Why Believe in Genesis – Part 2

31 thoughts on “Why Believe in Genesis – Part 2”

1. Kim June 5, 2012 at 10:58 am

   I’m in the middle between a creationists and an evolutionist… I was raised in a Christian home and I used to believe strongly that only microevolution occurred but then I got to thinking…

   Is it not entirely possible that the small, yet very significant changes in the species populations over time could indeed make a new species? for instance take the dog example which is accepted as an example of “micoevolution” by creationists…say there is a chihuahua and a great dane, technically being the same species they should be able to reproduce offspring…however, the incompatibility of their stature and reproductive organ size would make it very difficult to happen in nature (although humans may be able to force it). For example, if the great dane was a female it would be very difficult for the chihuahua male to initiate intercourse given it’s smaller stature. Furthermore, if the chihuahua was female there is a strong likely hood that 1) the larger great dane reproductive organs would be incomapible or 2) the likely-larger pups wouldn’t survive in the limited uterine space…so here we have two animals produced by “microevolution” that are virtually incapable of reproducing with each other. Although their potential offspring would be viable, similar to how wolf and domestic dog offspring are viable currently, over time due to reproductive isolation could this difference not become significant enough to create a “new species” where the offspring are not viable? Currently domestic dogs are sub-species of the wolf indicating some, but limited reproductive compatibility. I guess what I’m trying to say is overtime (and that’s evolutionary time and not biblical time) is is not possible that sub-species could convert into separate species given 1) geographic isolation and 2) reproductive isolation?

   I’m anticipating a response along the lines of it’s all microevolution that I’m describing because they are all of the “dog-kind” that God created…but could this microevolution lead to macroevolution given the appropriate amount of time? And I know there is large disagreements between biblical time and evolutionary time…and that’s another issue…but do you all think it is possible that “microevolution” is our observable version of “macroevolution”?

   Also, something that has been bugging me…I’m a microbiologist and creationists always say that mutations (which evolutionary theory is based on) only create negative effects…that’s not true! Think immunity and antibiotic resistance, those are advantageous mutations. Mutations introduce DIVERSITY they are not inherently negative or positive. It’s the environment that determines whether a given mutation has positive or negative effects on the species and this is what evolution is based on…not the quality of the mutation itself.

   I’m not trying to advocate for either…I’m honestly just really confused about the whole creation V. evolution thing and how creationist seem to half-believe evolution in the context of “microevoulution”, but then denounce some of the fundamental bases of “microevolution” (ie: mutation).

   1. loswl Post author June 6, 2012 at 11:41 am

      Hi Kim, thanks for the questions, I can feel your frustrations by the questions you are asking. First thing you should know is that the word ‘evolution’ originated in 1622 and derives from the Latin evolution, “unrolling, from”, as in a parchment, and this is actually the perfect way to think of both Darwin and Evolution in their context.

      Pedantics will note that Darwin used the word ‘evolved’ and not ‘evolution’ in Origin of Species, which seems a little picayune – there are good reasons he did not use it and only popular context demanded he include it by the sixth volume of Origin of Species, though he clearly preferred “descent with modification.”

      Evolution is an extremely new word and concept on how life came about and it is thrown around very loosely like fact. Words are not the master of science; science is, or should be, the master of its words.

      Micro-evolution is an even newer word, which resonates better with what the Bible teaches in Genesis, that living things will reproduce after their kind, not “other kinds”.

      Micro-evolution is simply a change in gene frequency within a population. Evolution at this scale can be observed over short periods of time — for example, between one generation and the next.

      There is really no confusion in my mind between micro and macro evolution. Nobody has ever observed macro evolution of anything, but on the other hand we all have observed some type of small changes even within species, every child that is born in our family is a little different from the first child in that family, in fact it is a completely new child and no other child will ever be the same…basic changes occur in our family gene pool, this is a simplified version of what happens, but it’s quite obvious that God allow for changes within species, we can see that with humans, animals, plants, fishes, insects and birds, it is not a mystery.

