Creation vs Evolution

[Guest Jesus-lives]

Is the theory of Evolution contradicted by the story of Creation told in Genesis.

Most Christians I have spoken to seem to think so.

But surely they are complementary to each other in that the order in Genesis is the same as the order that scientists describe the evolution of the world? -

1. Heavens & Earth

2. Life beginning in the water

3. Plants

4. Life on land

5. Humans

Also there is the fact that God is outside time so a day to him may seem like a millions years to us.

This is a problem that I have been struggling with when confronted by non-Christians so any help would be much appreciated

[Bread_of_Life]

This isn't the order presented in Genesis.

The bible says:

"Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning

[fenwar]

Is the theory of Evolution contradicted by the story of Creation told in Genesis. 

Most Christians I have spoken to seem to think so. 

But surely they are complementary to each other in that the order in Genesis is the same as the order that scientists describe the evolution of the world? - 

1. Heavens & Earth

2. Life beginning in the water

3. Plants

4. Life on land

5. Humans

Also there is the fact that God is outside time so a day to him may seem like a millions years to us.

This is a problem that I have been struggling with when confronted by non-Christians so any help would be much appreciated

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Jesus-lives,

I don't think Genesis contradicts the theory of evolution, because I don't think the "days" are talking about the order in which God made everything. I think they're more designed to reflect the categories of things that the Israelites could see around them - land, sea and sky; the sun, moon and stars; day and night; plant life; aquatic life; animal life; mankind.

The first five books of the Bible are known as the books of the Law. While they contain some historical details, you should always bear this in mind - they're about establishing God's Law, so they contain the details necessary to do that - but they might not tell us things which aren't relevant to the Law.

Where other creation stories in cultures around the Israelites start with some of these things existing already, the Hebrew story makes the clear point that nothing we see now existed before God created it. It establishes God's sole right of authority over creation, and man's accountability to him.

This is true whether the creation took 6 days or 6 billion years. Genesis doesn't need to tell us about how God created everything, because that's not relevant to the fact that he alone is ultimately in charge of it, or that he created man for a purpose, or that man in his arrogance fell short of that purpose.

Hope that's helpful, obviously I'd love to go into tonnes more detail but I don't want to write a massive essay. This is just my opinion and I could be wrong! I know for sure that plenty of people here disagree with me. Feel free to ask questions.

-Fenwar

[halifaxchristian]

Why must Christians side-step into the non-believer realm??? Evolution is a JOKE. An absolute lie...PERIOD. God doesn't play tricks...7 days means 7 days.

Just to let you know: the founder of the religion/theory of evolution, Charles Darwin, recanted on his deathbed and became a born-again believer.

Talk about irony.

All things work together for good to those who are called...

God bless.

[fenwar]

Why must Christians side-step into the non-believer realm???  Evolution is a JOKE.  An absolute lie...PERIOD.  God doesn't play tricks...7 days means 7 days. 

I respectfully disagree. This is no more a "trick" than Jesus' parables or the Prophets' visions were "tricks". There are certain parts of the Bible that simply aren't meant to be read as literal history. I honestly believe that the creation narratives are amongst them.

Just to let you know: the founder of the religion/theory of evolution, Charles Darwin, recanted on his deathbed and became a born-again believer.

The authenticity of this story is highly doubtful, and in any case Darwin was not the first scientist to suggest the theory of evolution, nor was he the last.

-Fenwar

[halifaxchristian]

Why must Christians side-step into the non-believer realm???

[Remnantrob]

Why must Christians side-step into the non-believer realm???  Evolution is a JOKE.  An absolute lie...PERIOD.  God doesn't play tricks...7 days means 7 days. 

I respectfully disagree. This is no more a "trick" than Jesus' parables or the Prophets' visions were "tricks". There are certain parts of the Bible that simply aren't meant to be read as literal history. I honestly believe that the creation narratives are amongst them.

Just to let you know: the founder of the religion/theory of evolution, Charles Darwin, recanted on his deathbed and became a born-again believer.

The authenticity of this story is highly doubtful, and in any case Darwin was not the first scientist to suggest the theory of evolution, nor was he the last.

-Fenwar

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have to agree with halifaxchristian. a day is a day in the genesis account. If you question the reality/accuracy of it then you're more likely to question most other accounts in the bible that you as a christian must believe in if you say the bible is the authority of your conscious. (i.e. noah & flood acct.)

[fenwar]

Instead, you would still believe like the apostles in a literal creation in 7 days.  And you would STILL believe in Jesus' parables.

Which apostle said they believed in a literal 7-day creation? (Or a 6-day one for that matter?)

Where did I say I don't believe in Jesus' parables? I believe he told them, and he told the truth.

That doesn't mean the events in them actually need to have happened. Perhaps there really was a wedding where five of the virgins fell asleep and failed to trim their lamps, but five stayed ready. Perhaps there really was an unmerciful servant who, having had a large debt cancelled, threw his own debtors into jail. But there doesn't need to have been because that's not the point.

[Lekcit]

Good day all. While this subject is highly stimulating and partially engaging intellectually, I want to put my two tenths of a dollar in. I've posted this information before and it seems to go unnoticed every time.

In order to interpret any portion of Scripture properly, you must do one thing. You have to understand the language. Obviously the Hebrew word for "day" in Genesis is yom and yes it can mean a long period of time. So we must figure out when it means a literal 24 hour period and when it doesn't. If you look in all the instances in the Old Testament where yom is used for day other than Genesis 1 you see the following:

1. Every time yom appears with the word night it means an ordinary day

2. Every time yom appears with the phrase "evening and morning" it means an ordinary day.

3. Every time yom appears with a number it means an ordinary day.

Now look again at Genesis 1 where the word yom is used. What do you see? The word day used in conjunction with the word night, the phrase "evening and morning", and a number. Sometimes it uses more than one in a single instance and sometimes even all three. Now in contrast go to Genesis 2 where it says, "in the day God created." Does that mean an ordinary day? No because none of the prior instances are used. What does it mean? It means, "In the time God created.

Also, if a long period of time was intended there are many better, clearer Hebrew words to use other than yom to convey that meaning.

So since the only way God has to communicate with us is through language, the meaning is simple.

I hope this helps in some small way. Have a blessed day.

In Him.

[fenwar]

If you question the reality/accuracy of it then you're more likely to question most other accounts in the bible that you as a christian must believe in if you say the bible is the authority of your conscious.  (i.e. noah & flood acct.)

Hi Remnantrob,

Like the Creation and Fall narratives, the Flood is not something I feel the need to view as literal history. At very least to the extent that I don't think it needs to be a global flood.

Given the presence of Flood myths in other Ancient Near Eastern cultures it may be that there is some collective cultural memory of a Flood, but there is obviously a problem with this view in that the competing stories cannot all be true. My instinct is to see the Bible's story as a response to these other Flood narratives, and look for the differences to understand the point the Biblical version was making - which is about God's grievance due to sin, his reluctant yet righteous judgement and his mercy towards mankind - rather than about telling the reader about whether there actually was a Flood or not.

Remember Genesis was not written down at least until Moses' time. The stories may have existed in isolation before then. As we proceed through Genesis to Abraham and his family line, the focus becomes sharper as we get closer to the time of writing. The point is still not about writing a history, but now that God's relationship with man has been covered, we begin to see the unfolding of God's plan of salvation through his relationship with Israel. Again this special relationship has to be described here in order for the Law - which is given directly to Israel - to make sense.

Hope that's clear.

-Fenwar