How has science impacted your perspective on the Hebrew Bible?

[GWH]

Im not smart enough to believe in evolution and aliens.

2Thes. 2:10 indicates that wisdom is love of truth.
The truth is that all animals and even plants share much of the same DNA,
and Genesis 1 puts them in an order that generally agrees with science, but Darwinism lacks evidence.
However, Genesis merely tells what happened but not how God did it, so science must speculate.

 

[DeanM]

2Thes. 2:10 indicates that wisdom is love of truth.
The truth is that all animals and even plants share much of the same DNA,
and Genesis 1 puts them in an order that generally agrees with science, but Darwinism lacks evidence.
However, Genesis merely tells what happened but not how God did it, so science must speculate.

And thats what it is speculation.

 

[GWH]

GWH
2. Very insightful about Abram. Also both the wives of Jacob were Sumerians from Haran.
4. You don't get to duck Revelation. The Locust-Scorpions of Chapter 9: Often considered the most terrifying creatures in Revelation, these demonic beings are released from the abyss to torment anyone without the seal of God. They resemble warhorses with crowns of gold, human faces, and the teeth of lions. For five months, they inflict agonizing, venomous stings so severe that victims "will seek death but will not find it" (Revelation 9:6).The Cosmic Violence in Chapters 15–16: These chapters detail the Seven Bowls of God's wrath, which represent unmitigated destruction. The narrative pulls no punches, describing agonizing sores, seas and rivers turned to undrinkable blood, scorching heat that burns human flesh, absolute darkness, and a global earthquake that flattens every city on earth, topped with 100-pound hailstones.The Gruesome Carnage of Armageddon (Chapter 19): Perhaps the most graphic imagery occurs when the armies of the earth gather to fight, only to be slaughtered. An angel invites all the birds of the sky to "gather for the great supper of God, to eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty" (Revelation 19:17-18). It is a brutal, visceral scene of mass devastation.The Lake of Fire (Chapter 20 & 21): The finality of the narrative is merciless for those whose names are not in the Book of Life, as well as for "the cowardly" and "liars", who face the "second death" in a lake of burning sulfur

Revelation describes evil souls reaping what they sowed, which I harmonize with the rest of the NT thusly:

Part VI: Issues Inhibiting Theism

Three issues frequently are cited as constituting stumbling-blocks to belief in the NT God for some people. The first problematic issue is reconciling God’s power and love with the fact of evil and its consequence. A person—even a theist—might think that God would not permit evil, suffering and hell to exist. People who are mystified by evil and repulsed by its punishment do not realize that the essential aspect of being a human rather than a robot or subhuman creature is moral free will (MFW), which is what enables a person to experience love and meaning. This is what makes humans different from animals, whose behavior is governed mainly by instinct. This is what it means to be created in God’s image (Gen. 1:26-27; robot or responsible)?

God could not force people to return His love without abrogating their humanity. If God were to zap ungodly souls, it would be tantamount to forcing conversions at gunpoint, which would not be free and genuine. If God were to prevent people from behaving hatefully, then He would need to prevent them from thinking evilly, which would make human souls programmed automatons. Thus, for reasons we may understand only sufficiently rather than completely, God designed reality so that experiencing His presence is less than compelling, so that even Jesus (God the Son) on the cross cried out “My God [the Father], why have you forsaken [taken God the Spirit from] me?” (Matt. 27:46, Psa. 51:11) This phenomenon is sometimes called “distanciation”, because we experience God as distant from us and “unknown” (Acts 17:23), even though He is close or immanent, “for in Him we live and move and have our being” (Acts 17:28). Distanciation is not forsaken.

God’s normative means of conversion is persuasion rather than coercion (Matt. 12:39, 24:24, 1Cor. 1:22-23). This is seen very clearly in Jesus’ lament over the obstinacy of Jerusalem (Matt. 23:37). God loves a cheerful giver (2Cor. 9:7), which means He desires people to cooperate with Him happily because of love and gratitude for His grace rather than to cower before Him because of fear of hell. Love must be evoked; it cannot be coerced. And again, when souls sin or do NOT choose to love God freely, it is perfectly just (loving and logical) for them to reap the appropriate consequence (Gal. 6:7-9) or hell.

