PDA

View Full Version : Do you believe God created us through evolution?



moonglow
Sep 6th 2006, 02:36 AM
I am wanting to get an idea on here about this...how many Christians believe God used evolution to create us and why...what influenced you to believe this? School, the media, reading the science fourm on here...your own studies. And have you studied the refutes against evolution or are you just taking their word this is right?

When I first joined this board in 2002 sometime later ONE member on here said he believed through evolution God created us...and that was all. No one else did. Now I am seeing more and more Christians believing this and I would like to know how many and why. thanks.

God bless

Slug1
Sep 6th 2006, 02:42 AM
I personally don't care. Does an actual answer to this effect my walk with Jesus, or effect my salvation.... No. Then I don't care.

However, I am interested in other answers to see what other thoughts are about this topic.

dixie_chick
Sep 6th 2006, 02:46 AM
I voted no and personally I sincerely hope not.

Diggindeeper
Sep 6th 2006, 03:18 AM
NOPE! Don't even slightly believe that.

Although I do have to add...I have seen some people who look like their great-grandmammy just might have been some kind of monkey... Hmmm...

And one of my daughter's school teachers had a noticible BANANA NOSE! :rofl:

flybaby
Sep 6th 2006, 03:22 AM
No, the Bible is clear on how God created us. And as a Christian, if someone can't believe the first two chapters of the Bible, how can they even begin to claim to believe the rest???

rachellynn
Sep 6th 2006, 05:17 AM
No, I believe what the Bible tells us.
In 5th grade (public school) I remember reading a book on evolution and having to do a book report on it.
And then went on to say I did not believe what the book said and wrote the Bible's version of the events.
Since I was an extremely shy child I still am amazed I did that. The teacher took it okay.

NHL Fever
Sep 6th 2006, 05:50 AM
I'm happy to see this poll had the 'I don't care option', having the wisdom to see beyond the petty and largely useless 'evolution vs not' debate and consider what is actually important. Has anyone actually ever been converted by this argument?, has it ever enriched any brother or sister's walk with Christ? And how many people has it driven a wedge between? Don't miss the forest for the trees.

moonglow
Sep 6th 2006, 03:31 PM
I'm happy to see this poll had the 'I don't care option', having the wisdom to see beyond the petty and largely useless 'evolution vs not' debate and consider what is actually important. Has anyone actually ever been converted by this argument?, has it ever enriched any brother or sister's walk with Christ? And how many people has it driven a wedge between? Don't miss the forest for the trees.

Well I hate to say it but if you look around the bible and science fourm you will find Christians on there constantly arguing FOR evolution...saying this is how God did it....and yea, it does cause division...and the atheist love it...they want us to see ourselves as nothing more then animals...:(

skc53
Sep 6th 2006, 04:21 PM
I voted no. In my opinion evolution has nothing to do with God's creation. God created us without any help from anyone or anything.

JesusPhreak27
Sep 6th 2006, 05:05 PM
I voted no. In my opinion evolution has nothing to do with God's creation. God created us without any help from anyone or anything.


VERY well put!!!! That is my exact belief. We are created IN HIS IMAGE so why would He need to have us evolve from what Adam and EVE were?

Like my daughter tells me -- If it aint in the Bible then it didnt happen. And no where does it say anthing about evolution......so that all I need to know.

Whispering Grace
Sep 6th 2006, 05:48 PM
Nope. I am a young earth creationist and that's not going to change.

Whispering Grace
Sep 6th 2006, 05:49 PM
I'm happy to see this poll had the 'I don't care option', having the wisdom to see beyond the petty and largely useless 'evolution vs not' debate and consider what is actually important. Has anyone actually ever been converted by this argument?, has it ever enriched any brother or sister's walk with Christ? And how many people has it driven a wedge between? Don't miss the forest for the trees.

It matters to me as it is a matter of trusting in God or trusting in man.

moonglow
Sep 6th 2006, 05:52 PM
Off hand I can think of at least four members on here, Christians, that do believe this is how God created us...I would like to hear from them....there is one vote on this is how God created us through evolution...so some either aren't seeing this poll or too shy to vote.

Clouds & Spikes
Sep 6th 2006, 06:08 PM
I voted "I don't know" because, quite frankly, I don't.

