What would Jesus say about evolution?

[MidniteWelder]

Adam and Eve werent immortal until they ate of the tree of life. My guess is they were the first, which would be why they were the most talked about.

Can you show us from scripture please where Adam and Eve ate of the tree of life?

 

[chasten]

No. I'm not going out of my way to find the bible verse.

Adam and Eve were being kicked out of the garden after being persuadede by Satan. And God said
" Behold man has become as one of us, to know the difference between good and evil. And now he needs to take and eat of the tree of life, eat, and live forever."
Or whatever. I dont even know why you asked that. It wsnt relevant to my post at all. I was only correcting other chicks typo. But w/ e. Its in Genesis somwhere.

 

[MidniteWelder]

Hey cool, whatever it said in Genesis somewhere

 

[crossnote]

Are you saying that the Bible teaches that animals were supposed to be immortal before Adam and Eve sinned? How about plants? I thought that only Adam and Eve were supposed to be immortal. Not the animals and plants too. How about mosquitoes and flies?

This quote only appears to be talking about Adam's race, which does not include animals or insects: "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned..." - Romans 5:12 (KJV)

I'm saying sin and death were not introduced into creation until the Fall and therefore evolution is excluded.

 

[notuptome]

It is not possible for us to imagine how much the world changed as a result of sin. There was no death in the world until sin. God sustained all life in the garden by His will. None of the things we deem essential for life today would have been essential in the garden. The new earth is essentially a re-creation of things as they were in the garden. Sin will not be present and neither will be death. Death is after all an essential component of the theory of evolution. No mutation and change without death. No sin no death.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[homwardbound]

My guess is he would have had a parable because his disciples wouldn't understand how wonderful it is that all life is connected. They would have scoffed at the idea that they are related to monkeys; I suppose Jesus would have said something like "Truly truly I tell you..."

if evolution were true and we evolved form monkeys then why is aren't apes still evolving to man enquiring minds want to know?

 

[DannyC]

if evolution were true and we evolved form monkeys then why is aren't apes still evolving to man enquiring minds want to know?

I'm not sure whether you are inquiring with genuine interest and have not studied the theory of Evolution and you have been given a sort of pseudo version of Evolution and are just misinformed or are you trying to use a 'Gotcha line' and disprove an entire body of work. If it is the second, then you will be embarresed as I explain how uneducated that statement is.

I will assume you are genuinely interested. We didn't in fact evolve from modern apes in fact modern apes and us never evolved into or from each other. We are a species of great ape and so are Chimpanzees, any observer will note the close similarities we share with these fine creatures.

The theory of evolution details that in fact we evolved from a common ancestor and so did the modern Chimpanzee, our species and the Chimpanzee diverged at a point in history from our shared common ancestor. Our evolution and the Chimpanzees are not interchangable. We didn't in fact evolve from Chimpanzees. There is also a fine set of human skeletons detailing our evolution, in fact human evolution is one of the best recorded in the geology record.

 

[crossnote]

I'm not sure whether you are inquiring with genuine interest and have not studied the theory of Evolution and you have been given a sort of pseudo version of Evolution and are just misinformed or are you trying to use a 'Gotcha line' and disprove an entire body of work. If it is the second, then you will be embarresed as I explain how uneducated that statement is.

I will assume you are genuinely interested. We didn't in fact evolve from modern apes in fact modern apes and us never evolved into or from each other. We are a species of great ape and so are Chimpanzees, any observer will note the close similarities we share with these fine creatures.

The theory of evolution details that in fact we evolved from a common ancestor and so did the modern Chimpanzee, our species and the Chimpanzee diverged at a point in history from our shared common ancestor. Our evolution and the Chimpanzees are not interchangable. We didn't in fact evolve from Chimpanzees. There is also a fine set of human skeletons detailing our evolution, in fact human evolution is one of the best recorded in the geology record.

similarity does not prove causality and is a false running assumption with the evolutionary theory. Example, God could easily have created the various species with a continuum of similar features..two eyes, two ears, one head etc. It's when you get these wild jumps in differences of features in the species that evolutionists have trouble explaining.

 

[kardiaoangelous]

No. I'm not going out of my way to find the bible verse.

