Evolution

And that is different from saying it did happen, how?

No, they don’t, they take God’s first assertion about the universe and believe it, it is man’s assertions they don’t always trust.

Denying? Denying what, that it is inevitable that mutations will lead to evolution? Evolution has not been proved, so why is it inevitable that mutations will lead to evolution?

Thanks for being just another person to prove evolution by saying it happened or in your case inevitable, I hope you don't mind if I wait for a little more proof than that.

So?

 

You mean like updating a six day creationist theory by claiming the word "day" in the translated Old Testament actually refers to thousands are even billions of years, and not just a 24 hour cycle, to avoid the embarrassment of claiming that the Earth is only 6,500 years old?

The first five books of the Old Testament were written in Hebrew. The Hebrew word for day used in the genesis account is “yom”, which is a definite 24-hour period.

 

Why should I? I can imagine a lot of things, that included but that doesn't make it true. Are you just going to tell me again given enough time it's inevitable?

 

Personally, I lump creationist theory with evolution theory, neither one is true. So, no, the Bible says what it says and it does not say how long a creative day is, no matter what some idiot creationist might think or say.

As for the word “Day” this is what Strongs says:

3117. yowm (yome)
From an unused root meaning to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether literal (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term), (often used adverb) -- age, + always, + chronicals, continually(-ance), daily, ((birth-), each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, X end, + evening, + (for) ever(-lasting, -more), X full, life, as (so) long as (... Live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, X required, season, X since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), X whole (+ age), (full) year(-ly), + younger.

If you’ll notice it says; figurative (a space of time defined by an associated term).

So how long is that "space of time" that are creative days? If you’ll notice in Genesis the first six days end with the phrase “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” but the seventh day is not thus concluded; so when, more than 4,000 years after that seventh-day rest period began; in Hebrews 4:1-10 the apostle Paul indicates that God’s rest day was still continuing in his generation, this makes it evident that each creative day, or work period, was at least thousands of years in length.

And I didn’t have to change anything the Bible says to show that.

 

“Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work: But the seventh day is the Sabbath. . . . in it thou shalt not work... For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth… and rested the seventh day” (Exodus 20:9-11).

Sounds like a pretty long weekend by your math...

Adam was made on the sixth day (Genesis 1:26-31) which was supposedly thousand of years long. This was followed by the 7th day which was also thousands of years long. Following the 7th day, Adam fell into sin and was expelled from the Garden. This would mean Adam lived thousands of years, which is false, since he died at age 930 (Genesis 5:5).

Hmmm....

 

Just,https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=copOYXvEsRs

 

But doesn't Genesis say the days are demarcated by evening and morning? Or are those also a different kind of evening and morning than we mortals experience? And what about the sequence of creation? Were the "lights in the sky" really created after the dry land, oceans and vegetation? I think it was Origen in the third century who asked how anything could grow if there were no "lights". And were the sun, the moon, and the stars really created after the Earth? No wonder teaching this stuff in schools is controversial!

 

Yes but one must realize that we are talking about how God views things, not how we view them. To God the day of rest we are talking about would, to God, seem like one 24 hour day would seem to us.

It would seem that Adam was created close to the end of the 6th day and obviously it wasn't after the end of the 7th day that Adam sinned seeing as that 7th day was still going on at the time Paul wrote Hebrews 4000 years later and Adam at that time was long gone.

 

There is no reason to believe that the term “day” would be the same “day” for God as it is for us, in fact the Bible says that a 1000 years is but a day in God’s eyes.

The phrase “And there came to be evening and there came to be morning” could be just a figure of speech meaning that a complete “day” or time period had been finished. If the first 6 “days” of creation were only 24 hours as you seem to be suggesting, then why is the 7th day over 4000 years long as Paul points out at Hebrews 4:1-10? It would seem all the “days” should be the same length.

The Bible says; “In [the] beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Thus the sun, moon and stars were already created before the 7 “days” spoken of in Genesis 1:2-2:1. Those 7 “days” describe the preparation of the already created Earth for human habitation, from the viewpoint of someone standing on the Earth. So those "lights in the sky" are talking about what was now visible from the earth at that time, possibly due to a change in the atmosphere of the earth and not that they were at that time being created.

 

If a day is an era, why are an evening and a morning even mentioned? Actual days must be intended, otherwise, men who lived hundreds of years, e.g., Seth and Noah, would really have lived millions of years. If a day is an era, then a year must be tremendously long, perhaps encompassing hundreds of millions of years?

 

it's always seems to get down to what a day is ...24 hours?... a year? a eon..?

 

hm,
people who do not believe in evolution... are there any other scientific theories that you do not believe in?
im not trying to be sarcastic...
really, are there some other accepted and acclaimed scientific theories that are being disputed by the church or believers?

then again,
catholic church accepted the theory of evolution as a sound theory!
they incorporated it with the church teachings, some 10-20 years ago....
do you know that?

 

In this case...yep!

 

Very interesting question. None that I know of.

The Catholic church is not noted for it's defense of the Bible and what it says.

 

Yes. Blue eyes are caused by a mutation that lessons the ability of the OAC2 gene to produce melanin which give pigment to the eyes. In the case of an albino this gene is completed shut off.

May I ask where you are getting your information?

People with immunity to the black plague, small pox and AIDS have a mutation that shuts off the Delta 32 gene. This gene is resposible for the receptors on white blood cells. If it isn't working molecules such as the AIDS virus can't latch onto them.

 

No, blue eyes are not a mutation; hair color, eye color, skin color and height are not mutations, they are just part natural genetic variation.

 

Very interesting but why call it a mutation? Those people that had an immunity to the black plague had already inherited it, it was not a result of the black plague, that immunity was part of the genetic diversity long before the black plague of the middle ages and continues to be part of the genetic diversity down to this day.

 

Did I ever say that the mutation happened as a response to the black plague? I agree it was already in existence before the plague hit. "Genetic diversity" is a vague blanket term that doesn't explain anything. Where are you getting your information?

Care to provide evidence that mutations don't occur? And I'll give you evidence that they do.

 

So to understand your day reasoning, the supposed Noah could of been over a million years old?

Adam also?