I am not evolution "friendly" I guess you would say, but there is ALOT of evidence that *seems* to contradict a literal 7 day creation. I also do not believe that a literal 7-day creation is required by the text. The whole "what else has mornings and evenings" argument is silly to me. If a 'day' can be a metaphor, so can 'mornings and evenings'.

To be quite honest, I don't really trust what experts or scientists tell me. Its not because I distrust science, I love science, but because I am only 26 years old and I have seen science change its stance on things so much, usually in light of new evidence. Also, NOTHING in this world is without bias, and how can I even trust I am getting the scientist's report accurately? By the time it gets to me, its been through the media, who have no expertise in the field. When they report it, alot of times, it can get reported wrong. And then there is all of this misinformation floating around. This happens so much its unbelieveable.

So, the very best I can say right now, is that in light of current scientific understanding, the earth *seems* alot older then 6k years. However, someone could discover something tomorrow that changes everything, so thats about as far as I am willing to take it.


Fortuneately, this answer has no bearing on salvation, although it would be nice to know.


Brandon

Whispering Grace
Sep 6th 2006, 06:33 PM
I also do not believe that a literal 7-day creation is required by the text. The whole "what else has mornings and evenings" argument is silly to me. If a 'day' can be a metaphor, so can 'mornings and evenings'.

Exodus 20:11 confirms a literal 6 day Creation:


For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

atrus912
Sep 6th 2006, 06:48 PM
Alright, this is pretty much the first and last thread I am ever going to post in on this matter on the boards for a good while, because I do believe that the whole debate/obsession over the subject derails Christians from their true purpose. If you have any personal problems with me, you can PM me or e-mail me. If you're in the mood for mature debate, I welcome your disagreement.

I have absolutely no problem with taking certain parts of the Bible metaphorically. The first two chapters of Genesis are pretty vague in my opinion. Also, the whole notion that the Earth has been around for only 6,000 years is ridiculous to me. Most (about 95%) of the people who argue that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, carbon-14 dating doesn't actually work, evolution violates the first law of thermodynamics, etcetera do not know science. They hear a few things, decide to connect them together to "prove" their point, while ignoring the rest of the science that tells them that they're wrong.

As for why I believe these things, part of the reason is because I used to think that under Christianity I wasn't allowed to believe them. In my high school biology class, I debated the subject so much that by the time I left the class (somehow passing, despite what an absolute stubborn fool I had been) I was percieved as nothing but a self-righteous jerk. Which was pretty much what I had been in that class. After that, I was an agnostic for about a year and a half (not that I had ever really been a Christian). After I was communicated the loving, accepting, and forgiving nature of Jesus Christ and saw how my efforts to "defend the right, oh how holier I am than thee evil scientist" I was pretty upset with myself. Then, I looked into it from the perspective of a scientist, and I found that the science works, perhaps not on a 6,000 year scale, but it does work. I had never bought the 6,000 year-old universe theory either. I then studied the arguments against evolution, both scientific and theological, and I saw that it A)Looked extremely childish, and B) Most of it was not based on any real science (even the "scientific" arguments).

Now if I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, but my answer is a definate yes. By the way, most of us that do believe that God used evolution in His Divine Creation of the world do not have the perspective that God needed "help", we just think that it's logical for Him to have done it that way. The idea of God doing it this way actually makes my perceiption of His Power and Control that much more awesome.

God Bless You All!

slightlypuzzled
Sep 6th 2006, 06:53 PM
I have seen no reason to look any further than God exercising His omnipotence to carry out His own will.

NHL Fever
Sep 6th 2006, 10:58 PM
Well I hate to say it but if you look around the bible and science fourm you will find Christians on there constantly arguing FOR evolution...saying this is how God did it....and yea, it does cause division...and the atheist love it...they want us to see ourselves as nothing more then animals...:(

Right, but it works both ways don't forget. Those that insist on the non-evolution in a debate contribute just as much to dividing the body of Christ as those Christians that are trying to push evolution. It's an issue that is not critical to our faith, and does not affect salvation. If somebody's faith is contigent upon interpreting the creation one specific way or another, that seems like a weak faith. The point of creation is God's sovereignty, not his mechanism.


