Evolution and Hebrews 11:3

  • 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.
U

UnoiAmarah

Junior Member
#21
Jul 28, 2017
740
128
43
#21
dcontroversal said:
I also find it interesting that the BIRDS came from the sea.......!!
Click to expand...
I guess that is a matter of opinion. Get it..matter. ;)

So how do your reconcile Genesis 1:20 with Genesis 2:19?

And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;
Gen 2:19

But of course it all starts with Genesis 1:1, yet John 3:12 explains the reason for what is taught in John 8:44 considering the passage written in Matthew 13:15-16

Hevosmies said:
DEATH CAME at the fall, not before it. No amount of education can fix ignoring simple facts like that!
Click to expand...
Well, anything which is eternal is exemplified by two immutable facts, one being that which is eternal has no beginning of life since the eternal has always been alive and the second being that the eternal doesn't change in either form or nature. Thus, having no beginning of existence and not changing in either form or nature, it can then be reasonably expected that the eternal always will be alive.

Likewise, any living thing which has not always existed, but has a beginning of life is a mortal life form meaning that having not always existed that it is not eternal. Therefore not being eternal, any living thing which has a beginning of existence will have an end of existence, or life if you will.

That is the law of truth and there is nothing mortal man can do to change that. So the lesson of Genesis 3 isn't that man lost eternal life by reading from the book of knowledge of good and evil, as evident by Genesis 6:3, but rather life beyond the number of his days in his mortal flesh is by the hope that there he is and that he did tell man that there is life after his days in the flesh on this planet.
 
crossnote

crossnote

Senior Member
#22
Nov 24, 2012
30,706
3,650
113
#22
UnoiAmarah said:
Likewise, any living thing which has not always existed, but has a beginning of life is a mortal life form meaning that having not always existed that it is not eternal. Therefore not being eternal, any living thing which has a beginning of existence will have an end of existence, or life if you will.
Click to expand...
This is only true in light of the Fall, otherwise created entities would have a beginning but never end.
 
D

dodgingstones

Active member
#23
Nov 20, 2019
430
238
43
#23
There is nothing explained in the Theory of Evolution that can not be better explained thru Created Adaptation. A God able to create living things is also able to give those things the ability to adapt to their environment so as to promote the survival of the species. Even Darwin credited adaptation for much of what he wrote.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#24
#24
EleventhHour said:
This is interesting.
Just wondering, there is a scientist, Hugh Ross who is an old earth creationist, but he believes death preceded the fall?
I am very unsure of this...what are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
If death is the penalty of sin

how could death occur before sin?

anyway, this is what I see
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#26
#26
UnoiAmarah said:
I guess that is a matter of opinion. Get it..matter. ;)

So how do your reconcile Genesis 1:20 with Genesis 2:19?

And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;
Gen 2:19

But of course it all starts with Genesis 1:1, yet John 3:12 explains the reason for what is taught in John 8:44 considering the passage written in Matthew 13:15-16



Well, anything which is eternal is exemplified by two immutable facts, one being that which is eternal has no beginning of life since the eternal has always been alive and the second being that the eternal doesn't change in either form or nature. Thus, having no beginning of existence and not changing in either form or nature, it can then be reasonably expected that the eternal always will be alive.

Likewise, any living thing which has not always existed, but has a beginning of life is a mortal life form meaning that having not always existed that it is not eternal. Therefore not being eternal, any living thing which has a beginning of existence will have an end of existence, or life if you will.

That is the law of truth and there is nothing mortal man can do to change that. So the lesson of Genesis 3 isn't that man lost eternal life by reading from the book of knowledge of good and evil, as evident by Genesis 6:3, but rather life beyond the number of his days in his mortal flesh is by the hope that there he is and that he did tell man that there is life after his days in the flesh on this planet.
Click to expand...
So an eternal all powerful creator can not creat eternal beings?

what about angels?

while i see your argument, I can not agree, it limits god
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#27
#27
dodgingstones said:
There is nothing explained in the Theory of Evolution that can not be better explained thru Created Adaptation. A God able to create living things is also able to give those things the ability to adapt to their environment so as to promote the survival of the species. Even Darwin credited adaptation for much of what he wrote.
Click to expand...
While true

this still does not support evolution or any of its theories,

as change happens in kind, not kinds changing to a new kind
 
JaumeJ

JaumeJ

Senior Member
#28
Jul 2, 2011
21,230
6,526
113
#28
Where are the villages of people who were transforming from apes to man? Where are any villages of any people before written accounts of mankind's progress as civilization? Where are the remnatnts of creatures between the prehistoric and historic times? You know, those evoving creatures??? It is more foolish ti adhere to evolution thand to the common sense given by our Fasther. They say horses were once like dogs and dthere is no evidence of anything living as creatures in the in between time. There is an enormous gap of knowledge of men of the time betwween dinasaurs and knonn historic creatures…………...…..where are they?
 
Hevosmies

Hevosmies

Well-known member
#29
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,632
113
#29
eternally-gratefull said:
While true

this still does not support evolution or any of its theories,

as change happens in kind, not kinds changing to a new kind
Click to expand...
This is the TRICK they play on people in the indoctrin.. i mean uhh. education.. yeah education institutions. They switch adaptation to micro-evolution and try to jump from that to macro-evolution.