MFW only exists when there is the possibility of choosing between two qualitatively opposite moral options that we call good and evil. These options are opposites because of essentially different consequences for choosing them. Choosing good results in blessing, life and heaven; and choosing evil results in cursing, death and hell (Deut. 30:19). This is why hell as well as heaven exists. It is the just conse-quence for choosing evil rather than God. The Spirit of God is good: love, peace and joy (Gal. 5:22-23). Therefore, whoever rejects the Lord is spiritually separated from Him (Isa. 59:2) and thereby chooses the evil or satanic spirit of hatred, strife and misery and reaps the just consequence called “hell” in the afterlife (Gal. 6:7-9, Heb. 9:27-28). These options were presented by Moses to the Israelites (Deut. 30:19), and Jesus referred to this fundamental choice in terms of a fish or egg versus a snake or scorpion (Luke 11:11-13). Life… or Curse? (Gen. 3:24, Rev. 22:1-2)

God created theoretical evil or the possibility of rejecting Him as an option that actualizes MFW/free human personality. As such it is necessary and even good (Gen. 1:31). Of course, it was wrong for Satan (1John 3:8) and humanity (Rom. 5:12) to make evil actual by choosing to Sin or reject Faith in God’s Lordship. Sin: ignoring God/God’s Word. Why would anyone choose to ignore God/believe otherwise? Only God knows why people choose atheism. It is a mystery stated by Isaiah, which is cited by Jesus (in Matt. 13:14-15): “You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused.”

Apparently, this callous attitude demands God to nullify faith/MFW and thereby abrogate the essence of humanness by performing miracles in order to prove He exists (Matt. 12:39, 24:24, John 20:29 & 1Cor. 1:22). In other words, atheists presume to know better than God; they want to usurp divine authority to determine what is best or good, but they may one day (at the eschaton per Rev. 20:15) wish they had admitted the possibility that God has ordained this mortal life on earth for the purpose of people proving to Him who is worthy of (qualified for) eternal life in heaven (cf. Rom. 2:5-8 & 2Cor. 13:5; heart/mind: hard or open?).

Such evil people punish/torture themselves by experiencing delayed karma, just as those who experience appropriate justice during this earthly existence also punish themselves or reap what they have sown and send themselves to jail. This view makes souls responsible for breaking the rules rather than blaming evil on the judges (or Judge) who enforce the rules. The purpose of earthly punishment is to promote repentance, but the reason for retribution in hell is to attain justice.

It is difficult to imagine, but somehow even someone as evil as Hitler will receive perfect justice, perhaps experiencing the agony of the millions of deaths he caused in accordance with the principal of “eye for eye” (Matt. 5:38), after which their souls are destroyed forever (per John 17:12, Rom. 9:22, Gal. 6:8, Phil. 3:19, 2Thes. 1:9, 2Pet. 3:7 & Rev. 20:13-14).

 

[GWH]

And thats what it is speculation.

Having much of the same DNA is proved, which indicates a connection, and the best guess seems to be theistic evolution,
meaning that God controlled the process that created humanity. Atheist evolution both lacks evidence and is not desirable.
The PP points out that until proof is provided in the future at the eschaton, humanity’s existential need and desire for eternal life and ultimate justice (the duo of desirables or DOD) make it logical for truthseekers to have a propensity to hope and believe a God who provides the DOD exists, to determine the most credible revelation of God’s requirement for attaining heaven, and to cooperate with His revealed will.

IOW, it seems logical–given the existential facts of death and imperfect justice–that an unbiased truthseeker would have a propensity to hope the Christian view is correct, because there is no better (credible and desirable) way of attaining the DOD than NT theism. This PP restates Pascal’s wager in terms of comparison shopping (with all belief systems) instead of gambling. The PP employs linear logic (rather than circular reasoning) to propose faith in the NT God as the best belief that solves the maze of reality.