      Darwinian or Macro-evolution would suggest that one specie can change completely, like a bird changing to a dinosaur lizard etc. which is totally ridiculous. If you are interested in why I say Darwinian/Macro-evolution is ridiculous, please read a previous post we did on the whole topic of evolution and all its faults, it is very interesting. (some of the questions you asked are answered in the series)

      Evolutionary Tales Exposed – 13 Part Series:

      https://www.inspiks.com/page/3/?s=evolutionary+tales+exposed&x=0&y=0

      And no I do not believe that if a Chihuahua and a Great Dane were to mate, that over time they would develop a whole new species of animal, what would happen is a production of a very funny looking breed of dogs, but they would still be dogs 🙂

      Just remember, that your relationship with Christ is of paramount importance. When God returns, I doubt that he will ask you if you believe in evolution or creation, He will be more concerned about what you have done with his Son Jesus Christ and if you believe in His death and resurrection.

2. jbarry June 26, 2011 at 9:19 pm

   Hi Lucas,
   You believe in mico-evolution, not evolution (The Evolution Theory) Typically, micro evolution is observable changes in a specie due to four different processes: mutation, selection (natural and artificial), gene flow and genetic drift. for example, bacterial strains that have antibiotic resistance. This is still being studied under a section of biology called Population Genetics, so all the reasons for the observable changes are inconclusive.

   Evolution (organic evolution), on the other hand falls under Macroevolution, a study which focus on change that occurs at or above the level of species or population. Example, birds came from dinosaurs or man came from monkey. This is what we do not believe in, because it is not observable and there are many hoaxes surrounding the study and also there are scientific laws and studies that goes against this belief system.

   And yes, as you say, “God created all creatures on the earth” – to multiply, each after it’s own kind – this is also observable.

   1. Lucas June 26, 2011 at 9:34 pm

      jbarry, I am sorry to inform you that micro- and macro-evolution are purely fictional names for the same thing. I’ve done research into it, and all evolution is basically the same. It’s just that atheists use it as substitute for God. It’s the same kind of evolution, except it’s just being used in the area of creation, instead of the intended area (nature).

      1. jbarry June 26, 2011 at 9:56 pm

         LOL! You are right they both are based on change due to the four different processes: mutation, selection (natural and artificial), gene flow and genetic drift. The only thing is that there are few defense for Micro evolution and non for Macro. Everything about evolution is fictional 🙂 I am learning more and more about it and it’s laughable that they teach it as fact. tnx

         1. loswl Post author June 27, 2011 at 1:10 am

            I think there is some confusion here has to what Lucas believes, let me try to clear it up a bit. I think Lucas believes in Theistic Evolution (please correct me if I am wrong)

            The definition of Theistic Evolution:
            “Theistic evolution or evolutionary creation is a concept that asserts that classical religious teachings about God are compatible with the modern scientific understanding about biological evolution. In short, theistic evolutionists believe that there is a God, that God is the creator of the material universe and (by consequence) all life within, and that biological evolution is simply a natural process within that creation. Evolution, according to this view, is simply a tool that God employed to develop human life.” – Wiki

            We have to be very, very careful as Christians not to try and mix evolution with the Biblical accounts of creation. God did not use evolution to create the heavens and the earth. God did however create different species, that went on to multiply and there can be seen today, variations within species of animals and plants. This is actually NOT evolution, just variations within species. As I have said before, evolution is an extreeeeemly loooong process that happens over millions and millions of years. The changes that occur, within species (even humans) happens very, very fast and we can see that happening around us, for example when two different dogs mate, they have a beautiful variety of offspring’s, this is done within a periods of months, not millions of years, the same process can be done with cattle and plants. It is not destructive to the specie and no mutation is involved, it is actually beneficial.

            1. Lucas June 27, 2011 at 11:14 am

               I believe what the Bible says: God created everything. However, evolution is also real, and, unlike “scientists” say, is really small. God created all animals, not just one animal that all other animals came from. Interspecial changes is what I believe, and it is the changes which we DO observe. God created wolves, and evolutionary changes (again, very small ones) added up so that dogs began to happen. God was behind it all along tho; I don’t believe evolution just displaced him since he created it, along with all other real science. Small changes r provable, but that doesn’t mean I believe all life came about through evolution, since that’s just crazy-talk and makes no sense once u break it down. Plus, evolution helps explain how Noah fit all the animals on the ark: a few pairs of snakes or lions or horses, etc. could, thru evolution and reproduction, become MILLIONS of pairs of snakes or lions or horses, etc. Please tell me if I still don’t make sense.

