Do you believe that the bible is compatible with the theory of Evolution?Why or why not?
The Bible and Evolution
Posts
Total:
28
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
The answer to this question is contingent upon individual interpretation of the Bible. So...yes AND no.
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
Compatible is as compatible does.
Lay them side by side and there wouldn't be any problems.
People are the things that assume to have incompatible ideas.
For me...Creation then evolution..... And god theories evolved alongside the evolution of consciousness and memory.
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
I don't know but if the fact that evolution does take place invalidates any given religion I may have some bad news for proponents of that religion.
-->
@SkepticalOne
Don't let Stephen see your answer or he will think you are avoiding the question or worse - "running away".
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
Do you believe that the bible is compatible with the theory of Evolution?Why or why not?
I don't think the answer is dependent upon biblical interpretation but rather upon how evolution is defined.
-->
@Tradesecret
I don't think the answer is dependent upon biblical interpretation but rather upon how evolution is defined.
The process of evolution is the change in allele frequency from generation to generation.
The theory of evolution (as separate from the process of evolution) is the best explanation put forth by the scientific community to explain the diversity of species we observe in our world.
If either of these ideas invalidates your religion I may have some bad news for you.
-->
@Tradesecret
I don't think the answer is dependent upon biblical interpretation but rather upon how evolution is defined.
Its not a matter of how evolution is defined, but how well it is understood and accepted.
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
YOUR HYPOCRITICAL AND LAUGHABLE QUOTE: "Don't let Stephen see your answer or he will think you are avoiding the question or worse - "running away". "
You are the last person to state that anyone is RUNNING AWAY, whereas as just one example of many, you embarrassingly RAN AWAY as shown when you had your unbiblical ass handed to you in this debate, where you forfeited in round three! As "WhoPutYouOnThePlanet" in the said debate below, myself, and many others have explicitly shown, we own your outright Bible ignorance with ease! LOL
Now, as usual, take your silence to the above RUN AWAY fact like it will take away your embarrassment above, NOT! Shhhhhhh, mums the word for you!
NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN?
.
-->
@secularmerlin
The process of evolution is the change in allele frequency from generation to generation.The theory of evolution (as separate from the process of evolution) is the best explanation put forth by the scientific community to explain the diversity of species we observe in our world.If either of these ideas invalidates your religion I may have some bad news for you.
You made the statement it was a matter of interpretation of the bible. I think that is nonsense. True, many people interpret the bible differently. It does not change the fact that most people interpret it one way. In our world of fluidity, people will seek to do anything - their own particular way. It does not change the way something was supposed to be done. For example, evolution. There are many ways of defining what it is but just because people want to define it in their own way does not change what its true definition is.
This is why I say when asking the question about compatibility with the bible - is not about interpretation but definition.
Now I certainly concede that there are many well meaning and excellent Christians who hold different views on these subjects and indeed some of these hold quite different methodologies of interpretation. But I have never met anyone who holds that they are incompatible on the basis of interpretation.
In fact - most Christians I know hold to a form of what is called framework hypothesis. This means that they take the first 6 days of Genesis as described as a pattern and form of the world's creation. Not as a literalistic picture of it. These people have no issues with millions of years. Others see the days of creation as 1000s of years - a theistic evolution point of view. Others simply see the Genesis picture as a myth. Now please note that despite the fact that these three interpretations are in theistic belief the most dominant, the fact that they are all quite diverse from each other does not make it incompatible with evolution.
And let us go further to the kind of interpretation methodology used by some for Genesis. And while it is sometimes labeled literal, that is rather a crude way of describing the language which is used. In Hebrew language, like other languages, it has a range of genres, including poetry and prophecy, and history, and narrative and myth. And for each of these styles of genre there are particular language clues that indicate what the author is presenting. The interesting thing about the first three chapters of Genesis is that it uses a very specific type of genre clue that is used throughout the Bible. And the clue here is distinct from poetry and it is distinct from myth and it is distinct from prophecy. These pointers are that it is historical narrative. Now most academics recognize this even when they disagree with it. And it is one of the first things that academics have to deal with if they reject this position because the markings and pointers are so visible to the person reading in Hebrew. But it is an interesting matter all the same.
But even now is the historical narrative incompatible with evolution? Well I say - it depends upon how evolution is defined. After all if evolution is simply referring to process - to the fact that species change and adapt over time- then this fits perfectly with the creation position which also teaches the same thing. The Bible's explanation provides a perfectly rationale for the diversity on the planet. God made creatures with the ability to change and adapt.
So if this is the picture then they are both compatible. But evolutionists don't simply stop there, do they? No, then they speculate backwards. They need to explain their position - that it requires millions of years for adaption and change. And furthermore that not only do species change but from kind to kind. Although it is obvious they never use the kind. And kind to them is simply a word created by creationists to try and confuse the issue.
