Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genesis: is it to be taken literally?
mpaul73
Inactive Member


Message 127 of 301 (129349)
08-01-2004 3:10 PM


I am a 6 day young earth creationist. I'll be upfront and say I have chosen to believe the Genesis record as a historical account because I am confident that God exists and that the Bible is God's revealed word to us. Seeing the weakness of the evidence for evolutionary explanation for life gives me even more confidence that God created this world just as He has said in the Bible.
By the way. For those who say that the days in Genesis could not have been literal days because the sun was not created until day 4, I would answer by saying that God can have day and night if he chooses without the sun being in existence. Light was created on day 1, and God separated the light from the darkness calling the light day and the darkness night. Therefore the light that God made on day 1 was already acting like the sun with a day and night cycle established. On day 4 the sun was created and took over from the original light source of day 1. To me it makes sense. To others it will be a myth but to me the evolutionary explanation for the universe/life is impossible.
Regards
Martin Paul.

Replies to this message:
 Message 128 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2004 3:25 PM mpaul73 has replied

mpaul73
Inactive Member


Message 129 of 301 (129355)
08-01-2004 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by sidelined
08-01-2004 3:25 PM


"Would you like to clarify what you find to be impossible with evolutionary explanation for life?'
Sure. I find it impossible (or beyond what I am willing to believe at least) that all life on this planet has arisen by purely natural/mechanistic processes without any need of a Creator. And I have no basis for believing that God created life in this manner. Many Christians do believe it but I would argue that there is no biblical basis (or compelling scientific evidence) for accepting it, assuming they take the scripture seriously that is.
"As for the universe evolution theory has nothing to say with the origins of that. "
Evolutionism (from what I understand) is a complete worldview that teaches that the entire comsos (starting with the big bang) *made itself* by way of purely naturalistic processes that are still in operation today.
Regards
Martin.
This message has been edited by mpaul73, 08-01-2004 03:28 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2004 3:25 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2004 4:42 PM mpaul73 has replied

mpaul73
Inactive Member


Message 131 of 301 (129363)
08-01-2004 5:36 PM
Reply to: Message 130 by sidelined
08-01-2004 4:42 PM


"This is no explanation but we may now narrow your objection down to this question.
OK. Let me expand on my answer a little. Evolutionary theory says that life arose by purely naturalistic processes and that by these same processes all life on this planet can be accounted for. *I have heard no explanation that even comes close to explaining how this could happen by natural processes?* The natural selection/mutation method just does not persuade me at all. Life is too complex. If evolution is a process then evolutionists better have a good explanation of what this process is. They don't. But they still religiously cling onto their theory proclaiming it as 'fact' and presenting it to the public as such.
"could have produced the evidence we find all around us?
could have produced the evidence for what? Evolution? The evidence I have seen for evolution so far does not presuade me at all, the opposite in fact. And I would agrue that the same data evolutionists use to support thier theory can be interpreted in a much better way that agrees with the presupposition of a Creator.
"Evolution theory deals with the means by which life has changed since life began.How life began is a study known as abiogenesis. How the universe began is a part of the field known as cosmology."
Yes but the point is is that all life (even how it originated) and the entire universe is to be explained by purely naturalistic processes in an evolutionist world view. Evolution is not just about how life has developed on this planet since it arose. Evolutionary thought saturates every scientific disipline. Not just biology. It is a belief based on a philosophy that everything must be explained by naturalistic/mechanistic processes.
"I am an atheist and have no God to go by but,as some people here will attest,belief in God and an understanding of the processes of evolution as we model it in evolutionary theory are not mutually exdclusive."
I understand some people have this view but I do not agree with it.
Regards
Martin Paul.
This message has been edited by mpaul73, 08-01-2004 04:37 PM
This message has been edited by mpaul73, 08-01-2004 04:39 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by sidelined, posted 08-01-2004 4:42 PM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 132 by Brad McFall, posted 08-01-2004 5:48 PM mpaul73 has not replied
 Message 133 by jar, posted 08-01-2004 5:55 PM mpaul73 has replied

mpaul73
Inactive Member


Message 134 of 301 (129377)
08-01-2004 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by jar
08-01-2004 5:55 PM


Thanks Jar. Yes things were getting a bit off topic but I felt I should respond to the question sidelined presented me with.
I take Genesis literally because Jesus Christ took it literally, amoungst other reasons.
Genesis 1 and 2 do not contradict if you *understand* them correctly. No act of 'gymnastics' is required to reconcile them if you can think reasonably, IMHO.
Regards
Martin Paul.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by jar, posted 08-01-2004 5:55 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by CK, posted 08-01-2004 6:33 PM mpaul73 has not replied
 Message 136 by jar, posted 08-01-2004 6:45 PM mpaul73 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024