         2. Lucas June 27, 2011 at 11:05 am

            Science observes that evolution within species (I guess I’m trying to be more specific) is real. However, evolution that creates species isn’t real: it is unobservable and the only proof scientists have for it is that humans have bones like monkeys, and some dinos had arms that looked like birds’ bones. I do not believe God just sparked life and let evoluion do everything (this is in part also a response to loswl). I believe God created snakes and wolves and all other animals, but the small changes in evolution r what he let create different colored snakes, or different sized wolves/dogs, etc.

            1. loswl Post author June 27, 2011 at 11:50 am

               Thanks for sharing that Lucas, I understand what you are saying now, for the most part that is what I believe too, that changes within species is a natural phenomenon which is observable. I have actually seen it happen with eg. Plant breeding. I have seen it done also in animal breeding, with goats, cows and dogs and it also happens naturally in nature.

               The only reason, I personally would not use the word “evolution” is because the word has many, many meanings and implications and when we use the word we have to first give a definition of what kind of evolution we are speaking about, because the most common understanding of the word EVOLUTION is… “Darwinian Evolution” which promote changes from one specie to another, basically it promotes “speciation” a process whereby a single ancestral species splits into two or more “different” species. I totally do not believe that at all. 🙂

               1. Lucas June 27, 2011 at 12:06 pm

                  Neither do I believe it. It has no basis in fact. And it denies the One True Living God YHWH. Bad “scientists”! ;D

                  1. jbarry June 27, 2011 at 12:10 pm

                     Lucas, I think we are explaining the same thing, just differently. I used micro evolution (small observable changes in species). However you used evolution within species to describe these small changes. I am fine with that, just may be confusing for some because evolution by itself is a presumptuous category of study which I think some christians try to blend with Creation.

                     What you describe is what we see in Genesis 1 & Genesis 7 example Genesis 1:24: Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so.

                     Man reproduce after his own kind, therefore from Adam, the first man and Eve, the first woman, came all the races we know today. Although we call it micro evolution or evolution within species – it’s God’s natural way of inbreeding. However, as in some animals eg livestock, man needed to narrow the scope of this mating between close relatives because they lead to what is called deleterious traits. This is why, now we do not mate with family members. We are all brothers and sisters, all came from Adam and Eve

3. Lucas June 26, 2011 at 1:42 pm

   Personally, I believe evolution and the Bible. I believe God created all creatures on the Earth, but there is also evidence that over many years small changes in animals can add up. However, I see no evidence whatsoever that humans came from the first monkeys, or that birds came from raptors. “Scientists”-reading-this, dogs come from wolves, that doesn’t mean wolves came from lizards. 🙂

4. BRILLIANTX November 7, 2010 at 11:31 pm

   About my belief, loswl,I believe that JESUS is not the second Adam, He is the word that created all including Adam.

   1. jbarry November 8, 2010 at 9:43 am

      Hi Mr X
      The doctrine that proclaims that Jesus is the second Adam is taken from the Bible in Romans 5:11-16

      11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
      12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification.

      If we look at verse 14 which says Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

      It clearly point out that as Adam was the first born of creation, so also, Jesus will (was) the first born of the new creation.

      Now that is a figurative description of Christ and Adam – Adam is describe as one “who is a type of Him who was to come”.
      Adam was the one that sinned, Christ is the one that did not sin. By Adam came death but, through Christ, who also suffered because of our sin, came life for all who believe that He is the Son of God.

      Your second pronouncement about Christ is right and is Biblically based in John 1:1-10

      1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend[a] it.
      6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all through him might believe. 8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. 9 That was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.[b]
      10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

      This is another Biblically based doctrine:
      basically the last verse (v10) explain the whole thing. So yes, we can agree on this.

      10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.

      1. loswl Post author November 8, 2010 at 10:18 am

         BRILLIANTX, I am happy we believe that Jesus is the Word that created all including Adam. I believe that too. Amen! I gave you the verse in scripture that spoke about the Second Adam 1 Corinthians 15:45-49 and jbarry gave you others, please check those out. We may have the same core beliefs about Jesus, but our interpretation of scripture is truly different.

