Debates discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
The Archives
>
Creation vs. Evolution
Creation, have you ever gone to the creation museum
Mod
Mod
Mod
Mod
Yes. I approve. XD
Creation in exactly 6 days, I don't have a strong opinion on. I've heard the whole debate on "1000 years is one day to God" blah blah blah. To me, everything was created lol the "Science", if you want to argue it [and we could] doesn't contradict God. Just the timing is when people start to fuss.Here's where I'm prepared to get heap piled on... XD
I believe in micro-evolution (as such was Darwin's original "Theory of Evolution" actually based on). Macro-Evolution is horse poop, though.
Elizabeth L. {Attend me, Mortal} wrote: "Creation, have you ever gone to the creation museum"I haven't been to the Creation Museum, but I've been to the Ark! It's honestly soooo cool!
So obviously, I'm pro–creation. I'm also a firm believer in the principle of the Young Earth, specifically ~6,000 years.
E wrote: "Creation in exactly 6 days, I don't have a strong opinion on. I've heard the whole debate on "1000 years is one day to God" blah blah blah. To me, everything was created lol the "Science", if you w..."I agree that "the Science" doesn't contradict God. Rather, I think it supports the Bible.
Also, I think macro–evolution is fake, too. However, what do you define "micro–evolution" as? Adaptation? Or something else?
I think the biggest problem with evolution and the Big Bang Theory is the large amount of unclear, foggy grey space.I mean, if you honestly dig through the definitions with an open mind, you'll find the definitions get murky the further you go
Also, for the record, I'm actually studying the sciences, and specifically physics. So people, you really can't say I've traded science and academia for "religion" — I'm doing both.**"People" and "you" being a general audience
Mod
E: I believe that the whole 6 days of creation is actually really important, but we can clash over that if only if you really want to.
As Asia said, how do you define "micro-evolution?" If you're referring to natural selection, meaning that animals can adapt to their environment, as well as variation within kinds (meaning large groups of animals, for example canines), then I agree with you. However, if you mean something else, tell me! I want to know!
And Asia, you need to see the Creation Museum. It's inspiring! :) I'd like to hear more about your definitions of macro vs. micro evolution. For the purposes of this debate, how are you defining them? And can you give me an example of what you mean when you say that the definitions get murky? I'm curious where you're coming from!
Macro vs. Micro
*In a nutshell
Macro is the most commonly "accepted" / well–known definition of evolution. It essentially means that one species evolved into a more complex species.
Micro is basically more commonly referred to being "adaptation" and natural selection and variations within kinds.
Mod
Macro vs. Micro
*In a nutshell
Macro is the most commonly "accepted" / well–known definition of evolution. It essentially means that one species evolved into a more complex species.
Micro is..."
I agree with your definitions and this is how I have been defining them as well. That being said, macro is a heap of bull sandwich, and micro is actually fairly accurate in my opinion.
Murky Definitions
What I've seen happen is the differences between macro and micro evolution begin to shrink until they begin to mean one and the same . . . until they don't. People use them to mean the same thing, when convenient (like, when it comes to convincing Christians). Then, when it's no longer necessary to call macro evolution adaptations it shifts back to meaning large scale evolutions.
If this sounds confusing, it is.
Denali wrote: "Asia (semi–hiatus) wrote: "Macro vs. Micro
*In a nutshell
Macro is the most commonly "accepted" / well–known definition of evolution. It essentially means that one species evolved into a more ..."
I agree, mostly.
I agree that adaptations occur, but I don't think the word "evolution" is particularly the best choice.
Yes! I'd also love to know what is/are murky...micro... and macro!Yes! I want to see the Creation Museum and The Ark... but maybe only in my DREAMS... :)
I believe the BIBLE more than 100%, that's why I'm also 6 days creation... :) and not 1000 years a day... :)
Hmm, I don't know a whole ton on this topic, but I believe in evolution. Of course I believe that God created the world. It was actually a Catholic priest (whose name escapes me at the moment) who created the 'Big Bang Theory'. Genesis is know for its use of storytelling methods, not necessarily all supposed to be taken completely literally. Obviously the Bible is never wrong, however, there can be storytelling license (such as in the Song of Solomon 'Her Eyes Are Doves'SoS 1.15, obviously her eyes are not literally doves, just that they have the beauty and grace of a dove. and don't forget the Parables.), I believe that the author of Genesis (which would be Moses, who, remember wrote these books thousands of years later, even if evolution is false), used devices similar to parables to show the creation in a comprehensive way.
I hope that made sense.