Atheists deny the validity of this argument, but in the absence of disproof, I find the decision to reject the biblical gospel of salvation from selfishness, spiritual death, and a miserable destiny to be illogical or foolish. This is why all truthseekers should agree on NT theism now rather than assume atheism is an unlucky guess. As someone has said, heaven is like a vision of water in the desert: the scoffer will surely die where he/she is, while the believer will live if right. However, this analogy should be viewed in terms of comparison shopping and logic rather than of blind faith and fear. Heaven may not be a mirage!

A biblical illustration of the PP is the OT story about Naaman being told to bathe in the dirty Jordan River to cure his leprosy (2Kings 5:10-14). The Naaman Example teaches us not to let sinful pride prevent us from being cured of spiritual sickness by methods we think are silly or do not fully understand. Some people might not understand why God ordained Messiah to atone for humanity’s sins, so they think the Gospel seems foolish or silly (cf. 1Cor. 1:18-25). However, they accept physical reality without necessarily understanding very well how it works (cf. John 3:8), and Jesus said that those who seek salvation will find it, which indicates that God graces every sinful soul with the ability or opportunity to understand how to be saved (Matt. 7:7, cf. 1Tim. 2:3-4), which might be called “seeking grace”.

Those who reject the PP (and Naaman Example) apparently employ a logical fallacy that might be called non praecedere (comparable to non sequitur), making an unwarranted conclusion which precedes unknown facts, namely the cause for the universe “banging bigly”. Atheists assume a natural cause will be discovered, but their assumption is premature and thus inappropriate.

 

[Citizen]

How has science impacted your perspective on the Hebrew Bible?

It hasn't.

The Hubble space based telescope is looking back over 1 billion yrs in the past. Paleontology has demonstrate humanity has existed over hundreds of thousand of years. Geologists believe the earth is about 4 billion yrs old.

Uranium-lead, AAR, fluorine absorption, biostratigraphy, and early radiocarbon were all thought to be accurate dating methods until discovered to be flawed and unreliable. This can apply to any dating method we have today. It's accurate until it's not, therefore I don't take dates like this as fact.

These and many other data from the scientific community seem to describe a world very different than that of Genesis.

If science contradicts the Bible, the Bible wins all day, every day. God's word isn't wrong. Man's data, understanding, theories, and speculations are wrong.

How we relate to these evolving facts and how do we inform our children on the data that confronts the Genesis account?

Facts don't evolve, and 'data' can be flawed. Science is great, but it's not always an absolute truth.

 

[HealthAndHappiness]

I trust that you realize that recent science has cast great doubt on the universal applicability of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It, like many other scientific "laws" seems to be a generalization not an absolute fact. That is, it is a good guideline and can be used to make predictions, but be aware that there are unusual circumstances in which it does not apply.

In the context that I applied it would you disagree?

 

[Gideon300]

Without a quote I am not sure what you think is the correct definition of evolution.
Scientific evidence is that the Flood was indeed worldwide, but it occurred in stages over millions of years before the land uplifted into mountains.
True hard scientists do not start with speculation about unprovable theories but with provable facts/evidence.

The Propensity Principle (PP) is as scientific as possible regarding ultimate reality. The PP employs linear logic (rather than circular reasoning) to propose faith in the NT God as the best belief that solves the maze of ultimate reality as follows:

1. Current scientific knowledge cannot explain how the universe came to exist by means of natural causes, thus it is possible that the cause of the universe is a supernatural Creator/God.

2. The most creative species is humanity, whose traits also include language, moral conscience and God consciousness (personality), so it is possible that these human traits reflect attributes of a God who created humanity.

3. Existential reality indicates that humans are mortal and life is painful, but when life is happy, one wishes it would continue indefinitely. Thus, it is rational to seek ways to become immortal in a heavenly existence (where there is love and justice for all forever, the duo of desirables (DOD).

4. Comparing all possible ways of achieving the DOD, the best or most credible way/hope at this point appears to be the God who resurrected Christ Jesus.

5. When words from God are sought, the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul seem to be the most highly inspired when compared with other scriptures (including the OT), because its concept of one God as the just and all-loving Judge (rationale for morality) is spiritually highest or most advanced, and the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is most credible.