I have seen no reason to look any further than God exercising His omnipotence to carry out His own will.

That's really what it's all about. When we insist on the details having no bearing on our faith or mission in life, we miss something far greater IMO.


Off hand I can think of at least four members on here, Christians, that do believe this is how God created us...I would like to hear from them....there is one vote on this is how God created us through evolution...so some either aren't seeing this poll or too shy to vote.

I've been away so I don't know how it turned out but last I heard there were new rules about whether or not you can discuss evolution. I'll assume it's ok since several senior (and expectantly informed) members are talking about it.

I have much the same perspective as a previous poster, believing in evolution in no way means that I somehow trust man more than God, or that God needed help. Does the fact that God used a rock to give water to Moses mean he needed the rock's help? God can do stuff in whatever way he wants, he is all powerful. God lets humans learn about the world however and he's given us minds to use and decipher the work around us. That is the reason we have all the fancy things we have today. It just makes sense that we would be able to learn about our own creation, just as we learn about the ways all of God's creations work. The bible is full of metaphors, some used obviously, some not. We simply don't always know, and as people of faith we need to be comfortable with not knowing everything (read: definition of faith). Jesus told lots of parables in his time, did those stories actually happen at some point in history or were they all just to make the point? Maybe yes, maybe no, maybe some were, but none of that matters because we all know the point of it, to deliver biblical truth. Jesus is God, so the answer of whether God uses metaphors is clearly yes. Is creation a metaphor, is it partially accurate? - I don't believe we know, and like the parables, it doens't affect anything, unless we get so bogged down in the details that we miss the message, and fight with each other.

I'm reminded of talking with a muslim friend once, I had them read the story that Jesus tells about the rich guy who invites a bunch of prominent people to his feast but nobody shows up so then he just gets people off the street to come. We all know that story and why it is told but my friend, not trained to hear it that way, completely missed the point. She became fixated on how the bibie must be saying you should invite rich/important people to your feast, and ignore the poor unless there's nobody else to invite. She didn't get it. Imagine if this story was big debate topic in Christian circles or on this board, how rediculous would that be? That could easily happen, guess where I'm going with this?

Both sides of the isle are guilty of forcing the issue and making waves that just drench everybody. The theistic evolution side is guilty of thinking they are better because they may know more, and can have an angry and sinful elitist attitude. They have got to realize that it's not necessary to make everyone understand evolution in order to appreciate God in their own way, and stop with the persecution complex. They also fall into the trap of believing they know how it happened. There's strong evidence, but it's far from proven. The anti-evolution side is often guilty of making no attempt to really understand what evolution is, instead being content with a false understanding, trite anti-evolution punch-lines, and making insulting and ignorant comments about the other side's lack of faith in God, lack of trust in the bible. They also need to stop believing that theistic evolutionists have some kind of anti-God agenda, out to turn everyone into debaucherers and idolaters.

God made the world, and He made us, we shouldn't be divided by the how.

Keemah
Sep 7th 2006, 02:09 AM
No, I don't believe God used evolution to create us. However, I do believe that some human beings underwent some changes in order to survive in the climates they found themselves in.

TEITZY
Sep 7th 2006, 02:14 AM
I have absolutely no problem with taking certain parts of the Bible metaphorically. The first two chapters of Genesis are pretty vague in my opinion...Then, I looked into it from the perspective of a scientist, and I found that the science works, perhaps not on a 6,000 year scale, but it does work. I had never bought the 6,000 year-old universe theory either. I then studied the arguments against evolution, both scientific and theological, and I saw that it A)Looked extremely childish, and B) Most of it was not based on any real science (even the "scientific" arguments).


What you actually mean is that you interpret Genesis metaphorically because a plain natural reading of Genesis clearly contradicts what evolutionary 'science' has proven to be true! So as a scientist you take what you believe is true and try and make it fit with what the Bible says. Of course the Genesis account is completely incompatible with evolutionary science and so therefore it must be figurative or metaphorical. So science takes precedence over the Word of God. Even if you were right about evolution you have already set a dangerous precedent that undermines the authority of God's Word.

