Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Demonstrating Evolution from the Bible?
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 12 (30803)
01-31-2003 2:34 AM


I have a challenge for all of you people:
To demonstrate from the Bible the concept of descent with modification of organisms. And not just show that the concept is consistent with the Bible. If one can deduce continental drift from the Bible, as some have tried to do, it might surely be possible to demonstrate evolution.
For extra credit, demonstrate from the Bible that evolution is driven by natural selection.
I myself have thought of some possible demonstrations; I'd like to know what you people think.

  
Karl
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 12 (30811)
01-31-2003 6:32 AM


I have no more interest in such a project than I have in attempting to configure a router using a sink plunger.
Wrong tool, wrong job, wrong field.
On the other hand, it might be right next to the chapter on geophysics....

  
lpetrich
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 12 (31792)
02-09-2003 3:54 PM


OK, I'll throw my hat into the ring.
Here is a Biblical demonstration of evolution by natural selection.
The Bible has an abundance of genealogies in it. Why might these be present? They are neither very entertaining nor very edifying, at least on the surface. However, they could be a hint that genealogies are something to look for in the world around us. And that's an important part of evolutionary biology -- phylogeny is genealogy under another name.
As to natural selection, we have a hint from Matthew 3:10, "he ax is already at the root of the trees, and every tree that does not produce good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire." and from Matthew 7:19, "Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire." This means that the reason that we see those that are good at surviving is that those that are not very good at surviving have a tendency to not be represented.
I hope that these arguments are not too absurd.

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 12 (31796)
02-09-2003 4:14 PM


I'm sure we could find similar evidence in such spiritual guides as 'Alice in wonderland' and the legends of robin hood

  
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 12 (31803)
02-09-2003 5:22 PM


Though, like Karl, I'd say that the Bible isn't concerned with modern science so doesn't directly address such issues, there is one point I'd take this opportunity to make.
The Bible records many instances of God using processes to achieve his goals. He took 12 normal blokes, and through not much more than them talking to other people, and those people talking to others, formed his Church. Infact, now I think about it a bit, the Church is his new people that developed out of his old people; a bit analagous to one species evolving from another.
Alan

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by truthlover, posted 02-18-2003 1:33 AM Dr Cresswell has not replied

  
drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 6 of 12 (32311)
02-15-2003 1:11 AM


Ipetrich,
You took that scripture out of context my friend. That scripture is talking about judgement.
Dr Cresswell,
By your statement were you saying that God is done with Israel? There is always a remnant of jews that are Christians. In fact there is a prophecy that was written 2,500 years ago that Israel after 2,500 years of exile would be brought back into their own land(Ezekiel 37). In 1948 they became a nation. It is also written that they will become a Christian nation before the return of Jesus Christ(Romans 9-11). Written almost 2,000 years ago.
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 02-15-2003]
[This message has been edited by drummachine, 02-15-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Dr Cresswell, posted 02-15-2003 2:17 PM drummachine has not replied

  
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 12 (32336)
02-15-2003 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by drummachine
02-15-2003 1:11 AM


That a new species evolves from another doesn't necessarily mean that the older species ceases to exist. It is quite possible for the two species to co-exist and continue to evolve seperately. The analogy isn't very strong, more an observation.
Alan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by drummachine, posted 02-15-2003 1:11 AM drummachine has not replied

  
Gzus
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 12 (32361)
02-16-2003 9:50 AM


I sense a desperate attempt by christians to make their scriptures fit in with science

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Dr Cresswell, posted 02-16-2003 10:55 AM Gzus has not replied

  
Dr Cresswell
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 12 (32369)
02-16-2003 10:55 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Gzus
02-16-2003 9:50 AM


Nothing desperate from me. The Scriptures do not, IMO, teach science. Except to the extent that I believe both science and the Bible teach truth, and so can't contradict each other (which is part of why I reject reading the opening chapters of Genesis as a literal historical account). Therefore, I'm not trying to make Scripture fit with science - though I am willing to admit to using science at times to illustrate a Scriptural theme.
Alan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Gzus, posted 02-16-2003 9:50 AM Gzus has not replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 10 of 12 (32523)
02-18-2003 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Dr Cresswell
02-09-2003 5:22 PM


Alan,
I think I really like the stuff you write and your attitude. Very pleasant to run across your posts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Dr Cresswell, posted 02-09-2003 5:22 PM Dr Cresswell has not replied

  
drummachine
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 12 (32982)
02-23-2003 9:47 PM