6. Thus, it is appropriate or wise to believe in the NT God and to accept Jesus as God’s Messiah.

When it comes to historical sciences, such as the theory of evolution, there are few true scientists. And of those who reject evolution, not so many are prepared to say so. It it a great way to end your career, as many have discovered.

There is zero reason to doubt a world wide flood that occurred simultaneously. There is a great deal of evidence to confirm the Bible account.

The earth is nowhere near as old as is claimed. Erosion, which is happening now on the cliffs near my home town, should have washed all soft materials into the ocean by now. The moon is moving away from the earth due to the interaction of lunar gravity and the earth's rotation (sorry FE people). Now if the assumptions of scientists are baseless, then their conclusions are equally suspect.

You may like to read "The Genesis Flood" by Whitcombe and Morris. The late Walt Brown wrote "In the Beginning". Walt Brown started out an evolutionist but changed his mind. His book is available as a .pdf download.

"The Genesis Flood" is quite technical and I found it hard work but rewarding. "In the Beginning" is easier to read and has a great many illustrations that are very helpful.

 

[Gideon300]

Without a quote I am not sure what you think is the correct definition of evolution.
Scientific evidence is that the Flood was indeed worldwide, but it occurred in stages over millions of years before the land uplifted into mountains.
True hard scientists do not start with speculation about unprovable theories but with provable facts/evidence.

The Propensity Principle (PP) is as scientific as possible regarding ultimate reality. The PP employs linear logic (rather than circular reasoning) to propose faith in the NT God as the best belief that solves the maze of ultimate reality as follows:

1. Current scientific knowledge cannot explain how the universe came to exist by means of natural causes, thus it is possible that the cause of the universe is a supernatural Creator/God.

2. The most creative species is humanity, whose traits also include language, moral conscience and God consciousness (personality), so it is possible that these human traits reflect attributes of a God who created humanity.

3. Existential reality indicates that humans are mortal and life is painful, but when life is happy, one wishes it would continue indefinitely. Thus, it is rational to seek ways to become immortal in a heavenly existence (where there is love and justice for all forever, the duo of desirables (DOD).

4. Comparing all possible ways of achieving the DOD, the best or most credible way/hope at this point appears to be the God who resurrected Christ Jesus.

5. When words from God are sought, the NT teachings of Jesus and Paul seem to be the most highly inspired when compared with other scriptures (including the OT), because its concept of one God as the just and all-loving Judge (rationale for morality) is spiritually highest or most advanced, and the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is most credible.

6. Thus, it is appropriate or wise to believe in the NT God and to accept Jesus as God’s Messiah.

Answering your first point last...........

American Heritage Dictionary
"Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, often resulting in the development of new species. The mechanisms of evolution include natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, mutation, migration, and genetic drift."

Evolution is the result of mindless, random, undirected processes according to Dawkins' book "Blind Watchmaker".

It's bunk, of course. Dog breeders have been selectively breeding dogs for supposedly 27,000 years. Since dating methods are suspect, that timeline is not a given. However, what is certain is that no new species has evolved. Dogs are still dogs, be they Chihuahua or Great Dane.

No bacteria has "evolved" into anything resembling other than another bacteria. The reproduction rate of bacteria surely should have produced something else by now.

The final death blow to evolution is DNA. It's code. Code implies a Coder. There is no other explanation.​

 

[Squigglylines]

Yes at 1.5cm per/yr. And also the earth is moving away from the sun at 1.5cm per/yr but the sun becomes more and more hotter and so will in 1-2 million years have all it's water flashed off before it freezes.

 

[rewriter]

It hasn't.

If science contradicts the Bible, the Bible wins all day, every day. God's word isn't wrong. Man's data, understanding, theories, and speculations are wrong.



Facts don't evolve, and 'data' can be flawed. Science is great, but it's not always an absolute truth.

An excellent statement, but whose understanding of the Bible is always correct?

Science is a process in an attempt to uncover what is true. What process is used to determine which understanding of the Bible is true. or is it merely a claim that the Bible is true and believers can debate endlessly as to what the Bible actually says?

If there is no process to determine just what the Bible is saying that is true, then you have science which not an absolute truth for humanity or the Bible which is an absolute truth, except no one knows what that truth is.