I am really struggling to see what is so "vague" about Gen 1 & 2. You are obviously fairly intelligent so I think you probably realize exactly what Genesis is teaching but are struggling to reconcile it with your own evolutionary presuppositions. I don't believe creationists for the most part are ignorant of evolutionary theory and indeed many creation scientists were once evolutionists themselves so they have a first-hand working knowledge of evolution. If the theory of evolution is as scientifically water-tight as you claim then no empirical scientist (especially those who don't believe in the God of the Bible) would abandon it for a theory such as intelligent design. But that is precisely what is happening and ironically it is their own empirical scientific observations in areas like DNA & cell function that has led them to reject evolutionary theory.


The idea of God doing it this way actually makes my perceiption of His Power and Control that much more awesome.


Yet the same theory you insist brings greater glory to God is the same theory most evolutionists use to reject belief in God altogether!

Cheers
Leigh

atrus912
Sep 7th 2006, 03:04 AM
What you actually mean is that you interpret Genesis metaphorically because a plain natural reading of Genesis clearly contradicts what evolutionary 'science' has proven to be true!

First of all, it's not "evolutionary" science, it's biological science, and it is really science, so I don't see the need to undermine it with quotation marks. I do consider my view and reading of The Bible to be plain and natural. As with other pieces of literature (and I do not consider The Bible to be fictional) it contains various literary elements, such as metaphor, simile, hyperbole, etcetera. The Bible can and should be taken metaphorically in other places. For instance, when Jesus says that it is harder for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God, He is not saying that a rich man definately cannot get to heaven. He is saying that it is immensely difficult. Which it is. Also, Jesus says to a man when he asks Jesus how many times to forgive someone "seventy times seven". Now, I know my father has wronged me far more than 490 times, but I continue to forgive him.


So as a scientist you take what you believe is true and try and make it fit with what the Bible says. Of course the Genesis account is completely incompatible with evolutionary science and so therefore it must be figurative or metaphorical.

I am not trying to twist The Bible around and make it fit my views. If I wanted to do that, I would be probably be looking at p*rn right now and snorting blow, as I can twist Scripture around to fit my views to those things fairly easily if I felt like it. However, as a Christian I know that the Bible specifically forbids such things. You have put yourself in a nice position by refusing to acknowledge the possibility that The Genesis account is metaphorical, and therefore anyone who claims it to be as such is not intrepreting scripture correctly. It works both ways.


So science takes precedence over the Word of God. Even if you were right about evolution you have already set a dangerous precedent that undermines the authority of God's Word.

I did not say that Science was more important than God. I said that they are not mutually exclusive. I am not under a "dangerous precedent", because I have not chosen to try and say the God's Word is false. I just think that it has more than one intrepretation.


I am really struggling to see what is so "vague" about Gen 1 & 2.

Very little information about a pretty essential part of human spiritual history.


I think you probably realize exactly what Genesis is teaching but are struggling to reconcile it with your own evolutionary presuppositions.

Please don't try and psycologically analyze me.




I don't believe creationists for the most part are ignorant of evolutionary theory and indeed many creation scientists were once evolutionists themselves so they have a first-hand working knowledge of evolution. If the theory of evolution is as scientifically water-tight as you claim then no empirical scientist (especially those who don't believe in the God of the Bible) would abandon it for a theory such as intelligent design. But that is precisely what is happening and ironically it is their own empirical scientific observations in areas like DNA & cell function that has led them to reject evolutionary theory.

I'd like to hear these observations, but I have probably heard them before. What I have heard about things that supposedly disprove macroevolution and carbon-14 dating have been extremely biased and "loaded" studies, that have sometimes included outright lies.


Yet the same theory you insist brings greater glory to God is the same theory most evolutionists use to reject belief in God altogether!

I didn't say that, I said that it made God seem more awesome to me. Biologists, by the way, aren't mounting a grand campaign to disprove The Bible. They are doing their jobs, and getting spat at in the face by both sides.

Christinme
Sep 7th 2006, 09:17 AM
I answered I don't know ... because I don't know. I've spent quite a bit of time examining this issue and I think that it is possible, I also believe that it is also possible that it isn't true ... hence I don't know. After reading and examining Genesis I do not see it precluding the possibility of God having used evolution as the method in which He created us.

