Thursday, November 29, 2007

In The Beginning God Created The Heaven's And The Earth

The Bibe tells us in Genesis that in that "In the Beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Gen. 1:1. And from then on we see that God was active in creating the earth. Notice especially verse 4-5. "God saw that the light was good and he seperated the light from darkenesss. God called the light "day," adand the darkness he called "night." And there was evening and there was morning- the first day." You have people arguing that it was a 24 hour day. It must be 24 hours. But, let us look at 2 Peter But do not forget this one things, dear friends: with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day."
Could it be that this day is a thousand years instead of 24 hour day?

Then you have the order in which God created things after he created day. He created the Waters and sky. vs 6-8.
Then land and seas. vs 9-10.
Then vegetation: seed-bearing planets- trees order of different trees and plants and veggatations.11-13.
Then stars, moon. 14-19.
Then waters teems with living creatures (fish) and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky. vs 20-23.
Then the land produced living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." 24-25
Then man.

I am just saying if you look at the order of creation and take the day as a thousand years could it be that we evoloved over time? Yet God created us? Or God was involved in it?

What do you think about the creatioin stories of Gen 1 & 2? Do they conflict each other?
What does that say about creation and us believing in the theory of evolution? Or theo-evolution?

Does it matter? Is it a salvation issue? Is someone going to go to hell for believing in the theory of evelution or theo-evolution, the Big Bang? How many Christians do you think believe in evolution or Theo-evolution? Do we understand that evolution is just a theory thought in science classes? Why do Christians get so caught up in this discussion and debate? Do they not understand that it is just a theory?Do those who believe against the "Big Bang" or "Evolution" think that science is evil or an attack against Chrsitian views? Do you see evolution as just a theory? What do you believe?

What do you think?
Share your thoughts.


Blogger Monalea said...

Verse 14-19 says He created the Sun, moon and stars. My question, if each 'day' was a 1000+ years how did the plant life survive because it was created before the sun???


6:36 PM  
Blogger Monalea said...

PS There is a good book out there called 'The Collapse of Evolution”


6:39 PM  
Blogger preacherman said...

Thanks for your comments.
I appreciate the book recommendation. I hope you are feeling much better. You have been in my prayers.

7:25 PM  
Blogger laymond said...

Kinney I believe this means we can't hold God to a timeline one day or a thousand years makes no difference to him. The facts of geology tells us that the earth was here many years before man. I can't give you a timeline but I believe it was much, much longer than a modern day week. geology also tells us it was not monkey turning into man, Adam was created a man. they will be looking for the missing link forever, but I doubt they will find it. God is that missing link.

9:40 PM  
Blogger preacherman said...

I appeciate your comments.
I think it is very interesting that we have 99% DNA of that of apes.

10:13 PM  
Blogger Darin L. Hamm said...

I think subjecting a document written thousands of years ago to scientific reason is a mistake. Either way you are stuck doing that. It was written for that purpose and to use it as such is IMO a mistake.

It is a beautiful story that sets the stage for the fall of man. I believe it is true and inspired as much as it is used for what it is inspired for. When we move outside of that we get a lot of bad theology and reason. Take what people do to the book of Acts and look what happens.

Try to imagine people in Babylon 2500 years ago reading gravity and physics. It makes no sense to think that the book would be written that way or to expect it to hold up to such scrutiny.

Please don’t misunderstand what I have said. I believe the Bible is inspired I just think we often make huge mistakes in what we try to do with it.

10:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No a Christian cannot believe in Evolution.

Why is this debate so important? Because it speaks directly to the inspiration of the Bible and the authority of God.

God says a day (morning and evening) either He means a day or He means something that is impossible to know. Jesus made claims to coming out of the grave in three days... Did He mean a 24 hour period or is Jesus still dead and waiting for another 1,000 years to come out of the grave?

If God lied in Genesis why not lie in Matthew?

If God teaches something that can't be understood then why teach at all?

"with the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day"
All that means is that God is not bound, concerned, or bothered with time. He will get things done on His eternal schedule.

For example: The church was in the "mind" of God before the creation of the world. How long before? Who knows but I know a lot of time went by even after creation before He brought it to fruition......

As far as that 99% DNA thing with man and apes.... it is a false comparison. First of all it was made before the Human Genome Project had mapped man's DNA. The chimps genes have not been mapped. That claimed is based on a specific set of proteins that were specifically chosen to prove a point. It sounds like human DNA and ape DNA are a 99% match... THAT JUST AIN'T SO. Did you know that man and worms have a 75% match?

Another comparison is based on the fact that man has 46 chromosomes and apes have 48. But the Irish potato has 46 so we are definitely a 100% match with French fries.