Adam and Eve were being kicked out of the garden after being persuadede by Satan. And God said
" Behold man has become as one of us, to know the difference between good and evil. And now he needs to take and eat of the tree of life, eat, and live forever."
Or whatever. I dont even know why you asked that. It wsnt relevant to my post at all. I was only correcting other chicks typo. But w/ e. Its in Genesis somwhere.

And besides!!!

If thy want to describe something real, all they need do is add an r to the beginning of the word evolution!!!

So there!!!

 

[DannyC]

similarity does not prove causality and is a false running assumption with the evolutionary theory. Example, God could easily have created the various species with a continuum of similar features..two eyes, two ears, one head etc. It's when you get these wild jumps in differences of features in the species that evolutionists have trouble explaining.

Well actually you are at utter odds with Biologists when you assume the idea of a running continuum or more commonly known as the transfer of themes from one animal to another. There is a documented tree of Ancestory, in actual fact assuming a running continuum would assert that the God of creation went out of his way to confuse scientists, for what reason? Either it is true or it is not.

Would you like to point to where I said similarity is causality? In fact I only pointed out an obvious observation, I did not say that Chimpanzees are our ancestors because they look like us. To construct a straw man so weak and to dismantle it so poorly is wasteful of my time and yours.

I assume since you know about evolutionary presumptions and the fact you never asked me how I know we are closer to Chimpanzees that other animals, you must be well aware of Molecular Biology.We can look at a few tests to confirm that in fact we are genetically close to Chimpanzees. The earlier experiments involving Immune systems and pathogens. I will only highlight the experiment, which you can study more later if you like.

By injecting an animal with another animals protein, the animals immune system attacks the protein with anti-bodies. If you continue the experiment by injecting another animal's protein the immune system will be forearmed for defence. The strength of the animals response to one protein injecting from an animal in comparison to another links to the resemblance of that protein to the other. It is long process and a very early one, but it is affective in showing cousinships throughout the animal kingdom.

We have the more modern form of DNA hyridization. It is self explanatory, you can take two animals genetic material and compare them, finding a more accurate analysis of the cousinship.

The we have the most expensive and most strenious experiment. The Human Genome Project, this ground breaking prodject traced our ancestors back but also can be used to compare animals genes to see how closely related they are. All animals are related by lesser degrees. This Project was headed by a few people including the well respected Francis Collins who by the way is a Christian. All this work shows that animals share genetic material and are related because of the close links they have with each other.

 

[jmlidea]

similarity does not prove causality and is a false running assumption with the evolutionary theory. Example, God could easily have created the various species with a continuum of similar features..two eyes, two ears, one head etc. It's when you get these wild jumps in differences of features in the species that evolutionists have trouble explaining.

You also have trouble when you put so much blatant evidence aside and say God created the earth at a point that is clearly in the middle of a great evolutionary process. God put fossilized dinosaur bones into the rocks for us to find, God created light close enough to earth that it would reach us in 6000 years but appear to have been traveling from galaxies billions of light years away. God created genetic anomalies that appear to only exist in evolved creatures, such as the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve, shared by all vertibrates (humans, girrafes, rhinoseros, fish etc). God made a natural system by which our planet creates a very abundant source of fuel which humans can use, but he makes it work only if you have millions of years to make it, that is crude oil, so instead he just makes a limited supply for us to find. God creates nebulas with stars being born inside, but makes other stars already billions of years old. God creates habitable planets in other star systems that can only be seen if light had been traveling for many thousands of years already (OR God just put the light on its course in between) God creates VERY accurate date-stamps that are designed to trick scientists into thinking that the universe is billions of years old, when in fact God made the universe only 6000 years ago. God created a process by which stars can produce every known element and disperse these elements across galaxies so that other stars, planets and cosmic bodies can be formed once again, then made it LOOK like the stars have been doing this for billions of years, and that the Earth and our very Sun was the result of this dispersal of elements (this is why our planet has gold, silver and platinum as these elements are only created in the violent death of a star). God creates IRON, which only appears naturally in the center of super-giant stars, and yet somehow we have plenty of iron here on earth, how did it get here in only 6000 years? Ohh, right, GOD did it... right. IF that's true then why would God trick us, why the deception?

