Theistic Evolution vs Genesis Creation. Which is true? And why!

[Eddie Deepfield]

The overwhelming majority of people on earth today, who identify as Christians, believe that evolution is real and is happening but that it was originally set in motion by God.

The Roman Catholic Church plus ALL of the main line Protestant denominations support or accept theistic evolution.


Pope Francis - “The theories of evolution and the Big Bang are real and God is not a magician with a magic wand, both scientific theories are not incompatible with the existence of a creator – in fact they require it. When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,”

 

[B-A-C]

Science is now proving the Big Bang is not real. The latest images from the webb telescope say the Universe wasn't created by a Big Bang. According to science the universe is 13 and half billion years old.
But yet there are still star forming. The law of thermal dynamics says all fuel will eventually burn up. Even nuclear stars eventually die. Why does the universe still exist? The thought was dark matter was accruing into stars.
But now science says there is no dark matter. It doesn't exist.

But even if it was true. What caused the Big Bang? Where did the matter from the Big Bang come from? - Science doesn't know. Mathematical theory states that something cannot come from nothing.
0 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 0 Where did the first 1 come from?

There simply is no evidence of evolution. We have old skeletons of small horses and dinosaurs, and we have big horses and birds now, but there is nothing in between to link them together. No missing link.
There are skeletons that look like apes, and there are skeletons that look like men. But nothing in between.

Breeders know of something called the "tendency to revert to the original". If you take two kinds of dogs and put them together to make a new breed, you have to keep doing it. A one time mutation never holds.
Both breeds will revert back to the original unless you keep doing this over several generations. Nature doesn't support evolution naturally. It's the same with roses, you can take two kinds of roses and cross breed them together,
but unless you keep doing this for an extended amount of time, both roses will eventually revert back to the original.

Take your eye. It has over 208 pieces to it. A cornea, a retina, a lens, carats, optical nerves, and many other parts. Darwin's theory states that in order for a mutation to become part of the evolution stream, it must benefit
the evolution process in some way. Any one of the parts listed above can not stand alone. All 200 mutations would have had to happen at the same instant in order to benefit the process.

Mammals takes in oxygen, and breath out carbon dioxide, plants breath in carbon dioxide and breath out oxygen. One can not exist without the other. Which came first? The plant or the mammal?
How long did it exist without the other? Virtually all plants and animals require food, and nourishment of some kind. What nourished the first animals if there were no plants or animals to sustain it ( feed it ).
What nourished the first plant? Even simple cell organisms need something to sustain them.

Too many holes in evolution.

Gen 1:27; God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

God created us the way we are. Not as another species that became another species that became another species.
Another law of nature is that two species cannot create life. Two breeds can. For example two kinds of dogs can make a dog. Two kinds of cows can make a cow. Two kinds of horses can make a horse.
But a cat and a dog cannot make anything. A horse and a cow cannot make anything. But yet there are millions of kinds of species of plants and animals. They all would have had to have their own unique evolution process.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Science is now proving the Big Bang is not real. The latest images from the webb telescope say the Universe wasn't created by a Big Bang. According to science the universe is 13 and half billion years old.
But yet there are still star forming.

The James Webb Space Telescope has not yet finished with its observations. So it is still too early to make any confident conclusions. So far, though, finding galaxies in the incredibly young universe is a point in favour of the Big Bang theory, not against it.

It was one of the main goals of the Webb telescope to discover and attempt to characterise the first forming galaxies.

Of course in science, it's always important to keep an open mind.

But so far the Big Bang Model has not yet been overturned by scientific discovery.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

The James Webb Space Telescope has not yet finished with its observations. So it is still too early to make any confident conclusions. So far, though, finding galaxies in the incredibly young universe is a point in favour of the Big Bang theory, not against it.

It was one of the main goals of the Webb telescope to discover and attempt to characterise the first forming galaxies.

Of course in science, it's always important to keep an open mind.

But so far the Big Bang Model has not yet been overturned by scientific discovery.

What caused the Big Bang? Where did the matter from the Big Band come from? - Science doesn't know. Mathematical theory states that something cannot come from nothing.

Of course science only knows up to one Planck time after the Big Bang which was when the universe began its expansion. Before that is unknown. But something obviously began to expand - preexisting energy and matter.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

There simply is no evidence of evolution.

Evolution simply means change overtime - and to that definition there is plenty of evidence, It does not mean the creation of life. it means the evolution of that life. Go to any natural history museum and you will find plenty of evidence.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Which came first? The plant or the mammal?