10:57 PM  
Blogger laymond said...

Kinney, if you want a verse that will really blow your mind try this.

Gen:1:16: And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

We know for a fact that without the sun the moon is no more of a light than the earth is, even if we had not been on the moon, an eclypse tells us that. we know that the light from the far stars takes million of years to reach the earth.The light we see from the stars each night started it's journey millions of years ago. so shouldn't that tell us the universe is million of years older than man?

12:38 AM  
Blogger Jason Campbell said...

You certainly are on a rampage to stir up all the good questions. Are the next three going to be on baptism, a cappella music, and acceptance of homosexual behavior?


This is a good discussion, but depending on who is involved, it can very quickly devolve (pun intended) into name calling, straw-man beating, and chest-puffing while both sides grab for the latest string of arguments to bolster their side.

The short version? Important question because of its implications on authority of Scripture, but at the same time, cannot be a salvation issue. Paul lines up in 1 Corinthians 15:1-11 the sort of hill I am supposed to die on as a Christian. Evolution doesn't make the short list...

12:45 AM  
Blogger laymond said...

1Cor:1:27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

1:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Don't let that "light" traveling at @ 186,282.397 miles per second thing bother you. Light has "physical" properties and as such if God put those lights in the sky He put that "beam of light" there also. Everything was created in its final state. The "light" traveling for billions of years thing is just like the, "what came first the chicken or the egg" question.

As for the proof of the Bible being 'more story than science' by saying the Moon has no light of its own? All God said was he put two things in the sky to light up the day and the night. He doesn't say that the Moon is the light source.

The Bible clearly states that "light" existed before the Sun or Moon. It says "let there be light" boy is that scientific or not? Remember I said light has physical properties? Well just think about the concept of "light" having to be created. Not just that light is the result of something but that before there was a Sun there was "light".

7:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That whole 1 Corinthians is the litmus test for salvation and knowledge is one of them there straw women.

Paul's point isn't "here is all youse guys needs to know and preach". Paul's point is all about proving that there is the resurrection of the dead and he uses the greatest resurrection of all time- Jesus. Paul is only saying if you don't believe in resurrection then how in the world can you believe that Jesus was raised. And then by implication- what is your salvation based on?

Question: Do you have to believe that Jesus is the God the Son to have salvation? Well Paul doesn't say that in 1 Corinthians 15.1-11!

Oddly enough this original comment was not as random as it seemed at first read. It proves my point in my first comment. If God "fudged" in Genesis He "fudged" in 1 Corinthians. How do we know that Paul really means dead folks coming to life when he says "resurrection"? What if Paul is using resurrection as a metaphor for "hope" or "change" you know a kind of- 'resurrecting your social, ethical and moral lives to be better citizens of this world'. After all IS THERE ANY SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT THE DEAD ARE RAISED? Doesn't logic dictate that there is no resurrection? Have you ever seen a person die and then 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 days later come back to life?

The key to 1 Corinthians 15 is chapters 1-14, the rest of 15and 16. Even 15 doesn't end at verse 11. The Bible will tell you what you need to know if you let it.

It is going to boil down to this- If Genesis 1 is myth or story or allegory that sets the stage for the fall of man then why isn't Matthew 27 a story that sets the stage for the redemption of man?

Here is the really strange thing.
"Creation" is a story that only sets the stage for a serpent talking to a female who came out of a male(where is the evolution or science in that) because the "fall" is real? Think about what people are saying- Creation a story - talking snake real.

In the words of the great theologian Johnnie Cochran,
"If the snake's a fit
then Creation's legit."

8:15 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

What about the age of the earth would God lie about the age of the earth? That will give you guys something to talk about today. I appreciate the discussion and will not delete any coversations between anyone. I ask that we strive to keep the conversation in the relm of a Christ-like behavior but I understand that their will be non-Christians who visit my blog who have the view of evolution and Big Bang; even Christians who hold the view of evolution with God being the one in control.

8:30 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

Laymond & A.W. I appreciate your view and where you are come from and the view you have as Christians. I appreciate it so much showing with Scripture your view. It means alot. I hope there will be some who learn.

The question I ask again today is it a salvation issue? What about the age of the earth? I have had Christians who have heald the view of evolution because they said, "would God lie about the age of the earth?". "What should be our response if we hold the scriputral view?". So, what about the age? & Salvation?

I apprecaite everyone's comments. I hope everyone has a great weekend. I will check back in on monday. I hope everyone has fun.

8:35 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

Oh, you can also talk about the Big Bang, & it being just theories?

Again have lots of fun.

8:36 AM  
Blogger laymond said...

1Tm:1:4: Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
Ti:1:14: Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

8:45 AM  
Blogger laymond said...

