove anything I wrote.

[RegulatorCountry]

It is your contention that all scientists practice a religion called "science"?

"All?" No. Clearly not all. The science of "climate change" has all the hallmarks of a religion, though.

And, so does the conception of evolution, that seeks to explain the origins of life on this planet.

[ColdWater]

Thank you for the ping. But since your senseless rantings are on the religion formum I will allow you to post in peace.

[OneVike]

It takes more of a leap of faith to believe in evolution then it does to believe in God. So that make evolution a religion, because there is yet to be any provable evidence it is true. And since scientists are at the forefront of teaching evolution and they use science to do it with. That make many of today's studied sciences a form of.

[tacticalogic]

"All?" No. Clearly not all. The science of "climate change" has all the hallmarks of a religion, though.

And, so does the conception of evolution, that seeks to explain the origins of life on this planet.

The hype of "climate change" has the hallmarks of a cult. The science has gotten corrupted by politics and money, but that doesn't make it a religion.

Evolution seems to be a diffent question than origins, and the age of the Earth a different question than biology.

The crux seems to be whether, within the realm of Christianity, it's blasphemy to consider them separately, or to speak of them in contradiction to the literal account of creation in Genesis.

Beyond that, the question seems to be whether science becomes a religion if it commits that blasphemy.

[OneVike]

What?

[whattajoke]

e ALL know I’m a lazt tyypist- this is common knowledge- so your johnny come lately ‘observations’ are a tad outdated- but thanks for playing- now run along

Understood and accepted. I promise to never point out your typing skills if you promise to never - for the millionth time - make some lame joke about my screename reflecting upon my intellect. Truce?

[tacticalogic]

It takes more of a leap of faith to believe in evolution then it does to believe in God.

That people believe in theistic evolution is evidence that those are not mutually exclusive.

The argument seems to be over belief in the doctrine of YEC.

[RegulatorCountry]

The hype of "climate change" has the hallmarks of a cult. The science has gotten corrupted by politics and money, but that doesn't make it a religion.

Oh, now. "Climate change" has sin. "Climate change" has redemption. "Climate change" even has an apocalypse.

Evolution seems to be a diffent question than origins, and the age of the Earth a different question than biology.

Tell that to the Primordial Soup-Nazis, who promulgate the notion that all life originated in pond scum, zapped to life by lightning or some such.

As far as the concept of "deep time," necessitated by the truly astounding lengths of time posited, for life to have arisen from nothing and self-organized into the sentient beings posting on this FR Religion Forum today, it was originally conceptualized by an atheist, James Hutton. As it would have to have been. Christians in the late 18th century accepted a catastrophic, global flood and a six-day Creation.

[whattajoke]

So unless you want to partake in the debate between YEC and OEC, which by the way is a Christian in house debate, then go find another thread to disrupt.

OneVike - May I offer my two cents on your thread? Disclosure: I accept the theory of evolution as fact. But that isn't my point at all.

I applaud this thread and encourage what you are trying to do here. For years I've been interested in the factions of creationists - both in the real world and on Free Republic. The top creationist thread starter here posts articles touting "Intelligent Design" on a daily basis and yet, he himself is a YEC. Many times I've asked him how he can support ID, which clearly states such things as "God is not part of this paradigm," and the "top" IDer, Michael Behe, accepts modification through common descent and an old earth among other things. He admitted under oath that ID is equal to astrology in terms of scientific merit.

We have geocentrists here. We have OECs and YECs. All point to the bible as their guide in such things - but none have the temerity to debate among themselves. They prefer to just write how stupid evolution is.

I think the internal debate (YEC vs OEC, geo vs heliocentrists, Flood vs. Not really a worldwide flood, etc) is great. It doesn't happen enough... and I wish this thread would really delve into it.

[OneVike]

Yes, and my point works both ways as to why someone would believe in God yet not have enough faith to believe He did what He claims to do, yet they have more faith in science that has been proved to be flawed. Why would any one who says God is God think him less smart then scientists who do not believe in Hem.

So I say again those who believe in evolution have more faith, just misdirected, kind of like those who believe in Islam, or Buddhism. If you want to stick around and debate the logic of this thread then I must assume you come from religious argument or you would not still be debating whether or not the logic I put forth in the article is true.

[metmom]

What RC said...

When it becomes an ideology that replaces religion in people’s life, those who adhere to it do.

[ColdWater]

So why are you here?

I was pinged by the author of the thread. You too?

[metmom]

I think the internal debate (YEC vs OEC, geo vs heliocentrists, Flood vs. Not really a worldwide flood, etc) is great. It doesn't happen enough... and I wish this thread would really delve into it.

Why?

[reg45]

I remind everyone of one important fact: It has to be created before it can evolve.

[metmom]

Did I ask you?

Or did I really ask you and you’re just confused?