Obviously primitive plant life came first. There was plenty of carbon dioxide in an early stage earth.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Too many holes in evolution.

The beauty of truth is that it has many interlocking parts.

Fossil record not doing it for you?

Try ERVs or human chromosome 2 or Professor Lenski's evolved citrate eating bacteria. He took bacteria that could not eat citrate, and put them into a citrate rich medium. After 33,000 generations they started to metabolize citrate. Turns out that it took 3 separate mutations to get to these bacteria, a change at 21k, 23k and then the final one at 33k.

Now that ubiquitous genetic sequencing is available more avenues of inquiry are becoming available.

The fossil record is not the only source of evidence for evolution. There are genetics, bio geographical distribution, vestigial traits, comparative morphology, DNA sequencing, evolutionary development and a whole lot of other evidence for evolution. Geology has its own facts that show the world is billions of years old.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

There simply is no evidence of evolution. We have old skeletons of small horses and dinosaurs, and we have big horses and birds now, but there is nothing in between to link them together. No missing link.
There are skeletons that look like apes, and there are skeletons that look like men. But nothing in between.

There are no "missing links". There are simply fossils, and the gaps between those fossils. Every fossil, if it's from a population that produced descendants that are alive today, is a transitional form. It's transitional from what it was to what it became. Every new fossil we find fills in a gap in the evolutionary time-line (and creates two new gaps on either side). The picture only gets clearer.

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Gen 1:27; God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

That is a literal understanding. When Genesis cannot be taken literally but metaphorically. That opens up a whole other can of worms.

Do you really believe that Eve came from Adams rib? And so on.

 

[Brad Huber]

There is no evolution that atheists prefer to believe in. There is only God imbued adaptation to a changing environment.

 

[Christ4Ever]

The overwhelming majority of people on earth today, who identify as Christians, believe that evolution is real and is happening but that it was originally set in motion by God.

The Roman Catholic Church plus ALL of the main line Protestant denominations support or accept theistic evolution.


Pope Francis - “The theories of evolution and the Big Bang are real and God is not a magician with a magic wand, both scientific theories are not incompatible with the existence of a creator – in fact they require it. When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,”

Dear Eddie,
Nope, I believe in how the Bible tells it. Meaning a God Creator.
Our God, or maybe I should say mine, because something tells me that you do not believe in the God of the Bible or maybe at all (?), doesn't have an issue with time. Being the Creator of it. I mean think of the Creation of Adam. He had made him whole, and the same of Eve, though in part Adam did contribute.

That you quote Pope Francis, is no never mind, especially since Evolution is but a theory, and yet because he's bought into it against God being the Creator, holds no water with me, and many others. I could find quotes of Scientist's that believe in God/Creator, and I'm sure that would not move you either would it? lol

To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David. The heavens declare the glory of God; And the firmament shows His handiwork. Day unto day utters speech, And night unto night reveals knowledge. [There is] no speech nor language [Where] their voice is not heard. Their line has gone out through all the earth, And their words to the end of the world. In them He has set a tabernacle for the sun, Which [is] like a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, [And] rejoices like a strong man to run its race. Its rising [is] from one end of heaven, And its circuit to the other end; And there is nothing hidden from its heat. Psalm 19:1-6 NKJV

"God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. "Nor is He worshiped with men's hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. "And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, "so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; "for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, 'For we are also His offspring.' "Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising. Acts 17:24-29 NKJV

Oh, by the way, you might do a search to find similar threads on this subject here on Talk Jesus. Similar to the world in general and Ecc 1:9 which makes mention of "...there is no new thing under the sun." nor in Talk Jesus apparently.

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Our God, or maybe I should say mine, because something tells me that you do not believe in the God of the Bible or maybe at all (?), doesn't have an issue with time. Being the Creator of it. I mean think of the Creation of Adam. He had made him whole, and the same of Eve, though in part Adam did contribute.

God still remains the creator or originator of life. But the evidence points to evolution sincethen. What,s the chance that Eve came from Adams rib?

Do you believe that God made everything six thousand years ago as laid out in the Biblical view point. IE Young Earth Creation?

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

That you quote Pope Francis, is no never mind, especially since Evolution is but a theory, and yet because he's bought into it against God being the Creator, holds no water with me, and many others. I could find quotes of Scientist's that believe in God/Creator, and I'm sure that would not move you either would it? lol

Let me quote Francis Collins the science adviser to the President, if you feel that the Pope is not a believer.