"The question I ask again today is it a salvation issue?"

I believe Paul answered your question many moons ago in the two verses I quoted above. have a good weekend may God bless.

8:53 AM  
Blogger dbbjavance said...

Disclaimer: I am not a scientist nor the descendant of a scientist, but I do have some thoughts.

First, God did not create everything in its final state; for their was the first Adam and the second Adam, Christ; and even the creation waits in eager expectation for the revealing of the sons of God (Romans 5 and 8; and 1 Corinthians 15)

Second, the Big Bang theory may not be contrary to a younger universe since the enormous energy of light creating the universe would likely have altered (probably sped up) what we now observe as the norm of time and space. I think that is a quantum physics theory -- I don't know for sure. We used to have a church member who was a quantum physicist and he believed the big bang was consistent with creation.


9:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No where in scripture does God tell us the age of the earth. So no God didn't lie about how old the earth is.

9:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

When I said, "Everything was created in its final state." I meant in it's mature state. The "chicken and egg" thing I thought explained that.

I have no idea whatsoever what:

"First, God did not create everything in its final state; for their was the first Adam and the second Adam, Christ; and even the creation waits in eager expectation for the revealing of the sons of God (Romans 5 and 8; and 1 Corinthians 15)"

Has to do with anything we are discussing but because it contained my phrase I'll try to say something about it. Paul is talking about sin coming into the world through ONE MAN (first Adam) and salvation coming into the world through ONE MAN (second Adam)- analogy. The sons of God are/is the church in its maturity and 1 Corinthians 15 says nothing about either. It speaks of resurrection and the judgment but I'm pretty sure most people understood "final state" in a reference to going from ooze to human as opposed to from this earth to the next life.

BTW: I once knew a man who was chicken farmer and he definitely believe the chicken came before the egg. ;)

9:50 AM  
Blogger LB said...

The speculated age of the earth is relevant only if we know for sure that the dating methods are accurate. There are numerous reliable arguments that the method used is both biased and circular.
I do not think you can throw out the Genesis account of creation as myth or story and have any reliance on the rest of scripture. (II Timothy 3:15-17)
In addition, I do not think you can make God a liar "And there was evening, and there was morning-the ____ day." (Gen. 1:5,8,13,19, 23,& 31)and be in a right relationship with Him. (Romans 1:18-25) vs. 20 "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities-His eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse."
Evolution cannot be married to Christianity-they are diametrically opposed in concept and purpose. Creation points to God (Romans) and evolution's purpose continues to be that of pulling man away from God. vs. 25 "And they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things rather than the Creator-Who is forever praised. Amen"

10:29 AM  
Blogger laymond said...

Don, unless you have changed your mind about the 24hr a day, week of creation. I believe the bible does tell us how old the earth is. The earth was created on the first day of that week, and Man was created on the sixth day of that week, and that man was Adam.
Gen:5:5: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

If you stand by your words that 24hrs was a work day for God, and you trace the generations back to Adam, I believe that makes the earth somewhere around seven thousand years old, don’t remember exactly, don’t care enough to trace it back. Just wondering why you said what you said about the age of the earth.

10:50 AM  
Blogger Darin L. Hamm said...


I don’t think I was very clear in my earlier post. I don’t think either side understands exactly how it happened. That was my point and that to expect the Bible to be written for us thousands of years later to argue it is to misunderstand the Bibles purpose.

Anyway, just wanted to clarify.

10:57 AM  
Blogger Neva said...

I have a very simple faith that says if God says it then I believe it, I don't have to understand it nor do I ever want to argue about it. I have heard this discussion many times--however because I do not feel it has much to do with salvation, I have not participated. I am glad there are folks like AW who are smart enough and confident enough to debate this topic. They probably run into people who are intelligent and knowlegeable to discuss it. And so, while I cannot comment, I wanted you to know that I am reading.

11:15 AM  
Blogger Darin L. Hamm said...


I’m not sure this is a good format to express my thoughts about the credibility of scripture being based on whether or not I understand the creation story in Genesis. I just don’t want to be taken the wrong way but I think it is an area that needs to be addressed.

Help me out because if I follow that logic what do I do with God’s words to Job in Job 38? Do I have to find storehouses of hail and snow? Doors in the sea? Should I go on? As I have stated, we humans set up rules of interpretation but shouldn’t we understand how it would be understood when it was written? We ask God to inspire a document that has no value and doesn’t even make sense for thousands of years until we come along and want to refute evolution? I’m sorry, that doesn’t make sense to me.

In the end what would makes it even sadder to me is the fact that in the context of Job 38 God is putting us in our place. No we don’t have to throw out resurrection just because Genesis wasn’t inspired to win an argument over evolution. Why does this matter to me? I know of many people who have abandoned God not because of Him but because of certain arguments about Him.