 

[notuptome]

You also have trouble when you put so much blatant evidence aside and say God created the earth at a point that is clearly in the middle of a great evolutionary process. God put fossilized dinosaur bones into the rocks for us to find, God created light close enough to earth that it would reach us in 6000 years but appear to have been traveling from galaxies billions of light years away. God created genetic anomalies that appear to only exist in evolved creatures, such as the Recurrent Laryngeal Nerve, shared by all vertibrates (humans, girrafes, rhinoseros, fish etc). God made a natural system by which our planet creates a very abundant source of fuel which humans can use, but he makes it work only if you have millions of years to make it, that is crude oil, so instead he just makes a limited supply for us to find. God creates nebulas with stars being born inside, but makes other stars already billions of years old. God creates habitable planets in other star systems that can only be seen if light had been traveling for many thousands of years already (OR God just put the light on its course in between) God creates VERY accurate date-stamps that are designed to trick scientists into thinking that the universe is billions of years old, when in fact God made the universe only 6000 years ago. God created a process by which stars can produce every known element and disperse these elements across galaxies so that other stars, planets and cosmic bodies can be formed once again, then made it LOOK like the stars have been doing this for billions of years, and that the Earth and our very Sun was the result of this dispersal of elements (this is why our planet has gold, silver and platinum as these elements are only created in the violent death of a star). God creates IRON, which only appears naturally in the center of super-giant stars, and yet somehow we have plenty of iron here on earth, how did it get here in only 6000 years? Ohh, right, GOD did it... right. IF that's true then why would God trick us, why the deception?

Well you can believe that all this happened by accident but I think it takes much more faith to believe in incomplete science than to believe in God. To believe that our earth is coalesced gasses resulting from the big bang is putting a lot of faith in man's thinking. Why is it difficult for you to believe that God said let there be and there was? Seems that if God created the universe He could do it any way He desires. Now let us think together here for a moment...who was it that said God didn't really say did He? Hint conversation between Eve and the serpent.
What would Jesus say? You are dead in trespass and sin. Repent! Believe on Me and have eternal life. If God lied about creation then how shall we trust His promise to save us from our sins?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[crossnote]

Well actually you are at utter odds with Biologists when you assume the idea of a running continuum or more commonly known as the transfer of themes from one animal to another. There is a documented tree of Ancestory, in actual fact assuming a running continuum would assert that the God of creation went out of his way to confuse scientists, for what reason? Either it is true or it is not.

Would you like to point to where I said similarity is causality? In fact I only pointed out an obvious observation, I did not say that Chimpanzees are our ancestors because they look like us. To construct a straw man so weak and to dismantle it so poorly is wasteful of my time and yours.

I assume since you know about evolutionary presumptions and the fact you never asked me how I know we are closer to Chimpanzees that other animals, you must be well aware of Molecular Biology.We can look at a few tests to confirm that in fact we are genetically close to Chimpanzees. The earlier experiments involving Immune systems and pathogens. I will only highlight the experiment, which you can study more later if you like.

By injecting an animal with another animals protein, the animals immune system attacks the protein with anti-bodies. If you continue the experiment by injecting another animal's protein the immune system will be forearmed for defence. The strength of the animals response to one protein injecting from an animal in comparison to another links to the resemblance of that protein to the other. It is long process and a very early one, but it is affective in showing cousinships throughout the animal kingdom.

We have the more modern form of DNA hyridization. It is self explanatory, you can take two animals genetic material and compare them, finding a more accurate analysis of the cousinship.

The we have the most expensive and most strenious experiment. The Human Genome Project, this ground breaking prodject traced our ancestors back but also can be used to compare animals genes to see how closely related they are. All animals are related by lesser degrees. This Project was headed by a few people including the well respected Francis Collins who by the way is a Christian. All this work shows that animals share genetic material and are related because of the close links they have with each other.

No one is denying there are close physical relationships, it just doesn't prove causality. It's the humongous intelligence gap between humans and the so called next 'link' that is evolutions problem.
I think it's time to get back to what Jesus would say concerning evolution. You'd give him a thumbs up? I'd say He'd give it a thumbs down!

 

[Meerkat]

I doubt Jesus would have thought that it was important enough to comment on.