" In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins wrote that scientific discoveries were an "opportunity to worship" and that he rejected both Young Earth creationism and intelligent design.

His own belief, he wrote, was theistic evolution or evolutionary creation."

 

[Eddie Deepfield]

Oh, by the way, you might do a search to find similar threads on this subject here on Talk Jesus. Similar to the world in general and Ecc 1:9 which makes mention of "...there is no new thing under the sun." nor in Talk Jesus apparently

I,m sure - evolution is a vital topic for believers. It can undermine or build their faith.

 

[Christ4Ever]

God still remains the creator or originator of life. But the evidence points to evolution sincethen. What,s the chance that Eve came from Adams rib?

Do you believe that God made everything six thousand years ago as laid out in the Biblical view point. IE Young Earth Creation?

Dear Eddie,
100% = especially since "rib" in the Hebrew can reflect a number of things and not like "barbeque pork rib" (my favorite)

On the time, well I do not see where it says 6 thousands years ago in scripture. Some have figured this or that for a time period, but it actually doesn't say straight out from any verses I could tell. If you know where in the Bible it says 6 thousand years, please tell!

Again, time to God and to us are not the same. We can only see through our own eyes, but God. Well, I've always believed that it makes sense that God sees time in the "now", whether for us it is "past/present/future". Being outside of time... Do I have Scripture to support that? Nope, but it makes sense since He created all things including time, and I figure I'll be finding out one day!

Let me quote Francis Collins the science adviser to the President, if you feel that the Pope is not a believer.

" In his 2006 book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Collins wrote that scientific discoveries were an "opportunity to worship" and that he rejected both Young Earth creationism and intelligent design.

His own belief, he wrote, was theistic evolution or evolutionary creation."

Holds no water for me Eddie. Gosh, if I came up with alternative quotes, as I said before, I doubt you'd all of sudden become a believer!!! lol
I laugh because I love to answer the Atheist's the question if there was the science to date creation, and by chance it was 6 thousand years, would you then believe in God? Of course, the answer given is no. See Eddie, that is not foundational to my faith in God, which is in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior and nor should it be for you!

I,m sure - evolution is a vital topic for believers. It can undermine or build their faith.

I'm sure it is too!!! Sadly, that is. "Vital" not so much! If their faith were so founded, it would really require one to reassess what they believe and how they came about their belief! I didn't come about my faith through science, or Creation, but through the Creator Jesus Christ who died on the Cross for us all. Though as a child I looked at the night heavens and came to the realization that there had to be a God. Tough to do in NYC at night when it's not always the clearest! Now in the desert it's a bit different that's for sure. Beautiful!!!

You have your own faith that you trust, which is no different in some ways. You have faith that when you sit down that the chair won't give out on you, take a plane ride the same, though now a days I'd be a little leerier on the latter, at least sitting by one of the doors! You have placed your faith on what others have done and your experiences since then with them confirms your trust. No, different for me in Christ Jesus. You are welcome to read my bio.

Science is beyond me in many ways, which I am not ashamed to admit. I'm a simple man Eddie. However, I do have a Brother-In-Law who is a believer and a Physics Professor in College (private secular college by the way). So, I push certain science things his way when I read something and have questions in the Sciences, but even with that being said, you have many in different fields who go both ways in their belief systems. So, when they find themselves in a position of belief, all that does is move each person to seek sources they are inclined to believe are true and/or support the position they hold that will help them against those they want to do battle against. You have a position, and you'll try to find chinks in the armor to weaken your opponent. I'm retired military so I have a tendency to see things in a militaristic sort of way! lol (I have to stop laughing/emojis, but believe it or not Eddie, it's a joy for me talking about the Lord and to someone who doesn't believe too!)

Not too long-ago Science and religion had the sun going around us! How times have changed! Give it enough time, and most of that Science in this area which we now believe to be true will come up with something new for what they thought was the truth i.e. Big Bang Theory. One thing that hasn't changed, is the Word of God. Translations will differ in some places, but not where it counts. New finds like the finding of the Dead Sea Scrolls just confirmed and did not change what had been found in previous manuscripts. Which there are plenty of them to peruse, that's for sure!

