Though I would disagree you have every right to believe that that is the case. I would however simply add that the belief in theistic evolution and OEC do have strong support Biblically which i suppose is the main point of the OP.
toldailytopic: Theistic evolution: best arguments for, or against.
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Though I would disagree you have every right to believe that that is the case. I would however simply add that the belief in theistic evolution and OEC do have strong support Biblically which i suppose is the main point of the OP.
I believe we all recognize that the created processes in Genesis are still present with us today. --tolkien
The processes are still with us but the creation of them is not. I do not follow your logic of how this makes the days in which the processes were created more than a normal day.
The processes are still with us but the creation of them is not. I do not follow your logic of how this makes the days in which the processes were created more than a normal day.
St. Augustine thought so. The initial creation, he thought, was instantaneous, with all things developing from that creation. It's not just Christian belief, it's also consistent with the evidence we see.
I agree, he tried it again i see since i posted last, quoting himself out of context, when i went line by line in my post, its so sad to see someone keep lying when they know others can see it also.
As you say it was the creation of processes therefore we would understand that such functions/systems require time, do they not? The six days involve fiats and that is the completion of God's "work". "And God said..." is the sole operative agent... He spoke the natural processes into action, mediate creation. When God commands the land to "bring forth" we can comprehend that time is involved, it should not create an image in our minds of vegetation, birds, animals, etc. instantly appearing because that is not what Genesis states.
In Genesis 1:27 we are told that ""...male and female He created them." and in 1:31 "..it was very good...". In 2:7 we learn that "..the man was formed" and that in verse 15 he was placed in the Garden of Eden "to work it and take care of it". Verse 18 speaks to "It is not good for man to be alone." obviously contrary to 1:31. Verse 19 begins with Adam naming the animals...finally the woman. (Thank you Lord!) Then Adam exclaims "...now..." or "...at last..." in verse2:23. Though God declares in 1:31 "...it was very good." to be meaningful it is obvious that the sixth day could not have been 24hours for all that occurred in the listed sequence of events.
Further it is not a question of what God is able to do, but rather what is layed out in His word before us. How does this incredibly complex universe of systems, processes, and functions that meaningfully suggest evolution and time in any way diminish God?
False dilemma! As stated previous the six days entail fiats not the completion, thus incipience relative to the divine processes. Do you deny that the Bible states mediate creation/natural processes?
Why not just believe that God did what He said He did WHEN He said He did it?
Six days entails completion of the creative process. God did not say "ok plants, here is how it is going to go. These are the mechanisms by which you are going to grow. I have supplied you with all the ingredients necessary, now take off". He made every plant in existence at the garden of eden whole, he did not use natural processes to create them. That is why I asked you if God created everything or natural processes. No false dillema here. The dillema is that you have a couch potato for a God that did not create a single thing, but simply watched.
Exactly, that is what I believe!
The six days involve fiats and that is the completion of God's "work". --tolken
God did not create anything by the issuance of fiats. That is absurd. What you are saying is the natural processes already existed without any help from God and were sitting around waiting for permission to start doing their thing. This implies cognitive will on the part of inorganic matter. That is insane.
God did not create anything by the issuance of fiats. That is absurd. What you are saying is the natural processes already existed without any help from God and were sitting around waiting for permission to start doing their thing. This implies cognitive will on the part of inorganic matter. That is insane.
The false dilemma is that you assert that one must hold to your two possibilities by simply ignoring the possibility that was presented. But all of that aside, I would suggest that only a superficial reading of Genesis would allow one to ignore that God created processes for life to thrive and that such functions require time. God created (ex nihilo) the fundational/raw materials immediately and the processes for life to thrive mediately. You are simply ignoring what is clearly written as to God's creative work and with that a lame attempt to minimize the very systems and processes ordained by Him and plainly stated in Genesis.
(Actually the Hebrew word in Gen. 2:8 denotes to sprout or grow...a process)
Further, you seem to dismiss the time frames concerning the sixth day relative to Adam working and tending the garden, naming the animals, etc.
Voltaire, I'm not trying to be flippant but have you read Genesis??? If you do you will note that each day begins with "And God said..." followed by a command or fiat. What would you call each "Let there be..", "Let the water...", "Let the land..."??? Again, don't put words in my mouth I never suggested that the processes existed previous but were put into "action" by His command...just like it says in the Bible! "And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures..." So clearly the processes were ordained/created/commanded by God...and one would note that in every first instance God did not make something but rather said something (Heb. 11:3) which would logically lead to "..without him nothing was made that has been made". (John 1:3) Please explain what exactly "Let the land..." means other then mediate creation?
At no time did I suggest that "inorganic matter" had "cognitive will" that is simply not understanding what was written or perhaps my not being clear or your attempt to not engage responsibly in this discussion.
What are those other evidences? As far as I can see they all support "six days" and "the whole Earth".
I believe I've explained clearly the Biblical justification for theistic evolution and OEC...is there something specific that needs further explanation? How does the command "Let the land produce (or bring forth) living creatures" not strongly infer an evolutionary process?
It might, on it's own.
But when it also says creation took six days, it is not reasonable.
Again I believe the Bible speaks to six command or fiat days. I reference what I had noted previous - In Genesis 1:27 we are told that ""...male and female He created them." and in 1:31 "..it was very good...". In 2:7 we learn that "..the man was formed" and that in verse 15 he was placed in the Garden of Eden "to work it and take care of it". Verse 18 speaks to "It is not good for man to be alone." obviously contrary to 1:31. Verse 19 begins with Adam naming the animals...finally the woman. (Thank you Lord!) Then Adam exclaims "...now..." or "...at last..." in verse2:23. Though God declares in 1:31 "...it was very good." to be meaningful it is obvious that the sixth day could not have been 24hours for all that occurred in the listed sequence of events.
I will have to address anything further tomorrow although there is basic hermeneutic reference in Genesis to support the structure of the six day/fiat interpretation.
You think there was not enough time to get the things done in one day?
First, the sixth day begins with a command to initiate a process "And God said, Let the land produce living creatures..." . The language can not be more clear that a God ordained process was created. If one chooses to infer immediate creation from this they do so by totally ignoring what is plainly written.
Subsequently God "plants " a garden which in Hebrew also states a process (2:7-9, "to sprout and to grow" which does not imply either immediacy or completion). In verse 15 he was placed in the Garden of Eden "to work it and take care of it". Either he was placed in the garden and tended it or this is just a throw away verse, because tending it would have required time. The man was instructed as to what he could and couldn't eat, and so logically one would assume from the passage that he took the time to eat, and realistically would have sampled the various plants and fruits. Verse 19 begins with Adam naming the animals and birds a function of time. (One could question whether God had all of the animals and birds form a line for Adam to name them or more meaningfully that over a period of time as Adam had some understanding of animal characteristics, habits, etc. gave them appropriate names) Verse 2:23 which again clearly implies that a span of time had past in order for him to exclaim "Now" or "At last". How can a reasoned mind not see the necessity of time involved not only on day 6 but throughout the creation account?
Six fiat or Command days (not necessarily consecutive, indeterminate length, and overlapping) to me best interprets the Genesis account. There is unison with the 6 day account in both Genesis and Exodus 20:11. There is no conflict between TE/OEC and science except from the extremes on the right and left.OEC and