11:15 AM  
Blogger Ted M. Gossard said...

I do think the accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 do contradict each other, if you see them as laid out linearly as to what happened. But I don't believe that's the intent of the two accounts. I consider this poetic and getting across to us the important aspects of God as Creator and the creation he made, something like that.

I so much agree that we shouldn't get so excited or worked up over science. Science is observation and interpretation, though sometimes its speculation arising from this oversteps the boundaries of what science really is. Like in the insistence of a naturalistic world with no room for God we find in some places.

I'm not fond of much of what i understand of evolution, but I really don't care how it happened. What I will hold on to is the truth of Scripture, and I believe in the account of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 without trying to figure out things from it that are really probably not there.

12:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If we have moved on to explaining metaphors and similes then I just need to move on.

Next we'll be 'cornfused' about parables and wondering if Jesus really knew a guy who buried a pearl in his back yard.

So, I'll just agree with neva and move on. I await your next post.

I will say this about genealogies and the Bible and dating things. Genealogies where not written in Eastern literature to be used as time lines. They were very loose and used to prove a point as much as to show lineage. Look at Jesus' genealogy in Luke.. one certainly couldn't take that and date the age of the earth.

An excellent resource on this would be:

Between "Azel" and "Azel" Interpreting the Biblical Genealogies
Robert R. Wilson
The Biblical Archaeologist, Vol. 42, No. 1 (Winter, 1979), pp. 11-22

12:04 PM  
Blogger Ted M. Gossard said...

I want to add to this is that an important reason we shouldn't get so excited over science is that its interpretations will be different years from now (if the Lord tarries), and even its observations will be markedly different as well- as all of this has precedence.

Also we should learn from science and listen to scientists who may not be Christians, without being threatened. There is much that is fascinating there.

12:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BUT I will conclude with this because I sincerely believe it matters what we believe.

The topic is evolution. The Big Bang is just a theory on how evolution began. But I'll stick with the topic.

Two questions we need to ask ourselves:

[1] How did God say it happened?

[2] Where does "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them." fit into the evolution of man? At what point did primordial ooze become the image of God? How long did it take for mankind to evolve into God's image?

12:10 PM  
Blogger Darin L. Hamm said...


And if I said that no we must know the date of the earth because obviously those genealogies were put there so we could figure out its age and so if we don’t agree that the earth is young because that is what the Bible says then where will will go from there?

If we can’t trust the Bible to date the earth how can we trust what it says about Jesus...

Preacherman, you did ask me to come and comment you know.

1:15 PM  
Blogger laymond said...

I remember someone berating Bobby Valentine for quoting or recommending books other than the bible for the beliefs he holds, now that very person is recommending a book,that as far as I know is not part of the bible, to reinforce his belief in the bible.

1:22 PM  
Blogger Lisa said...

I'm with Neva too. Since she commented without wanting to contribute to the discussion, I will also, to let you know I'm reading your posts. Personally, I can't even tell exactly where everyone who has commented stands on the issue, which tells me either no one is making sense or that I'm not as intelligent as they are (a much more likely scenario, I assure you). Thank you all, however, for maintaining civility and kindness.

6:14 PM  
Blogger cwinwc said...

Articulate my position on Creation I don't know but I do know this, folks can get down right silly and mean when it comes to this discussion.

Many moons ago I read a tract in a church that explained the existence of dinosaurs. The explanation -

Noah knew that he didn't have enough room (or security) to house big dinosaurs like a "T-Rex" in the Ark so the solution, he gathered up 2 of every egg to continue the dinosaur lines.

8:41 PM  
Blogger Alan said...

Hi Preacherman,

I predict that my comment won't settle this dispute once and for all. (ha!) But I'll comment anyway.

I believe time is a part of creation. Augustine came to that conclusion as a fourth century bishop, philosopher, and theologian. Modern physics confirms that time is a feature of the universe just like space, matter, and energy. Time is part of creation, and that means God created time. So it makes no sense to talk about how much time it took for God to create everything. He wasn't traveling through time as he made it all. God is outside of time. That is why a day is like 1000 years and 1000 years like a day. And that is why God can see the future. We are confined to move through time at an essentially fixed rate. Not so with God. He did not create the universe while earth rotated on its axis six times.

Therefore, the creation days in Genesis must be talking about something else. Perhaps in God's heavenly world there is something analogous to time, and he created the world in six units of time which he calls "days". Whatever the reason, God chose to use the concept of a sequence of days to communicate in a way we can relate to.

10:32 PM  
Blogger dbbjavance said...

