Edric and evolution

Acriku · April 17, 2003

Edric0, I was looking at the "Answers for Darwin" section in the Answers in Genesis website - http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/darwin.asp - and came upon this verse:

The Bible: 'And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good' (Genesis 1:11-12).

The website says this goes against evolution, and that is apparent from the "after his kind" and "was in itself, after his kind." So, what are you views toward this, since you accept evolution and the bible (although some not literal)? Other people can post their views on this as well. I just think this is interesting.

Gobalopper · April 17, 2003

I'm not really sure how EdricO is able to say evolution is possible, at least the common held belief that man came from apes, if he also believes that Genesis is accurate. Some areas can be similar but you would have to assume that the days of Genesis aren't really days as we know them today or that somehow time was accelerated.

Acriku · April 17, 2003

I think he does not take some of the stories as literal, more like allegories or parables.

Edric O · April 17, 2003

Indeed, I believe that certain parts of the Bible are not to be taken literraly. Namely the parts which handle such complex issues, that if they were to be written literraly, almost no one would be able to understand them.

God is omnipotent. Therefore he could have created the world instantenously. Yet the Bible states that He chose to take 6 days to do it. Why? Because, obviously, the process of creation in itself was important to God, not just "the finished product". So, if He would wait 6 days, why not 15 billion years? It makes no difference to an infinite being.

Now, as for the "after his kind" quote, that simply states that there are different species which cannot inter-breed.

Warlord Ripskar · April 17, 2003

Well that is wrong too as most plants are fully capable of Hybridisation producing viable descendents. Trees in particular.

sneezer3 · April 17, 2003

I personly believe Genesis account for it, there isn't really any creditable evidence for evolution i have seen as of yet. I think God got it right the first time and we should take him at his word.(If one parts of it is wrong then all of its wrong, so throw it all away or keep it all, there is no middle ground here.) It would have had to be 24 days because he made the plants before the sun if i remember correctly

Acriku · April 17, 2003

Sneezer - even 24 days kills a plant without the sun (especially when starting out with no leftover or excess CO2 or sugar).

Edric - "after his kind" in context is very close to "like begets like" (which is what Darwin determined to be falsed).

emprworm · April 17, 2003

Sneezer - even 24 days kills a plant without the sun (especially when starting out with no leftover or excess CO2 or sugar).
Edric - "after his kind" in context is very close to "like begets like" (which is what Darwin determined to be falsed).

God is light. whatever plants God made without the sun, I can ASSURE you they had plenty of light!

Acriku · April 17, 2003

Changing the situation to fit the idea. But if you think god is made of physical things (photons, spectrums of light, waves, plants can only use light with spectrums that give chlorophyll a or b etc) that's your problem.

emprworm · April 17, 2003

God manifests himself in the natural world as light. obviously GOd manifested himself in the natural world in order to create it.

Edric O · April 17, 2003

Acriku, what you're doing now is called nitpicking. Both atheists and Christians do it, but personally I hate it. Of course that "after his kind" could be interpreted in such a way as to negate darwinism. It could also be interpreted in a lot of other ways.

Acriku · April 17, 2003

You interpret "let there be light...and there was light" as "I'm going to be light for a while guys, please bear with me for the time being!" empr?

Edric O · April 18, 2003

I don't know about Emprworm, but I interpret that as the instant of the Big Bang.

Acriku · April 18, 2003

There's a big time gap between making the light, and making the grasses and fruit (third day in Genesis 1, sixth in Genesis 2) of the earth, that doesn't seem to be mentioned or taken note of.

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

God manifests himself in the natural world as light. obviously GOd manifested himself in the natural world in order to create it.

Right, but on the seventh day he rested. thats why it had to be 24-hour days.

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

There's a big time gap between making the light, and making the grasses and fruit (third day in Genesis 1, sixth in Genesis 2) of the earth, that doesn't seem to be mentioned or taken note of.

I don't think the Bible don't say anything about the sixth day in Genesis 2.(show me the verse)

Acriku · April 18, 2003

In the KJV, look in 2:4-7, I believe those are what I am talking about. This is going along with the "one deed per day."

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

Day 3 he made the plants, day four he made the sun. That passege in chapter two is just going over what has already been said.(1-9-13 Day 3 Day 4 1-14-19)

Acriku · April 18, 2003

It is not in the same order though, so it isn't exactly going over it. Usually, in a chronology, it is in order.

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

How?

the first chapter explans it preety clearly.

Scrinlord · April 18, 2003

I like your sig, sneezer

God can change his things any way that is possible, I believe that evolution is possible, but only if it is guided by Gods hand.

Acriku · April 18, 2003

The first chapter says this way, the second says the other way. You can't have it both ways sneezer.

Scrin - atleast you accept evolution (that's all that matters :)).

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

The first chapter says this way, the second says the other way. You can't have it both ways sneezer.

then spit it out. what verses?

Acriku · April 18, 2003

Now I have to repeat the verses? Sneezer, the only verses I gave you are the verses I am talking about. The order is different.

sneezer3 · April 18, 2003

we talked about a number of passeges. if your going to make the claim give me the exact chapter/verses that "conterdict".

i'm not trying to make you to work, but i have to know what passeges your talking about exactly.

there is a whole lot of supposed conterdictions in that area.

Sign In

Edric and evolution

Recommended Posts

Acriku

Gobalopper

Acriku

Edric O

Warlord Ripskar

sneezer3

Acriku

emprworm

Acriku

emprworm

Edric O

Acriku

Edric O

Acriku

sneezer3

sneezer3

Acriku

sneezer3

Acriku

sneezer3

Scrinlord

Acriku

sneezer3

Acriku

sneezer3

Join the conversation

Activity

Important Information