5. David St Claud November 7, 2010 at 12:19 pm

   Thanks for your ministry INSPIKS. Interesting conversation here. Thanks for the verses loswl, helpful stuff.

   1. loswl Post author November 7, 2010 at 12:43 pm

      You are welcome David St Claud, very encouraging that people are being blessed by the ministry 🙂

6. BRILLIANTX October 31, 2010 at 9:00 am

   Okay loswl, as you said “you don’t need to try to interpret the Bible, the Bible interprets itself” I ask you to do the same. Just do the following for me:
   Write Genesis 3:4-5 on one side of a page, then write Genesis 3:22 on the other side. Don’t they sound like a prophesy fulfiled?
   I’m sure you are aware that the Bible does not say the snake was the devil. that’s your interpretations.
   To jbarry,nice car right there , huh! Well you said it yourself “Evolution says, from that one microbe, all life on earth was derived.” Let me put it bluntly: those who believe that human beings and apes came from one ancestor are not different to those who believe that blacks and whites came from one couple, Adam and Eve.

   Yes, jbarry,”Creation says, all life was created by God and God commanded all life – birds, fish, cattle, man, etc to be fruitful and multiply.” that’s Genesis 1 Now go to Genesis 2 and you’ll find the following:
   – Adam was formed from dust not commanded.
   – Eve was formed fro the rib as an after thought for friendship not for multiplication.
   -To Eve, givimg birth was a punishment, not a blessing
   This is the truth in the Bible.
   I can see, jbarry, that you want to twist the term multiplication to mean diversification; it doen’t. Nowhere shall multiple of (4) result into (A) this is why the statement you left out in your analysis is very important: each after its own kind. I can see that you have an open mind.
   Let us not ignore the answers provided by the Bible. The Bible shows the absolute truth that you can see just by looking around you. The Bible is not even shy to tell us about bestiality. Imagine how many types of people were born out of that before Moses banned it! You must also realise that Moses was for the Israelites only; thus other nations did not stop at the same time as the Israelites.
   Again if you think that Genesis 6. and verse 4, in particula, was a lie or a complicated part of Bible history, it is not the fault of the Bible, but what you want the bible to say.
   The truth does have a shattering effect on doctrines built over many centuries. That’s why Jesus was crucified. Though he showed them what is contained in their books, they continued to think that it was not a revelation from God. They thought it was blasphemy and lies. I already touched slightly on Jesus, The Son of the living God as He puts it in John 10:34, but the creation story seem to have stired a lot of emotions because the human race made a lot of progress towards coexistence and peaceful relationship. But I have no doubt that many “white” churches have a similar concept, they just can’t be as eloquent as i’ve been when explaining it.
   If you look closely at what I said you will find answers to things such as global warming and various phenomena created by snake education.

   1. loswl Post author October 31, 2010 at 12:23 pm

      Dude, I don’t know where you are coming up with these false doctrines, but in my opinion, you are preaching doctrines of demons!! I am not mad at you, this is just what I see, your explanations for what you believe are very contradictory and confusing, you are basically all over the place with your apologetic (defense of the Gospel). You are so puffed up (arrogant) with your snake theology (demon theology) that goes against Gods Word. Yes the snake is the devil, the Bible interprets that for us in.. Revelation 20:2, Revelation 12:9

      This is why I say Doctrines of Demons:

      1. You preach two creations, the Bible teaches only one creation, it just gives more focus on Adam and eve in Chapter 2. That is just basic English literature.

      2. You preach that the snake (Devil) did not lie to Adam and Eve. The Bible teaches that the Devil lied to them and was cursed because of his deception Genesis 3:13-14

      3. You preach that sin means to leave the purpose for which one is created. which is partial truth. The Bible teaches that sin is transgression and rebellion against God and his laws. 1 John 3:4, Deuteronomy 9:7, Isaiah 14:12-15

      4. You preach that, if Christians believe that all human beings came from Adam, it shows they also believe in evolution. The Bible teaches that all humans are decendants of Adam and Eve, Acts 17:26-27, Genesis 3:20. The Bible also teaches that Christ is the second Adam. 1 Corinthians 15:45-49. In Genesis 2:7 it speaks of the first man, Adam, becoming a living person. Adam was made from the dust of the ground and given the breath of life from God. Every human being since that time shares the same characteristics. However, the last Adam or the “second Adam”—that is, Christ—is a life-giving Spirit. Just as Adam was the first of the human race, so Christ is the first of those who will be raised from the dead to eternal life.