Were all things really created in a mature or perfect state? I agree that the chicken came first, then the egg. However did the chicken come first or the chicken's ancestor. I do not know if the Caudipteryx is an ancestor of chickens, but it does represent a species of small, feathered dinosaurs. If Caudipteryx and chicken were created maturely on the same day, how did chickens survive whatever caused the extinction of the feathered creatures like Caudipteryx. I do not support Darwin's theory of evolution, but within species I do believe their is evidence of change. Some change happens rapidly, for example through catastrophe; and some change takes a very long time, for example through the natural processes and effects of the cycles of nature.

Regarding my distinction between Adam and Christ. In the flesh Adam was created in a mature state. Nevertheless, in the flesh man has changed over time and adapted to his environment in various ways. Regardless, the perfect man and the destiny of man is Christ, and man has a great deal of changing to go through before that destiny is reached. God is sovereign; this universe and all things in it are his creation; and his plan for the creation and humans is by His design and the working of his creating and resurrection power through Jesus Christ.

11:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


i am pretty much in the same camp as Neva on this one.


12:36 PM  
Blogger laymond said...

I see we have women here who are strict believers in what Paul said

1Tm:2:11: Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.

except monalea good girl monalea :) I am encouraged to learn women do have opinions, and are not afraid to state them. even in a MANLY discussion. I thought I had married the only one. Ha :)

2:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh laymond!

10:36 PM  
Blogger Monalea said...

Preacherman, thank you so much for the prayers.


12:10 AM  
Blogger Stoned-Campbell Disciple said...


Perhaps we can help refocus the question you have raised by asking another but related question:

"Can one be a Christian and still believe in a heliocentric solar system?"

I doubt there are to many folks who still believe the Sun revolves around the Earth.

If we can claim, as is done, that Scripture uses "accomodative" language when it speaks of the sun rising and setting, and related images of a stationary Earth and a Geocentric worldview then why could not Genesis 1 also use such language?

It is a fact that over the last two thousand years that there has never been uniformity in the interpretation of Genesis 1. This was true with the Rabbis, the Church Fathers and even in the Stone-Campbell Movement. It was only after Darwin that dogmatism reared its head on this text.

We should learn the lesson of Galileo ...

I know and fellowship those within my own congregation who love the Lord Jesus and yet believe that Genesis is accomadative language.

Bobby Valentine

3:50 PM  
Blogger Neva said...

Can you email me?


12:05 PM  
Blogger Jim said...

Well... I think that pretending to understand God's concept of time is only possible if we are God. How was time marked off before he created the sun and the moon? We are left to figure that His dividing the light and the dark was how we should interpret each and every day because that is all we know as mere humanity.

I believe that the most of the need that man feels to understand this tells us how weak our faith is. I frankly don't dare to hold God to some kind of limits... if He chose to create it all in nano-seconds, who am I to try to measure those nano-seconds.

Walking on the water was just not possible, then or now, yet Jesus said to do it and Peter obeyed. It wasn't until he started to apply his own physical understanding of the stability of water as a viable surface to trod upon that he began to sink.

God, through His inspired word tells us it was a series of days, perhaps to allow us to absorb what and how it came about. It matters nothing to me, if He took 7 million days or 7... He is God and it is my faith and belief in Him that changes my life every day.

Too many Christians have lost the passion, if they ever had it at all, for serving Him in His way. We take it as far as a marginal, superficial set of beliefs but we actually have lost the sense of who He is.

Arguing the about the beginning is as much a waste of time as fussing about the end times. When I die, my time is ended, regardless of how much longer the world as we know it continues.

We need to be more focused on the time that we are here and love, serve, obey, teach, reach, yada-yada-yada... until the time when we can be reunited with Him in His glorious body above. Phil. 3:20-21 tells us to walk on this earth remembering that our citizenship is in heaven.

Why waste time trying to figure out the beginning or the end... it will only result in sinking in the waves because we can't walk on the water. We don't understand what God does and we will not know what He knows while we live on this little bit of clay. I try to understand walking on water and I am at a loss because the variables (which God also created) don't match up to the event.

Seek out God. Do what He desires today and every day. Stop trying to figure the beginning or the end out, because they don't matter. "Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." Ironically that is great advice from a king who did neither for most of his life.

Swimming upstream...

2:21 PM  
Blogger preacherman said...

I want everyone, I mean everyone, to know how much I appreaciate your comments. I know that some people have differing opinions than others. I am glad that we all respected each others opinions in a respectful Christian way. I want us to understand that this is just "theories" and not fact. We need to understand that this isn't a salvation issue. We need to respect peoples and move on. And focus on the true Son that gives life and life abundantly.

Thanks you again for taking part in this discussion. I respect everyone's opinions. I love all of you.

2:58 PM  
Blogger David Dallas said...