Sounds like it is as broad as it is long and no one wins.

Or of course, we could believe the Bible when it says that creation is a second source of truth and use the process of science to determine just what that truth is and use that truth to help us determine what is the truth the Bible reveals.

 

[Squigglylines]

Darwin's greatest fear was that monkeys evolved from men and were sitting in he top of the trees looking over the horizon waiting for men to catch up.

 

[Gideon300]

An excellent statement, but whose understanding of the Bible is always correct?

Science is a process in an attempt to uncover what is true. What process is used to determine which understanding of the Bible is true. or is it merely a claim that the Bible is true and believers can debate endlessly as to what the Bible actually says?

If there is no process to determine just what the Bible is saying that is true, then you have science which not an absolute truth for humanity or the Bible which is an absolute truth, except no one knows what that truth is.

Sounds like it is as broad as it is long and no one wins.

Or of course, we could believe the Bible when it says that creation is a second source of truth and use the process of science to determine just what that truth is and use that truth to help us determine what is the truth the Bible reveals.

We do know what truth is. Lord Jesus is Truth. He is the Living Word of God whose Word is Truth.

Those who are born again have the Truth dwelling in them. Before I was saved, I'd never read the Bible. I knew a little from Sunday School stories, Christmas and Easter celebrations. I was compelled to got to church for 3 years, so some things stuck in my memory. That was all.

As soon as I was born again, it was as if my eyes were opened. I realised that the Bible was God's word. I spent hours studying it.

Since we are fallible human beings with minds that need renewing, we won't fully understand what we are studying, especially at first. However, we can start with the assurance that the Bible is indeed God's Word. If there is confusion, it's because of our lack of spiritual knowledge.

Lord Jesus knows the difficulties that we face. That's why He gave the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth.

 

[rewriter]

We do know what truth is. Lord Jesus is Truth. He is the Living Word of God whose Word is Truth.

Those who are born again have the Truth dwelling in them. Before I was saved, I'd never read the Bible. I knew a little from Sunday School stories, Christmas and Easter celebrations. I was compelled to got to church for 3 years, so some things stuck in my memory. That was all.

As soon as I was born again, it was as if my eyes were opened. I realised that the Bible was God's word. I spent hours studying it.

Since we are fallible human beings with minds that need renewing, we won't fully understand what we are studying, especially at first. However, we can start with the assurance that the Bible is indeed God's Word. If there is confusion, it's because of our lack of spiritual knowledge.

Lord Jesus knows the difficulties that we face. That's why He gave the Holy Spirit, to lead us into all truth.

And what does the phrase "Jesus is truth" mean? Whose understanding of that is accurate? Christians cannot agree on a multitude of theological positions, so what do those few words mean in any realistic sense other than as a statement of faith?

 

[Gideon300]

And what does the phrase "Jesus is truth" mean? Whose understanding of that is accurate? Christians cannot agree on a multitude of theological positions, so what do those few words mean in any realistic sense other than as a statement of faith?

You make something very simple overly complicated. Are you related to Pontius Pilate by any chance? He queried that while Truth was standing in front of Him.

 

[rewriter]

You make something very simple overly complicated. Are you related to Pontius Pilate by any chance? He queried that while Truth was standing in front of Him.
Tradition claims that Pilate became a Christian, whether you know that or not. But I did not ask about what the truth is, I ask what do you mean when you say that Jesus is the truth?

If the answer is easy, why can Christians not agree on points of theology. If it is not easy then your comment is meaningless as even supposedly enlightened Christians cannot agree as to what is truth.

Now are you claiming some insight with your comment or are you merely reiterating a claim you have heard and that you do not understand, but that sounds comforting.

Personally, I seek truth and I am willing to dig to find it. I am willing to be persistent when querying God to know what is true. Are you persistent or do you ask and run off to follow some new thing that grabs your attention and return to the question of truth only when you remember you have not gotten an answer yet, and again stay on that point only until you become distracted.