      5. You preach that God did not make Adam in His own image, but the image was stolen by Adam. The Bible teaches that Adam is the first man and God made Him in His own image. Genesis 1:26, Genesis 2:7, James 3:9, Romans 5:12

      6. You preach that Eve’s punishment for her sin was childbirth. The Bible teaches that Eves punishment was the pain during childbirth, desire for her husband and the rule of man over her life Genesis 3:16. When God created man and woman he Blessed them with childbirth, childbirth was not a curse it is a gift. Genesis 1:28.

      7. You said that God rested after the seventh day of Creation. The Bible teaches that God rested on the seventh day, he finished ALL his work on the sixth day. Genesis 2:1-2

      You make many assumptions about Christians and Christianity, I still am confused as to what you are and what you believe! Are you a Christian?, do you believe that Christ came, died for your sins, resurrected and is now at the right hand of The Father?

7. BRILLIANTX October 31, 2010 at 5:07 am

   When Jesus started to preach the truth he came across various reactions. Many people even said what he said and did came from mammon and not from God, despite the fact that what Jesus said was in their religiou books.
   The passion with which lowsl responded to my post is interesting. “For He made from one [common origin, one source, one blood] all nations of men to settle on the face of the earth…”, Acts 17:26-27″ to just fall into the hands of evolutionists like this is amazing
   The amazing thing about truth is that it has a shattering effect and that is the reason Jesus was crucified. I know we need to be sensitive in order to apprecite the progress humankind has made towards coexistence and the Bible was used to extreme ends in the past, but if we are to preach the Kingdom of God, truth cannot be compromised for the sake of peaceful coexistence. My point of departure may threaten the foundation upon which the Church and “Christian” theology was built over many centuries, but when this truth is fully expounded you will almost feel paradise in your lifetime.

   jberry, your statements shows that you agree with me. your main argument is about the degree of change “evolution”. for an example

   “Evolution says, from that one microbe, all life on earth was derived.” Let me put it bluntly: I say those who think that human and apes came from one ancestor are not different to those who say blacks and whites came from one couple i.e.Adam & Eve. Both are evolutionists not creationists!

   And your are correct:
   “Creation says, all life was created by God” But the Bible does not say God commanded all life – Read your Bible again; the people in Genesis 1 were created the same wasy as animals, but Genesis 2:7 says Adam was formed from the dust. Those who say Genesis 1 is a short summary of Genesis 2 are the ones who make the Bible seem contradictory and eventually spoil the truth about God: the birds, fish, cattle, human beings, etc. created in Genesis 1 were created male and female at the same time in order to be “fruitful and multiply.” I’m sure that you are aware that you left out the statement that say-each after its own kind.
   Idon’t know about yours, but my Bible does not leave blank spaces when it comes to creation. it also shows a great degree of bestiality in the old Testament. Imagine how many kinds of people were born before this practice was banned by Moses! I’m sure you are aware that Moses was only for Israelite. So the practice continued in other nations.
   The whole truth about God and his creation is in the Bible.
   I’m very surprised that lowl choose to be angry instead of appreciating the truth reflected in the Word of God. The Bible does not say the snake was the devil. It was an “intellectual”. i fully agree that the Bible is self-explanatory. Now I beg you to write Genesis 3:4-5 on one side of a page; then write verse 22-24 on the other side. Don’t try and explain them! Are they not in agreement? Remember, read the Bible for yourself and protect your mind against all the doctrines that you call “foolishness”. Remember that Jesus,The Son of the living God, was crucified because people who “knew scriptures” relied on human teachings and when the truth about God showed up, they called it blasphemy despite the fact that it is right in their books.
   i wanted to continue expounding on Jesus’ accomplishments. but the creation issue seem to evoke serious emotions.
   But this is the truth of the Bible:
   -Adam was not made in the image of God, but stole the God characteristics using the education of a snake
   -Eve was created after long thinking, not to produce children but friendship with Adam and for this reason, the female descendants of Adam and Eve were not attractive to their male folk. And this is the reason for the extinction of pure descendants of Adam. To Eve, giving birth was a punishment from God, while to those created in Genesis 1, it was a blessing.