Normally, I look to individual testimonies to see where a person is coming from. I have a few stories, which I've told before, and I know other believers have them as well, but I'll leave that for another time, being I can go on and on....but I will say an interesting book that goes along that line is written by a man you might have heard of, Lee Strobel, which is called A Case for Christ. The book is much better than the movie if you decide to look it up. The interesting thing about how he began his search was by a push from his wife. She became a Christian, and he an Atheist, in which he thought fun/life was over in their marriage. Both college grads by the way. Anyway, being an Investigative Reporter for the Chicago Tribune, he kept peppering her with questions on "Why?". She told him getting tired of his questions, "you're a reporter, go do what you do and find out for yourself" (not verbatim). Which is how the book came about. Good read, from one man's search for the truth concerning Jesus.

I did say I could go on and on! lol

Well, I'm sure you'll reply, but I have a Bible class I'll be attending so I may not get back to you right away. I hope I haven't talked your eyes balls out of your head yet!!!

With the Love of Christ Jesus.
Servant of the Most High (First time using that closing, but it felt right
Nick
\o/
<><

 

[Br. Bear]

There are no "missing links". There are simply fossils, and the gaps between those fossils. Every fossil, if it's from a population that produced descendants that are alive today, is a transitional form. It's transitional from what it was to what it became. Every new fossil we find fills in a gap in the evolutionary time-line (and creates two new gaps on either side). The picture only gets clearer.

---> ?

 

[Br. Bear]

evidence for evolution

Science would agree that it is theory and science investigates evidence.

Many and much wobbly reporting of part-only scientific findings leads many to believe that which is being upheld as fact, whether it is or not, to be fact indisputable, which helps drive the theories further than what science can confirm.

While it can be/is fascinating to learn of different outcomes in the different fields of science, we do well to remember the restrictions/limitations of 'test tube' experimental procedure. Any honest scientist would vouch for that.


Bless you ....><>

 

[Br. Bear]

Science is now proving the Big Bang is not real. The latest images from the webb telescope say the Universe wasn't created by a Big Bang. According to science the universe is 13 and half billion years old.
But yet there are still star forming. The law of thermal dynamics says all fuel will eventually burn up. Even nuclear stars eventually die. Why does the universe still exist? The thought was dark matter was accruing into stars.
But now science says there is no dark matter. It doesn't exist.

But even if it was true. What caused the Big Bang? Where did the matter from the Big Bang come from? - Science doesn't know. Mathematical theory states that something cannot come from nothing.
0 + 0 + 0 + 0 = 0 Where did the first 1 come from?

There simply is no evidence of evolution. We have old skeletons of small horses and dinosaurs, and we have big horses and birds now, but there is nothing in between to link them together. No missing link.
There are skeletons that look like apes, and there are skeletons that look like men. But nothing in between.

Breeders know of something called the "tendency to revert to the original". If you take two kinds of dogs and put them together to make a new breed, you have to keep doing it. A one time mutation never holds.
Both breeds will revert back to the original unless you keep doing this over several generations. Nature doesn't support evolution naturally. It's the same with roses, you can take two kinds of roses and cross breed them together,
but unless you keep doing this for an extended amount of time, both roses will eventually revert back to the original.

Take your eye. It has over 208 pieces to it. A cornea, a retina, a lens, carats, optical nerves, and many other parts. Darwin's theory states that in order for a mutation to become part of the evolution stream, it must benefit
the evolution process in some way. Any one of the parts listed above can not stand alone. All 200 mutations would have had to happen at the same instant in order to benefit the process.

Mammals takes in oxygen, and breath out carbon dioxide, plants breath in carbon dioxide and breath out oxygen. One can not exist without the other. Which came first? The plant or the mammal?
How long did it exist without the other? Virtually all plants and animals require food, and nourishment of some kind. What nourished the first animals if there were no plants or animals to sustain it ( feed it ).
What nourished the first plant? Even simple cell organisms need something to sustain them.

Too many holes in evolution.

Gen 1:27; God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

God created us the way we are. Not as another species that became another species that became another species.
Another law of nature is that two species cannot create life. Two breeds can. For example two kinds of dogs can make a dog. Two kinds of cows can make a cow. Two kinds of horses can make a horse.
But a cat and a dog cannot make anything. A horse and a cow cannot make anything. But yet there are millions of kinds of species of plants and animals. They all would have had to have their own unique evolution process.

BUMP

 

[KingJ]

I,m sure - evolution is a vital topic for believers. It can undermine or build their faith.

How does evolution edify our faith in God?

Evolution is by natural selection. Natural selection is pure evil.

 

[Curtis]

The purpose of God in creating the physical world is so man would "study" it (science) to be able to "see" how the invisible spiritual world is, or in other words one big "visual aid".

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: