Creation vs Evolution

[Trust & Obey]

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}>

The problem with the "day is like a million years" argument is that God tells us, in the Bible, that they were literal 24 hour days.

Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

Exo 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

In the passage above, God likens the "days of creation" to the same days that we live now here and now. God likens the 7th day that He rested to our 7th day of the week here and now.

God uses His example of resting on the 7th day to show the children of Israel that they, too, should rest on the 7th day.

God does not say, "now, my 7th day was really a multi-million year time period, but since you are not alive that long to you it will be just a 24 hour day.

From Exodus 20:10-11 it is abundantly clear that the "days of creation" were not "time periods of millions of years."

They were literal 24 hour days, as we have now. Perhaps there was a slight variation because we now know that the speed of light and the passage of time are physical properties and they are showing evidence of slowing down very, very slowly.. But, if you reverse the clock to the time of creation it is not significant enough to change the issue.

[Trust & Obey]

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.

halifax, the "Darwin recanted on his deathbed" story is totally unsubstantiated and is highly unlikely.

You are 100% correct though about "7 days being 7 days."

[fenwar]

Wah, so many posts to keep up with, I'm lagging in my replies...

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.

Thanks for this...

To clarify my point - I'm not disputing whether the "days" are literal 24 hour days or not. What I'm saying is that the whole thing is a parable. It may well describe creation using six (or seven) 24-hour periods, but nowhere is it saying "this is exactly how creation happened".

Just as a side point, is there anywhere other than Genesis 1 where "yom" appears with the phrase "evening and morning"? I've always seen this as a rather poetic turn of phrase (as opposed to "morning and evening" which would be the "right" way around) - to give the passage a rhythm and memorability, rather than to make sure the reader understood that this was "a normal day".

Thanks,

Fenwar

[halifaxchristian]

If the 7 days of creation are not literal...are adam and eve literal? If not, is the fall of man literal? If not, is sin literal? Is satan literal? Is the Word of God literal? Where do you draw the line? Do you make the distinctions between reality and fiction...or does God???

[Remnantrob]

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

Thanks for the response. My answer to the statement you made and I bolded is

II Peter 1: 21For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Moses didn't just make up stuff that he heard, the HS inspired Him on the accounts that took place. I can't say that I think the Genesis acct of creation and the flood are just moral stories similar to the parables of Jesus' days just because there are some critics, I believe the stories to be true accounts because the bible says so and that is the standard by which I am driven. I'm sure you're as convinced in your mind about those accounts as I am convinced about what I've been taught and have read. Not judging, but using the logic you do I can understand why an athiest questions the bible because it seems like some goods stories. Anyway, thanks again for your response.

[Trust & Obey]

If the 7 days of creation are not literal...are adam and eve literal?  If not, is the fall of man literal?  If not, is sin literal?  Is satan literal?  Is the Word of God literal?  Where do you draw the line?  Do you make the distinctions between reality and fiction...or does God???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

halifax, in the context you provided... what does "literal" mean? Do you literally mean "literal?" Or is it figuratively literal?

[halifaxchristian]

If the 7 days of creation are not literal...are adam and eve literal?

[NITE OWL]

Evolution is a joke. It's nothing more then the devils doctrine. But for all of you out there that still have questions....

Let's say it all started like they say it did. Bang, water, sea creatures.

Why would a creature that lived under water feel the need to grow legs and crawl out of the ocean? They have the whole ocean to themselves. They would have no enemies since they are all the same. But let's just say something happened and one was born with a set of lungs. Wouldn't it drown? How would it know to go to the surface for air? Again, let just say it did. How would it reproduce itself? Wouldn't it need a mate?

These questions could go on forever. Evolution makes no sense. If a fish did in fact crawl out of the ocean, what would eat? The only life on the planet would be those little creepy crawlers in the water.

What about plants? Where did they come from?

They say we evolved from monkeys. Why are the monkeys still here? Why aren't there fossil records of mans evolution? Evolution happens over a long period of time. Why aren't there fossils that record this gradual continuous change?

I've seen fossils of baby dinosaurs but have yet to see one of a full body human. I've seen plant fossils said to be millions of years old but nothing that even comes close to being human. I've seen fossils of creatures so small you need a microscope to see them, but nothing human.

Back to the fish and the ocean. Once they got up on land, how would they survive? There would be no oxygen. But wait...I know what you're thinking. Plants came first. But how would they survive without carbon dioxide?

For every plant, for every living creature that lives on this planet there's a question of why.

Evolution just doesn't make sense. That theory is so full of holes you could read a newspaper through it. Scientists can't even explain the sudden explosion of life on this planet. And these guys went to college.

I could go on for days but I have to go check the mail. Think about these things I have written. Just because someone has a college degree doesn't make them right. I'm not a comedian but I know a joke when I see one.

Don't let satan blind you to the obvious. He's not that bright. If he was, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

You all have a good one and keep those questions coming.

In His name.

[mrs]

 

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.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually Darwin wasn't the founder of evolution - he stole most of his ideas from his grandfather.Some form of evolution is all through Greek history.

Also Darwin didn't recant, this is a popular and false rumour.

[fenwar]

From Exodus 20:10-11 it is abundantly clear that the "days of creation" were not "time periods of millions of years."

They were literal 24 hour days, as we have now.

Again this is an interesting point.... I must admit this is the only real "problem verse" for my interpretation although I hope I can offer a plausible explanation.

In addition to what I've just said to Lekcit, what I'd say about this is that the story doesn't have to be literally true for the commandment to be true. It's obviously not critical to the establishment of the Sabbath, as it is left out at the repetition of the 10 Commandments in Deuteronomy 5.

The sabbath principle is not confined to days; as we see in Leviticus 25, sabbaths can be measured in years and "weeks" of seven years. So even if the verse does justify the six days being real periods of time, it does not establish them as 24-hour days.

In so much as the reference does establish the Sabbath, then, to me it is not about how long God spent creating but the fact that we are told he "rested" at all.

One key point about this in the Genesis passage is that God "rests" because his creation is complete - not because he's tired! He is satisfied with everything he has done and it is sufficient. The commandment is bringing this to mind, in order to tell the Israelites that it is perfectly possible to do all the work they need whilst still allowing themselves sufficient rest.

are adam and eve literal? If not, is the fall of man literal? If not, is sin literal?

Adam and Eve do not have to be literal characters for the Fall and sin to be real problems. As Paul says, "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". Of course I believe this is true, just as you do.

Genesis 3 presents the fall in terms of one man not living up to the simple purpose God gave him, and also in terms of that man seeking to become God's equal; to decide for himself what was right and wrong. In presenting these problems right at the start of the story of man's relationship with God, the author is telling us that these are the fundamental problems - this is the root of where it has all gone wrong.

That's my response in a nutshell... I won't have time to reply any further today but will get back to any outstanding queries tomorrow.

Fenwar