‘But the Bible’s not a science textbook, is it?’
Editorial by Carl Wieland
First published in:
Creation Ex Nihilo 22(2):4
March—May 2000
This common objection to believing the straightforward history of Genesis has, in one sense, a simple answer ‘No, it’s not’. Dr D. James Kennedy correctly says about the Bible, ‘It is not a scientific textbook. It is not a textbook on religion. It is not a textbook at all; it is a revelation from God!’1
Keep up to date with the latest creation information!
Creation Magazine
Keep your family informed on the latest easy-to-understand evidences for creation and against evolution! This unique full-color family magazine gives God the glory, refutes evolution, and gives you the answers to defend your faith. Exciting articles and great witnessing material you won't find anywhere else! Includes a beautifully illustrated full-color children’s section in every issue. Powerful ammunition to intelligently discuss nature, history, science, the Bible, and related subjects. Delivered to your home every three months!
MORE INFO / PURCHASE ONLINE
But it is a loaded question; most who ask it presume that a ‘no’ answer means that the Bible’s authority does not extend to matters related to science. This is of course illogical. A novel about apple orchards could refer to apples falling down (rather than up) in accordance with the known facts about gravity. It could be completely accurate scientifically without its purpose being to teach science.
One reason put forward for saying that Genesis is ‘non-scientific’ is that the account is brief. But since when does brevity equal inaccuracy? As a minister friend says, when we listen to statements about the weather, we expect them to be based on totally accurate scientific data, despite being brief. ‘We don’t expect lengthy scientific explanations with details on the force of gravity vs the humidity and wind speed to generate rain fall. We just want to know whether it is going to rain in our area. Yet we expect extensive scientific explanations in the Bible for it to be taken seriously.’2
The Bible’s prime purpose certainly concerns salvation, not scientific explanation. But to use this to evade the clear teaching of origins in the foundational book of Genesis is intellectually illegitimate, if not dishonest. What if that approach were consistently applied? The Bible isn’t a mathematics textbook, either. But does that mean that if the Bible were to insist that ten divided by two equals six, it would make no difference to its ‘message of faith and salvation’?3 Of course it would a world of difference! What sense would it make to trust it as the Word of the all-powerful Creator who never lies and to commit one’s eternal destiny to its promises in ‘spiritual’ areas? As Jesus said, ‘If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how shall you believe if I tell you heavenly things’ (John 3:12)?
Even though the Bible’s purpose is not to teach history as such, the history it teaches is true. It states that Jesus was crucified at a specific moment in real history via a specific person, Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea. It would be bizarre to claim that it didn’t matter whether these events were true or not, ‘because the Bible’s not a textbook’.
The account of Jesus rising from the dead cannot be classified as only one form of truth; i.e. it cannot be a Christian or ‘religious’ truth without at the same time being a historical truth (unless language loses all of its meaning); and it cannot be historically true unless it is also scientifically true.
The same applies to Genesis events e.g. the statement that God took a rib and made Eve. As theologian Dr Douglas Kelly makes clear in this issue (p. 24 see Creation at the academy), Genesis presents such things as plain facts of history. So the question of whether the Bible is a science textbook evades the real issues, which are to do with its claim to total truth and authority. It is meaningless to claim that scriptural authority applies only to ‘religious things’, since the Christian Gospel is all about real things, the real origin, history and destiny of man and the universe. Remove its claim to authority in the realm of science, and you are actually removing it from any relevance to the real world. Sadly, this is exactly what compromise with evolutionism/long-ageism has done in many minds.
Creation magazine helps people to reconnect Scripture and reality. This is why its ministry has transformed countless lives. The less you keep its message to yourself, the more you become an ally in the spread of the wonderful Good News of salvation.
References and notes
Kennedy D.J., What if Jesus had never been born? Thomas Nelson, Nashville TN, USA, p. 105, 1994. Unlike the Bible, textbooks rapidly become out of date in any case.Return to text.
Broadwater D.A., email January 2, 1998. Return to text.
For any who have been misled by a common bibliosceptical assertion, the Bible does not claim that pi (p) is exactly 3; see Grigg, R., Does the Bible say pi equals 3.0? Creation 17(2):24—25, 1995. Return to text.

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Andya Primanda, posted 02-24-2003 1:53 AM drummachine has not replied

  
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 12 (33004)
02-24-2003 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by drummachine
02-23-2003 9:47 PM


...and Drummachine have just turned from preacher to salesman. Makes me wonder, what the difference is between the two professions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by drummachine, posted 02-23-2003 9:47 PM drummachine 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