They say: "Oh looky there, a bird adapted to its environment over long period of time, thats evolution right there. So it only makes sense that in a longer period of time that bird can switch to a completely different species even though we got no observable way to see this, and got zero evidence of this ever occuring, but evolution aint no religion tho, because look at this bird here, now its a slightly different looking bird."

Thats a prime example of science FALSELY so called. Its ridicilous and its just a way to escape GOD thats why it was invented. If you take a look at Charles Darwin's life you see he was supposed to be a preacher at one point, but because of family tragedy the man got BITTER and ANGRY at God and went out of his way to come up with his dumb theory.
 
D

dodgingstones

Active member
#30
Nov 20, 2019
430
238
43
#30
The only Degree he held was a Degree in Theology from Cambridge. His father forced both he and his brother to go. His resentment surely played into his desire to discount Creation.
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#35
Jul 31, 2013
36,650
13,124
113
#35
EleventhHour said:
This is interesting.
Just wondering, there is a scientist, Hugh Ross who is an old earth creationist, but he believes death preceded the fall?
I am very unsure of this...what are your thoughts?
Click to expand...
i didn't mean to comment on old/young earth at all, just to point out that the body of mankind was formed from things which He had already created first, things visible - so that Hebrews 11:3 doesn't seem to me to be commenting on the formation of the living creatures but on the formation of, as it were, the dust, in the first place..?
but in re: death before the fall - i don't know what i'm supposed to do with Romans 5:12 in that case! sin entered through one man, and death through sin.

when we read 'formed him from the dust' we all probably picture something similar: a sculptor working clay. but this isn't necessarily the true interpretation. how God forms dust into flesh may not be the way a human makes an image - we anthropomorphize these things often, just trying to comprehend them, sometimes forgetting how high above ours His own ways are.
 
E

EleventhHour

Guest
#36
#36
posthuman said:
i didn't mean to comment on old/young earth at all, just to point out that the body of mankind was formed from things which He had already created first, things visible - so that Hebrews 11:3 doesn't seem to me to be commenting on the formation of the living creatures but on the formation of, as it were, the dust, in the first place..?
but in re: death before the fall - i don't know what i'm supposed to do with Romans 5:12 in that case! sin entered through one man, and death through sin.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly, not sure if it was Dr. Ross or someone else, the counter argument is that Romans 5:12 is speaking to death with regards to man and not animals?
 
4

49

Guest
#37
#37
dcontroversal said:
Obviously I 100% believe God is the creator and sustainer of life....I do however find the verbiage of Genesis very, very inteesting....in particular the two phrases....

Let the EARTH bring forth
Let the Sea bring forth

I also find it interesting that the BIRDS came from the sea.......!!
Click to expand...
I also find it interesting that the BIRDS came from the sea.......!!

Was just reading this in Genesis the other night, and no matter how many times had read it in the past, it did not register in my mind until then. It is interesting!!
 
posthuman

posthuman

Senior Member
#38
Jul 31, 2013
36,650
13,124
113
#38
EleventhHour said:
If I remember correctly, not sure if it was Dr. Ross or someone else, the counter argument is that Romans 5:12 is speaking to death with regards to man and not animals?
Click to expand...
i don't see anything in Romans 5 that would indicate that. but in Genesis 3 there is the cursing of the ground, and Satan cursed 'more than all cattle and more than every beast of the field' -- can surmise that the ground was not cursed before that, but what the LORD says to Satan here is amazing and extraordinarily difficult to understand; what do cattle & creatures of the fields have to do with any of what's recorded there? were they cursed beforehand? why? why doesn't the scripture mention anything about that? or are they cursed in conjunction with what is recorded here? is that all part of 'cursed is the ground for your sake' ?
it connects back to Romans 8; all creation was subject to futility, to 'the bondage of decay' not of its own will, and groans in earnest expectation for the adoption of the children of God. this passage seems to me to indicate Romans 5 isn't talking about 'only the death of animals, not men' -- as well as does the fact that, despite the interpretive choices having been made in our English translations, Genesis 1-2 calls creatures "living souls" exactly as it calls man a "living soul" -- it's the same phrase in Hebrew, but men decided to translate nephesh as 'creature' when He describes His creation of non-human living beings, and only 'soul' when He describes Adam. anthropocentric bias, anyone?

i'd have to hear the argument. i don't see it just from what i know/remember about the text -- tho it could, and i suspect it is, not an argument made from scripture at all, but an argument made from another logic and then shoehorned into interpretation of the text. that's not necessarily bad in and of itself - the Bible leaves details out of accounts all the time, and i think we are meant to think about these things and attempt to infer details as we meditate on what the things which are written for us mean about the things that are not written. but to wonder about the 'missing information' in the accounts in the Book is certainly an opportunity to get a lot of things very much wrong.
 
4

49

Guest
#39
#39
So how do your reconcile Genesis 1:20 with Genesis 2:19?

And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air;
Gen 2:19

Duly noted. Thank you!
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#40
Jun 30, 2015
24,685
13,374
113
#40
UnoiAmarah said:
So how do your reconcile Genesis 1:20 with Genesis 2:19?
Click to expand...
There is no contradiction between these two verses, because 1:20 simply says, "Let birds fly above the earth". Most newer translations don't imply that the birds came from the water.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.