Evolution

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,203
10,086
113
When you say humankind do you mean Adam and Eve? If so do you accept that they were individuals i.e. a single man and a single woman? Which bit of chapter 2 did not have to take place on the sixth day bearing in mind that chapter one clearly states that God made them male and female? I would say that, at a minimum, God would have had to
  1. form Adam from dust and given him life
  2. plant the garden of Eden and put Adam in it
  3. make all the trees grow in the garden
  4. make all the animals and birds and bring them to Adam to name
  5. put Adam to sleep, took one of his ribs, and made Eve
God need only have done the first on the sixth day.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,203
10,086
113
Gosh, that's thrown me a bit of a curveball, I have to admit!
Okay then, when were the animals made?
Apologies; God created the animals in day six, and the plants before that. The rest of your list was likely later.
 
Jun 15, 2021
90
3
8
Apologies; God created the animals in day six, and the plants before that. The rest of your list was likely later.
Accepted, of course :)
Notice in chapter one God created "livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth" and said "let birds multiply on the earth". In chapter two the wording changed to "every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens". Do you think this may be in any way significant?
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
18,203
10,086
113
Accepted, of course :)
Notice in chapter one God created "livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth" and said "let birds multiply on the earth". In chapter two the wording changed to "every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens". Do you think this may be in any way significant?
No, not really. It's basically a difference of phrasing.
 
Jun 15, 2021
90
3
8
Well, I will try to live by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God. In this case, I think the meaning is clear and I think the significance is highly relevant.
 

peldom10

Active member
May 22, 2020
404
57
28
Moderators: do feel free to not publish this post if you feel it would cause unwanted negative responses from CC membership :)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

A simple thought experiment for those who believe the Earth is of the order of 5,000 years old and who do not believe in evolution:

If the story of Adam and Eve is literally true, then when only Adam and Eve existed there could have been a maximum of 4 different human eye colours.
This would be the case if the 4 human eyes (Adam had two, Eve had two) were all different colours.
However, there are now more than 25 human eye colours.

Many people who do not believe in evolution hold this position because they reason that a living thing could not possibly have some feature that its ancestors did not have - e.g. how could a sea creature evolve into a bird over millions of years...
If you take this position, how do you explain the development of human eye colours, as described above?
Understand adaptation and evolution. God built in elements of adaptation to accommodate man's earthly creations. The creator of evolution saw adapting traits and miss took them for evidence of evolution.

Remember for evolution to be prevailing ....change of function.... would have to be achieved and that has not happened.

Wow...me think you need updated;
Have you not become aware of the Cambrian explosion study?.......which totally nullifies the thought of evolution.
 

peldom10

Active member
May 22, 2020
404
57
28
was timed out above....

error above.....change of kind....not....change of function. ( although change of function could be present...that is not a scientific measure).

To meet Scientific measures such must include .... observable and repeatable ability....in change of kind. That has not been recorded.

Evolution is a myth.......later acknowledged by Darwin.
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,502
254
83
Interesting that you believe in "micro evolution" but not "macro evolution" because "there is no evidence for one species turning into another".

So do you think wolves and chihuahuas are the same species?
One species turning into another is macro evolution. A dog developing a long coat in a cold weather climate and a short coat in a warm weather climate as some do is micro evolution.
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,502
254
83
I don't even know why many like-minded Christians choose not to believe that evolution is a fact.

It reminds me of how in the 16th century Galileo was placed under house arrest for going against religious dogma that stated that the world is at the centre of the universe.
We now say that nothing in the Bible actually supports this belief and we rightly label it "religious dogma".

But the same is true for evolution - nothing in the Bible actually goes against it, and yet some religious folk shun it for no reason.
The fact is that evolution is not a fact. It is a figment of man's imagination that is intended to remove God from all aspects of his creation. Atheists say that God does not exist because they do not want him to exist. If he does they are totally up the creek without a paddle.
 
Jun 15, 2021
90
3
8
One species turning into another is macro evolution. A dog developing a long coat in a cold weather climate and a short coat in a warm weather climate as some do is micro evolution.
Where did you study biology? The University of Ken Ham?
 
Jun 15, 2021
90
3
8
I can’t imagine why you think such a direct personal attack is even remotely appropriate, let alone warranted.
Don't worry about it too much dearie, I'm just a troll. That's the kind of thing we do.
 
Jun 15, 2021
90
3
8
Okay, here are a couple of questions for anyone who wants to answer. Is it possible that the animals referred to in Genesis 2 as "beasts of the field" were not included in the animals referred to in Genesis 1 as "livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth"? What are the possible implications of them being different?
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,502
254
83
I can’t imagine why you think such a direct personal attack is even remotely appropriate, let alone warranted.
I have reported him for his sarcasm and attacking the person. I suggest you do the same.