Hence it is the definition of evolution but not in the way defined by you above but in the way that it is unpacked that produces the incompatability with some in the bible.
The one thing that all Christian theists have in common no matter whether they are sold on evolution or not is that God is the creator of life.
-->
@SkepticalOne
I don't think the answer is dependent upon biblical interpretation but rather upon how evolution is defined.Its not a matter of how evolution is defined, but how well it is understood and accepted.
Accepted and understood as in dogma and doctrine? Believe this or be rejected.
-->
@Tradesecret
Its not a matter of how evolution is defined, but how well it is understood and accepted.Accepted and understood as in dogma and doctrine? Believe this or be rejected.
Exactly like that, but completely different... (lulz). Seriously, belief is not required.
-->
@SkepticalOne
Are you saying we don't have to believe in evolution - just accept because if we don't we will rejected. Wow! are you a high priest for the atheistic worldview?
This is what I would call extreme blind faith that you require. LOL!
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I did nor forfeit - the site did not work. That debate site does not work. You know and I know it and everyone else knows it. LOL!
-->
@Tradesecret
Nice strawman!
-->
@SkepticalOne
Is it?
A strawman is when I produce an argument that you don't believe but suggest you do - and then destroy it.
Which argument are you suggesting I destroyed that you do not believe?
-->
@Tradesecret
.
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
YOUR PERCEIVED AND WRONGFUL NOTION: "I did nor forfeit - the site did not work. That debate site does not work. You know and I know it and everyone else knows it. LOL! "
What is LOL in your case, is the fact that nowhere within any part of that debate or comment section does it show that there was a problem with the Debate site, understand Biblical fool? Your statement above just shows the membership that you will go to great lengths to hide your complete Bible ignorance, whereas in the case in question, you forfeited round three, and why are we not surprised? Can you spell R-U-N-A-W-A-Y, sure you can! LOL
NEXT PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN?
.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
I entered the debate - I was enjoying the debate- and the site stopped working. Even now it is telling me I have debates due - despite the fact that it did not let me in and now time has run out.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
YOUR CONTINUED AND EMBARRASSING EXCUSE WHY YOU RAN AWAY FROM A FORMAL DEBATE IN POST #18: "I entered the debate - I was enjoying the debate- and the site stopped working. Even now it is telling me I have debates due - despite the fact that it did not let me in and now time has run out. "
Once again, there is absolutely NO PROOF of your claim, other than your little girly excuse of hearsay! Like you have proffered before, if it isn't within the scriptures to prove a point, then it is not true: "Stephen wanted to make a point. I have only asked him to prove it from the bible. He has been unable to do so." https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4969-the-sons-of-god?page=2&post_number=26
Therefore, within the same vein as yours shown above, outright prove that the website stopped working, or forever once again be known as a continued RUNAWAY to biblical axioms where you had your Satanic ass handed to you by "WhoPutYouOnThePlanet" is said formal debate!
NO MORE "LITTLE GIRLY EXCUSES" SUBSEQUENT TO YOUR GENDER CHANGE INTO A 2ND CLASS BIBLE WOMAN, UNDERSTOOD?
BEGIN:
.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
ok. If you say so. Thanks for your assistance.
You made the statement it was a matter of interpretation of the bible.
I don't recall precisely which conversation you are referring to.
But even now is the historical narrative incompatible with evolution? Well I say - it depends upon how evolution is defined.
The process of evolution is the change in allele frequency from generation to generation.
The theory of evolution (as separate from the process of evolution) is the best explanation put forth by the scientific community to explain the diversity of species we observe in our world.
So I ask. Is this definition compatible with genesis as a historical narrative?
Although it is obvious they never use the kind. And kind to them is simply a word created by creationists to try and confuse the issue.
Ok so clear things up. Exactly what is a kind and why do you believe one species cannot evolve over time into another? We have observed that it is possible under laboratory conditions why not through a process of response to environmental pressures?
The one thing that all Christian theists have in common no matter whether they are sold on evolution or not is that God is the creator of life.
Yes that is the claim that they would need to demonstrate in order to be rationally justified in their beliefs.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
YOUR QUOTE ADMITTING THAT YOU WERE LYING REGARDING THE WEBSITE OF YOUR DEBATE NOT WORKING CORRECTLY: "ok. If you say so. Thanks for your assistance. "
No, I don't say so, but you do with your "little girly lame excuse" as shown above! As this forum and I have seen many times, you continue to bring forth lame excuses to RUN AWAY from discussion and debate when I or others hand your Satanic ass to you relative to the JUDEO-Christian Bible. Again, you are the perfect example of what a pseudo-christian acts and looks like, therefore, with this embarrassment alone, it is truly hard to believe how you can stay at this forum in being easily owned by me and others relative to your dumbfounded attempts in explanation of the Bible.