Most of your questions have been answered. Peter should not be used to determine the length of days in Genesis. He was simply stating that God's time is not our time so don't use our time to say that Christ is not coming back. Further as stated by others--if God used evolution [which He has the power to do so] He would hasve to over ride the processes He was putting in place to do so in order for life to come into being in the order listed in the Genesis account. If as you ask 1000 years a day--What portion of that 1000 years would be night {evening and mornning were the 1st day, etc] How would plants survive during those long nights????
It is chimps not apes that were erroneously stated to have 99% of DNA in common but as pointed out that has been put to rest as false since the human genome project.
Do the 2 Genesis Accounts conflict? No only some people's wierd interpretations of them.
Do evolution and creation conflict. Yes, if you mean by evolution that once there was no life and then life spontaneously arose and from it all life forms that we know today.
It is interesting that scientists state that they conflict--that you have 2 alternatives--special creation or evolution. Only religious people try to hold on to both and that is because they erroneously believe that science has proof for evolution. Evolution is simply the religion of atheist who do not wish to believe in evolution.
Jesus said "have you not heard he that made them male and female" That makes it pretty simple--believe man got here by evolution and make the Savior a liar or believe the Savior who is the way, the truth, and life.
If you have not read it--I suggest that you read "The Case For A Creator by Lee Stroebel
Finally the best defense for creation is to show the Bible to be true which can readily be done. Thus if the scriptures say it, I believe it. It takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in Creation.

The Bible does not give an age for the earth. It does tell us that our earth after the flood is radically different than that before the flood. Could the rate of decay of various elements been different before the flood than after the flood and that explain the apparent difference between the young earth theorist and the old earth? Possibly--but at any rate the age of the earth is irrelevant to the discussion.

Also, the fossil record does not support evolution because we have no links linking development of one life form to another. Because of that--about 30 years ago evolutionist came up with "Punctuated Equilibrium" to try to explain why we had not found the missing links that Darwin sent us seeking.

David D. Retired College Biology Professor

9:23 PM  
Blogger laymond said...

david dallas, I am so glad you came along and set us all straight. no more questions you answered them all :)

10:36 PM  
Blogger preacherman said...


Thank you so much for you opinion. It mean alot to this blog. Your opinions are always welcome hear and hope you feel free blog hear anytime. Thank you for the recommendation of Lee Strobel's book. I will give it a read. I like how you ask about how the earth was before and after the flood. I do think it may have been radically different like you suggest. It would be a good discussion sometime. I think it is iteresting that the fossel record does not support evolution. Again, evolution is a "theory". So the fossil record does not support it's hypothesis.
Thank you again so much Dr. Dallas for stopping by and adding to the discussion.

7:53 AM  
Blogger Danny Sims said...

The early part of Genesis is Hebrew poetry. We do it and our faith a disservice to demand it to be English narrative or worse Western scientific analysis.

What we believe matters. How we live matters much more. The point of the poerty is much more for the formation of how we live life.

I’d put myself in the Theo-evolution-creationist. And I personally believe the world is much older than many creationists think.

I might be wrong For those who would say this is a salvation issue, let me encourage them: Make sure you are right if being right is what saves you.

10:16 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

Danny Sims.
Thanks for your comments brother.
I agree with the last part about getting it right about it being a salvatioin issue.

10:57 AM  
Blogger Jasper said...

RYC: Thanks for the encouragement borther. Stop by anytime!

11:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

God loves you, brother.

12:39 PM  
Blogger Keith Brenton said...

If God came thundering out of the heavens and demanded of me the answers to the forty questions He posed to Job and this one, I'd have just as much luck with the first 40 as with the last.

If He whispered to me after of the whirlwind and earthquake or queried me, "Can these dead bones live again?" I'd like to think I'd have the wisdom of a prophet to say, "Lord, thou knowest."

I used to spend a lot of time trying to grasp the incomprehensible God of scripture with my head alone rather than letting my heart and mind and soul and strength in on the grasping.

I wish I could say I don't do that at all anymore, but when a question like this comes up, there's still a part of my head that says, "Oh, come on, you know there's just got to be a rational answer to this."

No, I don't. I don't know that at all.

It's a question with God smack dab in the middle of it, so all rational bets are off. He is not solely rational - else He would not have sent His Son to sure torture and death. He is also passionate. He is loving and just; merciful and righteous; kind and severe. He can do what He wants when He wants to and any way He desires, whether I understand it or not.

So I just give up on questions like this, and believe.

It'll be fun to hear the answer when He gathers us all home.

(If I can comprehend it even then.)

9:57 PM  
Blogger royce said...

Throughout recored history men who took God at His word were rewarded and those who did not were not rewarded.