Kid
Sep 7th 2006, 09:48 AM
I personally don't care. Does an actual answer to this effect my walk with Jesus, or effect my salvation.... No. Then I don't care.

I am agreeing with this statement more and more regarding any issue that people bring up for discussion.

However, I do agree with the Bible - in what ever way I interpet it.
yup, 7 days = 7 days ;) .


I have seen no reason to look any further than God exercising His omnipotence to carry out His own will.
:thumbsup:

I wonder how many people would have the audacity of continuing a debate to the end source "No God, Your wrong - the Bible says .......":eek:

FaithfulSheep
Sep 10th 2006, 10:23 PM
Nope. I believe God created man in His image. He "made" us, and thus, we were. No evolution involved.

EarlyCall
Sep 11th 2006, 05:20 PM
I was wondering if someone believing in evolution could address a couple issues I've not seen addressed before.

Let me start out by laying some gorundwork.

Watching a show on the Discovery Channel at someone's house this past Saturday, the show traced man's evolution. At some point there were (and I forget what they called them) but a race of not so human and human. In other words the two co-existed together, but the one branch died off eventually and the other continued on and they were like us.

Now understand too that before this you had forms of human-like creatures and with time the forms varied until we have what we have today.

Now let's lay just a bit more groundwork here and bare with me please.

God said He not only created Adam and Eve but He commanded Adam to name the beasts and God told them not to mess with that one tree and God said He walked and talked with Adam and Eve and even said He did so in the cool of the evening. Sounds like this is not metaphorical but either the truth or a lie. But that is for another thread another time.

Now some will claim this is metaphor and so on, but you can hardly write it off as a fairytale with no meaning whatsoever. God is not an idiot that likes to talk just to hear Himself. When God speaks, He does so with absolute purpose and to think otherwise is simply foolishness. Anyone disagreeing with this, please do speak up - and then explain it.

So we at least agree, I hope, there is much meaning to what the Bible says about creation no matter how you interpret it.

Ok, now with that groundwork laid, can someone address a couple things for me please?

1) At what point did God put a soul into man? When man was not quite to that branch that we came from or was it long before that when man was still most ape-like but walking upright and beginning to use tools and such things?

2) At what point did mankind, in whatever prior form, begin to die and go to either heaven or hell?

3) At what point did man actually learn of God? Are those that didn't know they had a creator in heaven or hell? Of course that depends on whether they had a soul or not doesn't it.

I obviously voted No.

Frances
Sep 11th 2006, 06:46 PM
Definately not!

Studyin'2Show
Sep 12th 2006, 01:02 PM
Ironically, if you go to the 'The Bible and Science' section of this forum, you would be led to believe by theistic evolutionists that most Christians accept evolution. :rolleyes: Oh, by the way, I voted no.

DAISHI
Sep 13th 2006, 06:22 AM
I think if theistic evolution were widely accepted we'd not be having the current social war over the issue.

disiple56
Sep 13th 2006, 09:36 AM
If God created Adam, then made Eve from one of his ribs wouldn't that mean that Eve was the first female human and Adam was the first male human.
I can't believe that they both had parents that were "almost" human. If they did have parents that were "almost human" were these ape-like parents allowed to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil?

Butero
Sep 17th 2006, 02:03 AM
I believe in the Genesis account of creation.

Song of Songs
Sep 17th 2006, 02:59 AM
I believe in the Genesis account of creation.

I think we all do.

atrus912
Sep 17th 2006, 03:50 AM
I think we all do.
Exactly, we all believe in the Genesis account, whether we take it literally or metaphorically. Which is part of what Slug1 and C&S are trying to communicate with what they posted. It's an issue that's been blown completely out of proportion.

rightin2
Sep 17th 2006, 10:52 PM
i voted 'i don't know', because i don't.

but i believe that either could be correct:

A) God made us in an instant
B) God made us in what he considers an instant, which could've been 500 years on earth, meaning maybe we started like a lump of clay and then as God shaped us we grew into an 'ape-like' form on our way to a form resembeling Himself

though, neither of these options supports darwinian evolution.

slightlypuzzled
Oct 9th 2006, 03:09 AM
I wonder how many people would have the audacity of continuing a debate to the end source "No God, Your wrong - the Bible says ......."