 

[Lovette]

The Hubble space based telescope is looking back over 1 billion yrs in the past. Paleontology has demonstrate humanity has existed over hundreds of thousand of years. Geologists believe the earth is about 4 billion yrs old. Geoscientists look at crude oil that comes from 15,000 ft below the surface and see pollen grains, plant spores and algal cysts of ancient algae demonstrating ancient life on earth. These and many other data from the scientific community seem to describe a world very different than that of Genesis. How we relate to these evolving facts and how do we inform our children on the data that confronts the Genesis account?

All of that is a psychological warfare. "Billions of years‘ is an astronomical, incomprehensible number to human mind, it's equal to eternity, it makes you think that the universe itself is a god who's always been there, and it has generated everything all by itself;

Meanwhile, you'll also hear stuffs like "religions only have a few thousand years' history" in comparison; the concept of God were invented to help explain unexplainable events, to provide a sense of certainty, to attribute all the good things and bad things to a higher supreme being. Without these needs met, human beings can't function, human societies can't function. And this is where science fits in, sophisticated, advanced natural and social science, in the enlightened era to meet all those needs, even though science doesn't really have all the answers; religion is nothing but a relic in the past for the dull bumpkins who still are living in the dark age.

And this is the real ulterior motive. What you're talking about is not science, as in "knowledge of the cosmos", but scienTISM, a man made religion with its own narrative and worldview as I explained above.

 

[GWH]

When it comes to historical sciences, such as the theory of evolution, there are few true scientists. And of those who reject evolution, not so many are prepared to say so. It it a great way to end your career, as many have discovered.

There is zero reason to doubt a world wide flood that occurred simultaneously. There is a great deal of evidence to confirm the Bible account.

The earth is nowhere near as old as is claimed. Erosion, which is happening now on the cliffs near my home town, should have washed all soft materials into the ocean by now. The moon is moving away from the earth due to the interaction of lunar gravity and the earth's rotation (sorry FE people). Now if the assumptions of scientists are baseless, then their conclusions are equally suspect.

You may like to read "The Genesis Flood" by Whitcombe and Morris. The late Walt Brown wrote "In the Beginning". Walt Brown started out an evolutionist but changed his mind. His book is available as a .pdf download.

"The Genesis Flood" is quite technical and I found it hard work but rewarding. "In the Beginning" is easier to read and has a great many illustrations that are very helpful.

I have books by Morris, which is why I say let all viewpoints present their evidence in school classrooms and may the truth win.

 

[GWH]

Answering your first point last...........

American Heritage Dictionary
"Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, often resulting in the development of new species. The mechanisms of evolution include natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, mutation, migration, and genetic drift."

Evolution is the result of mindless, random, undirected processes according to Dawkins' book "Blind Watchmaker".

It's bunk, of course. Dog breeders have been selectively breeding dogs for supposedly 27,000 years. Since dating methods are suspect, that timeline is not a given. However, what is certain is that no new species has evolved. Dogs are still dogs, be they Chihuahua or Great Dane.

No bacteria has "evolved" into anything resembling other than another bacteria. The reproduction rate of bacteria surely should have produced something else by now.

The final death blow to evolution is DNA. It's code. Code implies a Coder. There is no other explanation.​

The AHD should also say that the theory has no proof or predictive value. Witness the thousands of widely different species in an environment.

Dawkins defined atheistic evolution, which is the result of mindless, random, blind and amoral processes.

However, there is some evidence in Scripture that humans can devolve into wolves, snakes and pigs.

 

[dkontner]

2Thes. 2:10 indicates that wisdom is love of truth.
The truth is that all animals and even plants share much of the same DNA,
and Genesis 1 puts them in an order that generally agrees with science, but Darwinism lacks evidence.
However, Genesis merely tells what happened but not how God did it, so science must speculate.

The Holy Spirit is the love of the truth.

2 Thessalonians 2​

7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.
13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.
15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.
16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,
17 Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

John 3​

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

 

[Gideon300]

The AHD should also say that the theory has no proof or predictive value. Witness the thousands of widely different species in an environment.

Dawkins defined atheistic evolution, which is the result of mindless, random, blind and amoral processes.

However, there is some evidence in Scripture that humans can devolve into wolves, snakes and pigs.

"However, there is some evidence in Scripture that humans can devolve into wolves, snakes and pigs." Physically impossible.