Some are trying to understand the Biblical record using only the human mind. It is to be received "by faith". Without faith it impossible to please Him (God).

God said it, that settles it, no matter if you or anyone else believes it or not.

Trying to explain a supernatural God and His acts using only natural means is akin to trying to teach a pig algebra.

His peace,

11:45 PM  
Blogger preacherman said...

You make very convencing comments. I greatly appreciate your opinion and adding to this discussion. It means alot.
In Him,
Kinney Mabry

8:07 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

I always appreciate your comments. Thank you for adding to the discussion. I respect your view and understand where you are coming from. You make your point so clear. Thanks.
In Him,
Kinney Mabry

8:08 AM  
Blogger laymond said...

I just have one thing to say to Royce, Did you ever see Arnold on Green Acres?

11:55 AM  
Blogger preacherman said...

I want to thank again all of those who have commented on this discussion. I undestand the differing opinions. I understand that all have belief's on this topic. The one great thing is that God greated all of with differently. It would be so boring if we agreed on all things. I do not see this as a salvation issue that is goin to hell. Why? Because God does not mention as one.
I do think there is a lot of Christian's who focus on this sun instead of focusing on the true SON that leads to life eternal.
God bless each of you.

3:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is not my first time to go to see this site, i am browsing this site dailly and get pleasant data from here

My web-site; view homepage

11:37 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

gucci outlet, louboutin outlet, longchamp handbags, tory burch outlet, longchamp outlet, true religion jeans, louis vuitton outlet, air max, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet, louis vuitton, jordan shoes, burberry outlet, tiffany and co, louis vuitton handbags, michael kors outlet, kate spade handbags, ray ban sunglasses, air max, oakley sunglasses, michael kors outlet, louboutin, tiffany and co, oakley sunglasses cheap, kate spade outlet, michael kors outlet, prada outlet, burberry outlet, michael kors outlet, nike shoes, coach factory outlet, nike free, louboutin, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, chanel handbags, christian louboutin shoes, prada handbags, michael kors outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, coach purses, michael kors outlet, coach outlet store online, true religion jeans, ray ban sunglasses, longchamp handbags, coach outlet

8:04 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

gucci outlet, louboutin outlet, longchamp handbags, tory burch outlet, longchamp outlet, true religion jeans, louis vuitton outlet, air max, oakley sunglasses, louis vuitton outlet, louis vuitton, jordan shoes, burberry outlet, tiffany and co, louis vuitton handbags, michael kors outlet, kate spade handbags, ray ban sunglasses, air max, oakley sunglasses, michael kors outlet, louboutin, tiffany and co, oakley sunglasses cheap, kate spade outlet, michael kors outlet, prada outlet, burberry outlet, michael kors outlet, nike shoes, coach factory outlet, nike free, louboutin, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, chanel handbags, christian louboutin shoes, prada handbags, michael kors outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, coach purses, michael kors outlet, coach outlet store online, true religion jeans, ray ban sunglasses, longchamp handbags, coach outlet

8:04 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

lululemon, nike tn, polo ralph lauren, hollister, vans pas cher, air max, nike air max, sac burberry, true religion outlet, nike roshe, oakley pas cher, michael kors, sac hermes, nike blazer, abercrombie and fitch, michael kors, converse pas cher, nike free, north face, ralph lauren, timberland, longchamp, louboutin, nike trainers, michael kors pas cher, sac guess, ray ban sunglasses, sac longchamp, air max pas cher, nike free pas cher, vanessa bruno, hollister, north face, louis vuitton uk, new balance pas cher, nike roshe run, louis vuitton, air max, air jordan, barbour, sac louis vuitton, sac louis vuitton, hogan outlet, mulberry, air force, true religion outlet, ray ban pas cher, polo lacoste

8:11 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

lululemon, nike tn, polo ralph lauren, hollister, vans pas cher, air max, nike air max, sac burberry, true religion outlet, nike roshe, oakley pas cher, michael kors, sac hermes, nike blazer, abercrombie and fitch, michael kors, converse pas cher, nike free, north face, ralph lauren, timberland, longchamp, louboutin, nike trainers, michael kors pas cher, sac guess, ray ban sunglasses, sac longchamp, air max pas cher, nike free pas cher, vanessa bruno, hollister, north face, louis vuitton uk, new balance pas cher, nike roshe run, louis vuitton, air max, air jordan, barbour, sac louis vuitton, sac louis vuitton, hogan outlet, mulberry, air force, true religion outlet, ray ban pas cher, polo lacoste