I think the above comments sum up Micro vs Macro lol today's common use of evolution in in reference to "Macro", but Darwin's original theory was actually only referencing "Micro" (i.e. Darwin's finches)Denali, I don't have a strong opinion one way or another (Same thing with Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, Post-Trib), but totally open to hearing your thoughts on it!
message 24:
by
Denali, Head Mod a.k.a. Meradoch ~ Oversees All Debates
(last edited Nov 22, 2021 07:05PM)
(new)
Mod
Mary-Therese, I'm going to pounce on you and I sincerely hope you don't mind. I've actually heard many people use this argumentation, that Genesis was mainly poetic, and I just can't get on this bandwagon. These next statements are my opinion, shored up with evidence I believe I have observed. I do not intend for them to have bearing on how you think I think of you or anything of this sort. However, I like debating. So I'm going to attack your position.
I was unaware that the Big Bang Theory was invented by a Catholic Priest. This is something new.
I'd also like for you to perhaps elaborate a bit more as it seems to me you've made a contradictory statement: How can you believe in evolution (things happened by chance) and God created the world (things happened for a purpose) at the same time? Obviously, if I'm misunderstanding your point of view, tell me!
I'm actually going to jump on your very first statement: "Genesis is know for its use of storytelling methods, not necessarily all supposed to be taken completely literally."
To begin with, I'm not entirely sure where you got the phrase that Genesis is known for its storytelling methods. Yes, there are moments of poeticism, but I'm not sure where you're getting this from. Please tell me more!
"Obviously the Bible is never wrong, however, there can be storytelling license (such as in the Song of Solomon 'Her Eyes Are Doves'SoS 1.15, obviously her eyes are not literally doves, just that they have the beauty and grace of a dove. and don't forget the Parables.)" I would not contest you here. Yes, the Bible does tell stories, and it is poetic in many places. HOWEVER, Genesis is not one of these places, and here's why. If you're interested, I'm sure I can find some experts to quote to back up my claims:
1) Ancient Hebrew poetry usually involves parallelism: meaning that oftentimes a line will be stated, followed by a second line that means something very similar. This device is used quite often in the Psalms. If you want examples, I can find them.
2) Genesis, specifically the Creation account, does not utilize parallelism, and thus there is very little reason to believe that this is simply flowery language meant to illustrate a point. Now, I know that you're going to point out that Jesus didn't use parallelism in any of parables, but keep this in mind: Jesus was speaking during "modern" times. He was not using ancient Hebrew, and He was speaking to common people, using stories to illustrate his points. However, Genesis taken in context would have been written in ancient Hebrew, and thus if it were meant to be poetry, it would have been clear.
I believe that the author of Genesis (which would be Moses, who, remember wrote these books thousands of years later, even if evolution is false), used devices similar to parables to show the creation in a comprehensive way.
I'm a bit concerned with this statement, and here's why: keep in mind that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Moses was writing under His inspiration, which would mean only two things: 1, if God wanted him to write figuratively, He would have said so, and thus Moses would have done so in an undeniable way. 2, if God didn't want Moses to write figuratively, He would have told Moses what to write, and Moses would have written it. There's very little evidence that Genesis was meant to be figurative, and so the only way to make it so would be to say that God was incompetent in His inspiration of Scripture. I think you and I can both agree that this probably wasn't the case.
Okay, so I literally just did that because I like debating people. If anything sounded insensitive or rude, please tell me as I did not mean for it to sound so. I would love to hear your opinion on this, and if you feel I misunderstood anything you said, please let me know.
Mod
Oops, my mistake. I responded to the wrong comment. Mary-Therese, have fun reading through all of that! XD
Mod
I may be wrong, but I believe Darwin was also talking about how natural selection could have led to ameoba to man type evolution. Am I wrong?
Soooo, Denali, I'll try to deconstruct what you said as well as I can XDWhen I talk about believing in "Evolution", it's in reference to "Mircro" [adaptability to the environment], which is scientificly proven, and does not dispel the Creation narrative
As far as diving deep into original writings, you're talking to an Ashkenazi here, sooo things might get really messy and confusing if you want to dive into narrative vs original writing vs passed down tradition.
As far as Genesis being poetry, it actually is in Hebrew? lol it's actually written as one giant song (source: I grew up in the temple, we read from legit scrolls written in the original Hebrew, it's that's one of the first thing that is taught (singing/chanting the text))
Your argument to God's word being divinely inspired and thus meaning it must be read quite literal (over figuratively) is something I disagree with. There are many parts of the Bible that are to be taken figuratively, taken with understanding of that era's environment, and/or with understanding the the writer's didn't have proper understanding and language to understand what it going on (i.e. the book of Revelation, as well as many of the prophecies concerning Christ)
Coming back to the debate: Creation I believe on. I have no opinion on the literacy of "6 Days". So convinve me XD
Mod
When I talk about believing in "Evolution", it's in reference to "Mircro" [adaptability to the environment], which is scien..."