You would be surprised how many people have thought they could debate God......... But then, God does not play with dice does he..........or does He?

ddlewis86
Oct 9th 2006, 06:15 AM
I voted no.

It's just like one of the Columbine victims father said the other day.

"Our schools have removed God from the class room and replaced him with evolution." (Ok not exact but VERY close to his quote)

It was Darwin's theory that led Hitler to genocide and his "creation" of the perfect race.

andrew_apostle
Oct 9th 2006, 01:37 PM
Personally, I'm just glad that God put me here. However, I did vote "yes" on the poll. Granted these are my simple minded opinions and I truthfully do not feel so set in my ways that I want to argue about it. The reason I voted "yes"? Well, based on fossil records, continental drift, carbon dating, atmosphereic changes, climate trends and shifts, and similar species found in very different areas I am led to believe that the Earth is much older than a young-earth creationalist believes. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT I AM NOT SAYING I AM CORRECT NOR SAYING ANYONE ELSE IS WRONG. According to the Bible, God created the Earth in seven days. How did we get this information? God said so (to the author of Genesis, Moses). Now, God, having no begining and no end, must view time in a very different concept than we have. Our lives are so short compared to God's and even the span of human history. We are here for just a blink of an eye. So, assuming that God's time is infinitely longer than ours, one would draw a conclusion that God's "day" is longer than ours also. Possibly even millions of years.
No matter how He did it, I know He did, and I am very thankful he took the time to create a speck like me. It never ceases to amaze me that even though there are billions of people in the world, and all the people who have come and gone before, and all the people that will come; God cares about all of us and takes care of all of us. Praise God!

EarlyCall
Oct 9th 2006, 01:45 PM
I'm still waiting for someone that believes in evolution as the manner in which God created us to answer the questions I asked on page two of this thread. No takers so far.

andrew_apostle
Oct 9th 2006, 01:52 PM
I was wondering if someone believing in evolution could address a couple issues I've not seen addressed before.


1) At what point did God put a soul into man? When man was not quite to that branch that we came from or was it long before that when man was still most ape-like but walking upright and beginning to use tools and such things?

2) At what point did mankind, in whatever prior form, begin to die and go to either heaven or hell?

3) At what point did man actually learn of God? Are those that didn't know they had a creator in heaven or hell? Of course that depends on whether they had a soul or not doesn't it.



Only God can answer the above questions without guessing. Genesis states plainly that man was created from the dust. God is also refered to as a potter. When a potter with a wheel goes to make a vase or a bowl or a cup, he takes the clay and shapes it until it looks the way he wants it to. A potter does not start with a finished product. Maybe in human time this shaping took millions of years and in God's time took a day.

andrew_apostle
Oct 9th 2006, 02:03 PM
Real quick, just so I am understanding everything: According to young-earth creationalism, how young is the earth? Say, 5,000-6,000 years? Either way, that about covers the only history I am interested in anyhow. ;)

qbee
Oct 13th 2006, 10:42 AM
Becuase this is a hot topic I want to remind everyone
Please remember NO debates in the poll forum or baiting
others to debate. Thanks for your cooperation :hug: _ Qbee

Poll forum rules and guidlines (http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?t=45744)

FoG
Oct 13th 2006, 12:43 PM
NO. And as a 4th grade public school teacher, I will never teach children that we evolved. My students know exactly what I believe. I tell them when we see it in the textbooks (and it is all over the textbooks) that they can mark out millions and change it to thousands, write in "a long time ago", or leave it the way it is. It is left up to them. However, they will never be able to say that I taught them lies.

KennethDCollins
Oct 26th 2006, 08:04 PM
We are created in His image. My God didn't start off as some single-celled organism.

Song of Songs
Oct 26th 2006, 10:44 PM
We are created in His image. My God didn't start off as some single-celled organism.

Your conclusion doesn't work because the Incarnation had not yet happened when God created man, ergo God had not assumed a physical form at all. Image refers to spiritual capability.

KennethDCollins
Oct 26th 2006, 10:46 PM
I'm not going to argue this with anyone. You either take the book of Genesis literally, or you don't. If you do, then you know that God created man as a man, nothing else. If you don't take it literally, then you're wrong and I feel sorry for you.