Well, as usual, you lost another one, sorry.
IS THERE ANY PSEUDO-CHRISTIAN THAT CAN ACTUALLY ATTEMPT TO PROVE THEIR POINTS WITH FACTS INSTEAD OF HEARSAY LIKE TRADESECRET CONTINUES TO DO WITHIN THIS FORUM? LOL
.
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Well, as usual, you lost another one, sorry.
LOL @ you.
Do you really think that people on this site did not leave the other site because it was working well? Do you really think so little of the people here that you would say otherwise?
Furthermore, given that your other allegations about me are produced by Harikrish, it does surprise me that you would raise them at all. I would have thought that even you - despite my better judgment would trust him about as far as you could kick him. Still I have denied the allegations and have nor reason to revisit them either there or here.
Have I lost? Lost what?
Unlike you, I still have my integrity. I don't have to resort to a somewhat weird caricature of everything I despise in order to be funny. I can't tell you how much the fact that you do this makes me smile. It is a little like Alex Baldwin doing his Trump impersonations. A person who does not care what the truth is so far as he gets a laugh. It really confirms in the mind of believers what atheists think of God and religion. And the fact that you use the scriptures out of context reveals that we need to our work even more thoroughly.
Still kudos to you. I am pleased to see you back.
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
Do you believe that the bible is compatible with the theory of Evolution?
Certainly.
Why or why not?
The Bible testifies about a Creator, creation is a process and evolution is a process, processes can be associated with intelligence so there is plenty of compatibility. Better put though, the proposition of a Creator is compatible with evolution (the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form) because the debate between evolution vs Genesis goes nowhere fast. If one assumes the creation account in Genesis to be a literal rendering rather than an idea of creation then the assumption that God just poofs things into existence without an actual process contradicts the theory of evolution.
But it is not necessary, there's no need to make the assumption that the first part of Genesis was the actual process of how God created our world. It's more like a picture play mixed with symbolism so that we get the basic idea. It just illustrates an idea of what God wanted, not really exactly how God did it. There's good indicators that the first few chapters are symbolic.....such as "God needed to rest.....man being created by the dust of the ground, woman being created with mans ribs, a talking snake, tree of knowledge of good and evil, a flying sword" ect ect...these are symbolic writings.
For God to bring something into existence there is a process for that to occur. Genesis was never meant to capture and record such a lengthy record of events, it's not supposed to be a scientific observation.
For example, "let there be light, and there was light" is the will of God (what God wanted) not necessarily how light was brought into existence. We know for light to exist there's a process that must take place for that to appear as light and we can show how that works.
6 "And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.
7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so."
Note it doesn't say HOW exactly the firmament appeared or HOW exactly the waters were divided, it just declares what God did not HOW God did it.
11 "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."
Again it just says what God wanted not how God did it..... it's like me writing "let there be cake" and "it was so" lol. Now if you were to take that at face value you might assume there was no process involved in making that cake but that's silly.
So by the time we get to "Adam" it's the same drill only the writers begin to use symbolism. Being created by the dust of the earth is another way of saying our physical bodies are made from the same elements as everything else. Eve being created by Adams ribs is another way of saying women and men were created to be paired. It's very simplistic not complicated at all. Of course the talking snake represents temptation, Adam and Eve are representative of mankind, the tree of knowledge of good and evil represents the mind and our participation in an environment of duality.
Generally speaking evolution is misconstrued to be a process that occurs as a means of its own doing, as well as all the processes that occur within the universe by the majority of atheists therefore generally speaking the religious oppose that notion. But no need to oppose that at all because creation is a process so the theory of materials evolving is compatible with Theism/creation.
The assumption though that processes (evolution) occur all by itself is foolish, to believe that inanimate forces could somehow begin to generate processes and bring forth intelligent productions as if they had minds is an absurdity. Materials are used and processes occur but as a result of thought and mind first, then the manipulation of energy, element, chemistry and physics. Look how these processes unfold and observe how energy acts within creation, it's very obvious that there is intention, an intention to bring about a desire effect. This of course indicates agency AKA God.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery,
YOUR QUOTE GOING NOWHERE IN PROVING BEYOND ANY DOUBT REGARDING THE WEBSITE IN QUESTION BEING BROKEN: "Do you really think that people on this site did not leave the other site because it was working well? Do you really think so little of the people here that you would say otherwise? "
Uh, you have yet to bring forth actual PROOF, that scary term for you, other than HEARSAY, understood? Maybe? Huh? And you are an alleged attorney in bringing forth hearsay only instead of empirical facts? Surely you jest! LOL!