   There is one part of the Bible that “Christians” avoid: When God restesd after seven days He did not retire permanently from creating. The creation in Genesis 2 happened after God came out of resting. I don’t know if i need to elaborate on this, but I want you to see how the Garden of Eden was created-Genesis 2:6. Now look at Europe-misty,snowy just cool enough to preserve a certain skin type. Look at Africa what skin type is appropriate for that climate?
   I can see that you want to twist the word “multiply” to mean diversification. It doesn’t. A number can only be multiplied by its fellow numbers. 2 X B cannot produce anything of progress, but 2X2=4-more progress.

   I will take this conversation to my blog later.

   1. jbarry October 31, 2010 at 3:25 pm

      Amen loswl – and I for one do not think you are showing anger in your response.

      @ Mr. X, you misunderstood my explanation, I think I made it too long – I tend to do that sometimes.

      Do I agree with you, that belief in the biblical creation and diversification of the human race is like believing in evolution? No.
      Do I believe in the multiplication and diversification of the human race from one origin, Adam? Yes (after his kind – not from another kind, the monkey or any other beast to that of man)

      Evolution says again, ALL LIFE, ALL LIFE, everything you can see around us that has life – came from one microbe that came from a rock. That’s the basic evolution theory.

      Our belief does not say anything close to that, it’s actually contrary to that. God created all the living things, different animals, different plants, different birds etc and man (Adam, singular). From each of these kinds, we get a variation over a short period of time.

      See: Genesis 11:1-8
      It’s only after this incident in Genesis that we had different languages – which in our world, is usually stapled with different races. If we read the book of Solomon, we see that his bride was black and I’d make the assumption that if blacks were around then so were the other race – this is thousands of years after Genesis.

      “Song of Solomon 1.5, “I am black and comely…” The problem here is that the Hebrew word for black is the feminine form shehorah, which means that the person making the statement is female. It is therefore the bride in the song cycle who is black, not the bridegroom. In Song of Solomon 5.10 the bride describes her bridegroom thus “My beloved is white and ruddy…” ~ The Chisholm Source

8. jbarry October 30, 2010 at 1:03 pm

   @ BRILLIANTX Hi, you said, “I also realized that if Christians believe that all human beings came from Adam, it shows they also believe in evolution.”

   That thought does not align itself with biblical knowledge. If you want to confuse the issue you must also speak about origin of life – The Bible says God made man from the soil, some scientist says, life started from a rock (origin of first microbe) which, according to them, took millions of years. That’s as close as it come to a mixture of both teachings. However, remember it took God only six days to complete His creation task.

   As for Evolution and Creation Growth:
   Evolution says, from that one microbe, all life on earth was derived.

   Creation says, all life was created by God and God commanded all life – birds, fish, cattle, man, etc to be fruitful and multiply.

   It is from this multiplication that we get different types of dogs, cattle, races of men etc. However, notice there is no transition from one specie to another – we have different species of dogs, different specie of cattle, and races of men – no monkey changing to a man over time. This is not evolution – there is no change of one specie to another. None.

   So, if God had created one microbial organism on the face of the earth, we would have different variations of that organism today but, not a new organism. Every time you catch a cold, you’ve caught a new form of the influenza virus that your body is not immune to. And the next time around another, the virus changes and become more or less resistant, but you will not wake up one day and catch, for example, the AIDS virus which was developed over millions of years from a flu virus. Not gonna happen

   Lets look at Macro evolution and Micro evolution:
   You can call the development of different types, Micro Evolution (small changes of features in some animals over time) if you want – since you could argue your point there – but not even science will agree with you.

   However the root of the evolution guess is that one life form, a microbe, transitioned to all other forms (Macro Evolution) over time, to be exact, millions of years – you will find nothing in biblical studies that agrees with that – unless you argue it in your mind.