8:20 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

insanity workout, north face jackets, giuseppe zanotti, chi flat iron, ugg boots, p90x, birkin bag, longchamp, ferragamo shoes, rolex watches, herve leger, hollister, canada goose, babyliss pro, ugg australia, canada goose, canada goose jackets, reebok outlet, ghd, soccer shoes, ugg, nfl jerseys, nike roshe run, north face outlet, valentino shoes, mont blanc, celine handbags, nike huarache, new balance shoes, canada goose outlet, ugg boots, canada goose, mcm handbags, beats by dre, bottega veneta, wedding dresses, soccer jerseys, marc jacobs, canada goose uk, mac cosmetics, ugg pas cher, vans shoes, jimmy choo outlet, instyler, uggs outlet, asics running shoes, lululemon outlet, abercrombie and fitch

8:20 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

lancel, canada goose, timberland boots, pandora charms, thomas sabo, moncler outlet, hollister, canada goose, moncler, hollister clothing store, converse, ray ban, louis vuitton, rolex watches, iphone 6 cases, oakley, juicy couture outlet, vans, karen millen, pandora jewelry, ugg, moncler, air max, supra shoes, swarovski crystal, swarovski, pandora charms, moncler, moncler, converse shoes, gucci, ugg, louboutin, montre homme, air max, hollister, coach outlet store online, links of london, baseball bats, juicy couture outlet, ralph lauren, parajumpers, moncler, toms shoes, wedding dresses, moncler

8:28 PM  
Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

ninest123 09.09
oakley sunglasses, tiffany and co, cheap ugg boots outlet, ugg outlet, prada outlet, cheap ugg boots, ugg australia, jordan shoes, replica watches, replica watches, christian louboutin shoes, nike air max, louis vuitton handbags, burberry outlet online, tiffany jewelry, nike free, christian louboutin, nike air max, michael kors outlet online, louis vuitton outlet, polo ralph lauren, michael kors outlet online, red bottom shoes, cheap oakley sunglasses, nike outlet, prada handbags, burberry outlet online, ugg boots clearance, michael kors outlet store, michael kors outlet, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton, christian louboutin outlet, oakley vault, louis vuitton outlet, longchamp outlet online, ray ban outlet, tory burch outlet online, michael kors handbags, louis vuitton outlet online, longchamp handbags, longchamp outlet, gucci handbags, michael kors outlet online sale, ray ban sunglasses

10:24 PM  
Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

nike free pas cher, air max pas cher, guess pas cher, true religion jeans, kate spade outlet, coach outlet, hermes pas cher, kate spade outlet online, true religion, vans pas cher, coach purses, ray ban pas cher, michael kors, nike roshe run, tn pas cher, michael kors uk, lacoste pas cher, timberland pas cher, scarpe hogan, longchamp, true religion outlet, michael kors outlet online, nike air force, north face pas cher, air jordan, oakley pas cher, longchamp pas cher, north face, true religion outlet, sac vanessa bruno, new balance pas cher, coach outlet, coach outlet store online, burberry pas cher, converse pas cher, hollister uk, nike air max, ray ban uk, hollister, chanel handbags, nike blazer pas cher, lululemon outlet online, michael kors canada, louboutin, ralph lauren pas cher

10:31 PM  
Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

chi flat iron, new balance outlet, soccer shoes, nike air max, instyler ionic styler, beats headphones, jimmy choo shoes, hollister clothing store, mac cosmetics, herve leger, nfl jerseys, abercrombie and fitch, nike free, abercrombie and fitch, asics shoes, ferragamo shoes, vans outlet, nike roshe, lululemon outlet, valentino shoes, soccer jerseys, reebok shoes, hollister, ralph lauren uk, insanity workout, p90x workout, mulberry uk, nike trainers, nike air huarache, celine handbags, birkin bag, longchamp, north face jackets, north face jackets, air max, wedding dresses, nike air max, babyliss, mcm handbags, nike roshe, mont blanc pens, bottega veneta, giuseppe zanotti, baseball bats, ghd

10:33 PM  
Blogger ninest123 Ninest said...

michael kors handbags, sac louis vuitton, pandora jewelry, swarovski uk, pandora jewelry, air max, marc jacobs handbags, links of london uk, abercrombie, ugg, vans, coach outlet, gucci, louis vuitton uk, converse, michael kors outlet online, louboutin, oakley, louis vuitton pas cher, uggs canada, juicy couture outlet, converse shoes, wedding dress, pandora charms, doke gabbana outlet, louis vuitton canada, toms outlet, hollister canada, pandora uk, replica watches, louis vuitton, supra shoes, thomas sabo uk, montre femme, swarovski jewelry, sac lancel, ugg, karen millen, ray ban, ugg boots, juicy couture, michael kors outlet, timberland boots, iphone case, ugg soldes, ralph lauren
ninest123 09.09

10:34 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home