He preached about how to accept Him to reach salvation, and how to welcome in your fellow man. Not about how to best follow scientific discovery and progress.

 

[4enlightment]

My guess is he would have had a parable because his disciples wouldn't understand how wonderful it is that all life is connected. They would have scoffed at the idea that they are related to monkeys; I suppose Jesus would have said something like "Truly truly I tell you..."[/QUOTE

But we all has branched out into tribes, and now we doesn't consider ourselves connected to one another. I believe that the bones of thel skull that were founded in the Neanderthal valley was a human, but which I believe during the time before the flood that plant life and the water has had some sort of different chemistry than the plant life of today. The word firmament was the earth crust that had separated the waters that were on top of it, from the water beneath it. And when it had rain, the earth crust had saturated and causing the earth crust to give way and sink to the bottom. and then the core of the earth has grown, pushing the collapsed crust, to emerge to the surface. So I believe that all of this changes that were going on, causes and atmosheric change in the environment; and which changes our developement. But i believe during time of Adam, Their developement were as normal as our of today; but after the Fall, their developement has changed.

 

[jmlidea]

f God lied about creation then how shall we trust His promise to save us from our sins?

Nailed it.
Let me ask, what's more probable:
A) The universe looks every bit its age, nearly 14 billion years old, because it IS?
or
B) The universe looks every bit its age, nearly 14 billion years old, because it IS NOT?

here's another one:
The recurrent laryngeal nerve provides motor function to your larynx, or voice box. It spans from your brain, to somewhere in your neck, behind your tongue. The path it takes to get from your brain to your larynx, however, is a long one... It travels from your brain, down your neck, into your chest, around your heart, back up your neck and finally to your larynx.
This nerve exists in all (known) vertebrates.
Now, again, what is more probable:
A) The recurrent laryngeal nerve's ridiculous length is the result of BAD DESIGN?
or
B) The recurrent laryngeal nerve's ridiculous length is the result of EVOLUTION?

 

[jmlidea]

But we all has branched out into tribes, and now we doesn't consider ourselves connected to one another. I believe that the bones of thel skull that were founded in the Neanderthal valley was a human, but which I believe during the time before the flood that plant life and the water has had some sort of different chemistry than the plant life of today. The word firmament was the earth crust that had separated the waters that were on top of it, from the water beneath it. And when it had rain, the earth crust had saturated and causing the earth crust to give way and sink to the bottom. and then the core of the earth has grown, pushing the collapsed crust, to emerge to the surface. So I believe that all of this changes that were going on, causes and atmosheric change in the environment; and which changes our developement. But i believe during time of Adam, Their developement were as normal as our of today; but after the Fall, their developement has changed.

Interesting opinion...

 

[jmlidea]

No one is denying there are close physical relationships, it just doesn't prove causality. It's the humongous intelligence gap between humans and the so called next 'link' that is evolutions problem.
I think it's time to get back to what Jesus would say concerning evolution. You'd give him a thumbs up? I'd say He'd give it a thumbs down!

thanks for your thoughts

 

[RachelBibleStudent]

Who would have been able to comprehend it if he did? And I don't think things were taken that literally back then.

Adam lived. Sure. He was the first human with an eternal soul.

several other cultures in jesus' time already had concepts of very large numbers and time periods...it is silly to suggest that jesus simply -couldn't- have 'corrected genesis' by inserting the required millions of years just because the jews weren't smart enough to get it...

 

[jerusalem]

there are 2 things that are impossible for our God to do.....one of them is lie.....to do so would redefine who He is and that is already the devil's definition. the word yom translated as day is actually a period of time not specified as to it;s length. the assumption has been that because in genesis one there are an evening and a morning to each of the time frames given that must make them 24 hour time frames. however it is strongly intimated that the 7th day hasnt yet come and it will be the day of Christ's return. each of the yom time frames could easily have been of different lengths.....it was 'in the beginnig' after all. in any event our religion requires faith......for precisely this reason......we still have questions.....we dont have all the answers.....we have to base our faith on the knowledge of right and wrong....we do know that. to base your beliefs on questions is very unstable. your belief must be based on the answer that we already have and the answer is Jesus our Lord