Doc
Oct 26th 2006, 10:48 PM
I am definetly a theistic evolutionist and I dont care to argue my case to YEC's or non christians.

I love the Lord and everything He has given to us.I believe the only thing that comes close to the Bible is evolution and if God chose that path great if not and im wrong great.

He created us however he wanted and its done and doesnt really matter.

Christinme
Oct 27th 2006, 10:53 AM
We are created in His image. My God didn't start off as some single-celled organism.You and I most certainly did physically start off as a single-celled "organism" ... (a fertilized egg is a single cell) ... unless the story about storks is true ... :rofl:

KennethDCollins
Oct 27th 2006, 02:37 PM
You and I most certainly did physically start off as a single-celled "organism" ... (a fertilized egg is a single cell) ... unless the story about storks is true ... :rofl::rolleyes: Alright, I suppose you got me on that one. :D I've also changed my tune since yesterday. Adam did NOT start off as a man. He started off as a pile of dirt. ;) God FORMED it into man and breathed life into him. If you want to call that evolution... well, you'd still be wrong. From dust we came and to dust we shall return. Therefore, pride is nothing more than saying your pile of dirt is better than someone else's pile of dirt. How silly that must seem to God.

Christinme
Oct 27th 2006, 03:46 PM
:rolleyes: Alright, I suppose you got me on that one. :DWell glad to see you can have a sense of humor about it.
I've also changed my tune since yesterday. Adam did NOT start off as a man. He started off as a pile of dirt. ;) God FORMED it into man and breathed life into him. If you want to call that evolution... well, you'd still be wrong. From dust we came and to dust we shall return.Well who knows what kind of organisms were in that dirt that He used ... ;).

Bashful
Nov 4th 2006, 10:22 AM
I take Genesis literally, so I voted no.

slightlypuzzled
Nov 9th 2006, 06:11 PM
I take Genesis literally, so I voted no.

If you took Genesis literally, did you put it back when you were through with it?

JenniferBerry
Nov 9th 2006, 07:00 PM
I voted no.

slynx
Sep 15th 2007, 07:13 AM
From-the-goo-to-you-via-the-zoo evolution is a travesty; if there weren't so many people who blindly believe it, I would think it was a JOKE!

Gard
Sep 22nd 2007, 04:02 PM
I voted "No". And I must add that I find it a little insulting when someone tries to tell me that my decendants were monkeys.

proverbs29
Feb 4th 2008, 05:47 PM
I'm just thankful that my salvation is not contingent upon whether I understand the how's and why's of creation, so long as I put my faith in the One who knows and trust His Infinite Wisdom. It would be an exercise in pride to assume that I could fully wrap my mind around His Plan.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the truth of Gods Word, and I believe that there is truth in stories of creation. Whether that truth is historical or parabolic (of a parable... did I just make up that word?).... for me, the value lies in how it is applied. Perhaps it is historical... with God all things are possible after all.... or perhaps God enjoys parables just as Jesus did as a means to teach. I'm content with not having to be certain of the historicity... because I have faith in the value of the stories whether or not they occurred with the precision of the record.

I try to keep my focus on what He wants me to do with the life He gave me, rather than chase my tail trying to figure out how he did it. I'm confident that He can illuminate that truth within me in His time.... and I'm content if that time is not to pass until my passing into the Eternal. It feels so great to be able to rest my questions in Him, and just know that He knows the answer. The peace that surpasses understanding....


saved by grace,
~sarai

Athanasius
Feb 4th 2008, 09:11 PM
Absolutely not.
God can't lie, if He did, He isn't God.

Gulah Papyrus
Feb 4th 2008, 09:42 PM
Last month I would have voted "yes", today I voted 'I don't care".

I read this book called 'Coming to Peace With Science" by Darrel R. Falk a few months ago and It made a lot of sense to me. Could someone please read it and tell me where it is wrong. This isn't a challenge, I just wan't specifics on where it goes against The Bible and specifically Genisis 1 and 2.

Thanks for your help.

Ninna
Feb 9th 2008, 12:36 AM
This poll is 2 years old and will now be closed. A thread can be started in the appropriate forum for any other discussion.