   So the issue here is with Micro evolution – which has some scientific/biblical basis of truth but cannot be used to explain derivative of different species from one original specie.

9. BRILLIANTX October 30, 2010 at 3:36 am

   I like the following statement in your article:
   “I encourage you to take another look at the Biblical accounts of Genesis for yourself, your eternal destiny relies on it. Do not place your destiny in the foolishness of man!”

   Like many people, I only relied on the skewed views of others when it comes to the Bible. But after I read your article I was encourage to read the Bible as a book of evidence and not just a Church or Christian book and I found the that: the evolution theory cannot be correct. I also realized that if Christians believe that all human beings came from Adam, it shows they also believe in evolution
   Christians will have to explain how blacks and whites evolved from Adam. The Idea of African weather vs European weather is not sufficient explanation because feature such as eyes, nose and others surely cannot have evolved due to weather or temperature

   I therefore challenge you to take the advice you made of reading Genesis for the truth that is reflected there, not from the perspective of Church or Christianity.

   You quoted Genesis 1:26, somehow you just seem to ignore that human beings created here were very different from Adam and Eve.

   Adam and Eve, created in Genesis 2:4-25, were not made in the image of God, neither were they given any form of authority or Independence of thought. The main purpose for creating Adam was farming (“to till the land”)They stole God’s likeness using the education of a snake. See how far education took them!
   Genesis 3:22, shows that the snake was not lying: God did not want Adam and Eve to be like him or those He created in Genesis 1.

   I must say that after reading the Bible for myself, I realized that sin means to leave the purpose for which one is created.
   Genesis 6 shows that Adam descendants became extinct as the males preferred earthly female. They started to abduct and rape abuse Earthly ladies and these sexual relations produced a mixed race. Remember that Earthlings were made in the image of God. The reason they did not fight Adam descendants is not because they were weak: The Bible says they were giants (think of Sarah Baartman). What caused them not fight Adam descendants is their immense Godly characteristics.
   Genesis 6 says the mixed race inherited the physical structure of earthlings and the sinical spirit of Adam descendants. They seriously challenged the attitude of Adam descendants and the escalation of this conflict (or violence) is what triggered God’s wrath(the flood)

   The reason this truth was avoided by Christians and the Church is the misconception of the terms children of heaven and earthlings:It was the belief that Earth is inherently evil and humans were made for the Holy Heaven that made the Church and Christians to shy away form the truth of Genesis and thus the whole Bible. The word children of heaven or of God means people who don’t have authority on earth and their sense of direction is entirely in the hands of God. See how Jesus puts it in the book of John10. At Verse 34 of the same chapter, Jesus tells them that they are gods(generation of earthlings)

   I’m saying that Education of a snake or “science” has taken the world too far from God and Christians must realize that they are too far from the doctrine of Jesus.
   I know it is easy to credit science with all innovation, but a closer look reveals that most of the things that made our life easier were created through revelation rather than education.

   1. loswl Post author October 30, 2010 at 10:57 am

      BRILLIANTX, thanks for reading the post. at the same time I am kind of concerned about your skewed interpretations of the Genesis accounts. I will try to address some of your statements.

      “I also realized that if Christians believe that all human beings came from Adam, it shows they also believe in evolution.”

      I don’t know how you came to this realization, but it is not from God. The Bible says that we have one origin not two.

      “For He made from one [common origin, one source, one blood] all nations of men to settle on the face of the earth, having definitely determined [their] allotted periods of time and the fixed boundaries of their habitation [settlements, lands, and abode], So that they should seek God, in hope that they might feel after him and find Him, although He is not far from each one of us.” Acts 17:26-27

      The Bible does not explicitly give us the origin of the different “races” or skin colors in humanity. In actuality, there is only one race—the human race. Within the human race is diversity in skin color and other physical characteristics. Whatever the explanation we may try to create, the most important aspect of this question is that we are all the same race, all created by the same God, all created for the same purpose—to glorify Him.

      There is no indication anywhere in the Bible that God created any humans other than Adam and Eve. …So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man” (Genesis 2:4-8, 18, 21-22).