YOUR LYING QUOTE ONCE AGAIN: "Still I have denied the allegations and have nor reason to revisit them either there or here. "
WRONG! You said yourself that you were an ungodly despicable sexual deviant, which in turn goes against the scriptures because your body is a Temple of Jesus which you DO NOT own, and to use it in despicable sexual deviancies, is totally wrong! (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). As explicitly shown, Harikrish handed your Satanic unbiblical ass to you in the thread in question many times that you tried to runaway from in despair, but could not because of your direct admittance of being an outright Satanic sexual deviant, period!
Do you want me to show you and the membership your post and link proving this actual fact, which would be biblical if I do? Huh? I am trying to save you even more embarrassment in front of this forum, as if your biblical ignorance wasn't enough to totally embarrass you, but when you LIE about this disturbing situation, that goes against Jesus' inspired words in the ninth commandment! Remember biblical fool, Jesus is watching you disgrace His words! (Hebrew 4:13), GET IT?
YOUR INSIPID QUOTE: "Still kudos to you. I am pleased to see you back. "
There is absolutely no need for you to continually KISS MY ASS, because when I am on a mission from Jesus to weed out pseudo-christians like you, there is to be no ass kissing to try in vain to make me feel that I should ease up on your biblical ignorance, DO YOU UNDERSTAND?!
-->
@BrotherDThomas
Do you lay awake at night thinking of me? I am so flattered. I have been wondering why I have been privileged to receive so much attention from you. And the only reason I can think of that makes sense is that the things I put forth get under your skin. Now I know you could not possibly admit or concede this, yet, it is the only thing that actually makes sense.
It must really gall you, that you are unable to get me out of your head. LOL! This explains the venom that pours forth from your fingers. Perhaps you are realizing the futility of your own thinking - I think this is great news. I will keep praying. I figure if GOD can save Paul then he can save anyone - including me and including you. That is great news.
-->
@Tradesecret
.
TRADESECRET, a Bible 2nd class woman NOW, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO, Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he/she follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, an admitted sexual deviant, and had ungodly Gender Reassignment Surgery, Satanic Bible Rewriter,
YOUR WISHFUL THINKING STATEMENT: “Do you lay awake at night thinking of me? I am so flattered.”
He/She, in your dreams! LOL!!!
YOUR COMICAL AND WISHFUL THINKING QUOTE #2: “I have been wondering why I have been privileged to receive so much attention from you. And the only reason I can think of that makes sense is that the things I put forth get under your skin. Now I know you could not possibly admit or concede this, yet, it is the only thing that actually makes sense.”
The attention that you are receiving from me, as well as the equal attention that your likewise dumbfounded of the Bible receive from the D-man, is from JESUS THE CHRIST as you Satanically try and REWRITE His Biblical inspired words! Understood continued Bible fool?
Take notice once again, you DID NOT address the additional questions posed to you in my post #25, other to change the topic, which easily shows the membership that you cannot address them, but instead, RUN AWAY from them as usual to “try” and save face.
Tradesecret, who has had Gender Reassignment Surgery from male to female, and remains SILENT upon this topic, therefore PROVING that you in fact had this Satanic surgery, your true MO within this forum has turned into RUNNING AWAY from biblical axiomatic posts to you. Satan is once again smiling in your behalf!
YOUR WISHFUL THINKING STATEMENT: “Do you lay awake at night thinking of me? I am so flattered.”
He/She, in your dreams! LOL!!!
YOUR COMICAL AND WISHFUL THINKING QUOTE #2: “I have been wondering why I have been privileged to receive so much attention from you. And the only reason I can think of that makes sense is that the things I put forth get under your skin. Now I know you could not possibly admit or concede this, yet, it is the only thing that actually makes sense.”
The attention that you are receiving from me, as well as the equal attention that your likewise dumbfounded of the Bible receive from the D-man, is from JESUS THE CHRIST as you Satanically try and REWRITE His Biblical inspired words! Understood continued Bible fool?
Take notice once again, you DID NOT address the additional questions posed to you in my post #25, other to change the topic, which easily shows the membership that you cannot address them, but instead, RUN AWAY from them as usual to “try” and save face.
Tradesecret, who has had Gender Reassignment Surgery from male to female, and remains SILENT upon this topic, therefore PROVING that you in fact had this Satanic surgery, your true MO within this forum has turned into RUNNING AWAY from biblical axiomatic posts to you. Satan is once again smiling in your behalf!
.
-->
@Jarrett_Ludolph
It's not really a question of compatibility, so much as whether there is any sort of evolutionary theory at all. There are no biology books in the Bible. Being taught in grade school that evolutionary theory was inspired by fossils and the studies in the time of Charles Darwin, I never would have imagined the authors gave it much thought. However, natural selection seems an intuitive principle that they would have been familiar with.