Lol are you telling me I have two people who are taking Genesis figuratively? XD Okay, so I'm going to respond to this comment tomorrow as I have a lot to do the remainder of this evening, but I look forward to continuing this debate! :)
Mod
Yes! I want to see the Creation Museum and The Ark... but maybe only in my DREAMS... :)
I believe the BIBLE more than 100%, that'..."
Hey Arnie, maybe you can weigh in on this debate too, considering you believe in six day creation. What has convinced you?
And Darwin came up with the Theory of it, but didn't actually believe it. He studied the origins of life and came up with several theories, asking other people with it. The idea took off like wildfire, though, and he got credited with things he didn't believe and ideas he didn't even talk about or create (i.e. Survival of the Fittest)
Lol I don't take the whole of Genesis figuratively, I was just refuting one of your claims of "God's divine inspiration and word" = "must be taken 100% literal". "6 Day narrative", however, have no opinion on so will be waiting for your response XD
Denali wrote: "I'VE SEEN BOTH CREATION MUSEUM AND THE ARK AND THEY'RE SOOOO AMAZING!!!!!"
I'VE SEEN THE ARK TOO!!!! I LOVE ITTT
I'VE SEEN THE ARK TOO!!!! I LOVE ITTT
Also I'm going Creation! There's so much evidence!!
@Denali, Like I said, I'm not the most eloquent speaker, so thank you for responding with the stuff that was unclearWhen I say that I believe in evolution and that God is the creator of all, I mean that I believe that the world has evolved from when it was first created, but that God planned the end result from the beginning because he is God and he doesn't make mistakes.
Thank you for pointing my first statement out, that was not entirely true and I apologize for that. I ment, as you said that it has poetical moments.
I would be very interested in the examples of parallelism in the psalms, if you could give me some suggestions I would be grateful.
I may be wrong, but when you Moses was divinely inspired, I take that as he was filled with the will of God, but I don't believe that God was dictating the pen as Moses was writing, instead filling him with the knowledge he needed to be able to share the creation with the people.
wow, I love debating like this. It is very interesting
Also, the sun and moon were not created until the fourth day(Gn 1.14), so 24 hour time like we know it wouldn't even have been there the first three days
Mary-Therese wrote: "Also, the sun and moon were not created until the fourth day(Gn 1.14), so 24 hour time like we know it wouldn't even have been there the first three days"Yeah, but it says "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
So there was day and night before the sun and moon were created
Mod
Micro-evolution isn't really evolution in the strictest sense. Micro-evolution is a slight change, but never a change in species. Macro-evolution is totally extrapolating, which we all know is very unreliable (and so is carbon dating! Just had to put that in there! XD)
Mod
When I say that I believe in evolution and that God is the creator of all, I me..."
So you don't believe in a literal 6 day creation??
@Kat, I see what you mean. however, later it says 'Then the Lord God said: "it is not good for man to be alone. I will make him a suitable partner" So the Lord God formed various wild animals from the ground and brought them to the man to see what he would call them'(Genesis 2.18-19). Couldn't God have named the light and the darkness after he had created them?
Mod
What do you mean?
Mod
How come?
Mod
I do need to sleep at some point here though, so I'm putting this epiicccc debate on hold for tomorrow when I will come in and discuss!!!
Also, E, you point something very good out. I believe I went a bit too far with my Moses statement, and I apologize for that.
However, I still believe literal 6 day creation and I'll get to that later, bringing some scripture into it, etc.
Good night friends!
Lily, I have my full argument higher up in the feed
Mod
(thisis what happens when it's late and I can't think right lol)
I’m hopping in tomorrow too!
Mod
oooo i've been to the ARK!
Mod
I'm def. a young earth creationist. And I also think the world is somewhere in the 6000's so therefore once it turns 7000 that is the resting period, or thousand year reign because God rested on the 7th day of creation.
Pianissimo wrote: "I'm def. a young earth creationist. And I also think the world is somewhere in the 6000's so therefore once it turns 7000 that is the resting period, or thousand year reign because God rested on th..."That’s actually very interesting; I’ve never thought of it that way….
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
I think everyone has figured out where I stand. I'm 100% six day, young earth creation. However, I'd love to debate with y'all about evolution and old-earth creation, including gap theory, etc, etc. I find this topic super interesting and really enjoy talking with people about it, whether we agree or not.
Talk to me, my friends! :)