      Notice that it says “there He placed the man whom He had formed.” Not the “men,” just the one “man.” And this man was alone (v. 18) so God made a woman out of his rib to be his companion. All other human beings have descended from these two original people.

      Christians will have to explain how blacks and whites evolved from Adam. The Idea of African weather vs European weather is not sufficient explanation because feature such as eyes, nose and others surely cannot have evolved due to weather or temperature.

      Christians are not the ones that need to explain, it is the foolish thinking of man that says the “African weather vs European weather is the explanation” this explanation can only account for different changes in skin tone during different seasons of the year, it does not explain different races, characteristics, body types, skin color etc. It is the foolishness of man that also says that “Black people is some kind of human hybrid gone wrong”, that was one of the brain washing tactics used during slavery and to let black people feel like they were an inferior race. all lies from the Devil himself!!

      You quoted Genesis 1:26, somehow you just seem to ignore that human beings created here were very different from Adam and Eve.

      I did not choose to ignore anything here, your reading and interpretation is very, very off, both passages were talking about Adam and Eve. Genesis 1 and Genesis 2:1-2 gives a general overview of the Creation event. Genesis 2:4 to Genesis 3, Gives a more detailed account of Creation, focusing more on the Creation of humans and their ultimate disobedience to God.

      Genesis 3:22, shows that the snake was not lying: God did not want Adam and Eve to be like him or those He created in Genesis 1.

      The snake is the Devil, lets get that straight!! Now the devil never come to us with a full blown lie, he is a deceiver, he always uses half truths, he did it with Adam and Eve, and he tried it with Jesus after Jesus fasted for forty days and forty nights. Read Matthew 4

      I hope that you will not continue to believe the lies of the deceptive one, you don’t need to try to interpret the Bible, the Bible interprets itself and although the Bible is based on historical facts, it is not an History book, it is Theologically based, meaning, that it is meant to bring us in a closer understanding of the Creator and Help us to find and accept Jesus, the only one that can save us from our sins.

10. Ami Wall May 23, 2010 at 2:29 am

    very interesting (:

11. Jared Latigo May 21, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    Great follow up! I really like the graphic you did too, you have such a knack for image manipulation.

    One thing I did want to point out though, simply because I’m sure anyone who doesn’t want to believe the Genesis account will. Evolution doesn’t say we evolved from monkeys but that we had a common ancestor. So that’s why we have humans and monkeys today as two separate species. I don’t buy it of course because I don’t believe in evolution at all. But I did take a couple biology courses and that was a question I had.

    Anyway, great post and I hope it spreads the word. Take care!

    1. loswl Post author May 21, 2010 at 3:16 pm

       Thanks for checking back for the follow up article, thanks also for the compliments on the image.

       Nice clarification on the monkey business. 🙂 I think the evolutionary theory tries to put everything that looks alike in one category. They got one point right…we all have one common ancestor, but they placed some unknown creature as our ancestor, instead of Adam and Eve 🙁

       Its interesting that Dogs and Dolphins are smarter than monkeys.

       1. jared May 21, 2010 at 3:34 pm

          Very true! Funny how that works. If you really look at the “facts”, even evolutionary beliefs fall apart. They all trace back to something that they’re unsure about. I like to quote a scene from FRIENDS when I think about this.

          Phoebe: So Ross you’re saying that there is absolutely NO chance whatsoever that you (scientists) could be wrong about evolution?

          Ross: Absolutely no chance at all we are wrong.

          Phoebe: Well what about years ago when you guys thought the atom was the smallest particle and then you split it open and this whole mess of crap came out!?!? And you’re telling me there’s absolutely NO chance at all you’re wrong about evolution?

          Ross: *long pause*….there might be a…tini, tiny, chance.

          Hahaha, HUGE FRIENDS fan if you can’t tell. 😀 Point proven!

          1. loswl Post author May 21, 2010 at 6:05 pm

             Oh..That is so funny, that is a great dialog, 🙂 I can remember so clearly back in the 80’s when I was in High School, they taught us that the Atom was the smallest particle…how things have changed..uum?!?

             1. Godserv August 6, 2010 at 10:56 am

                It’s good when science leave room for change/update as in this case which is an indication of good scientific study. However, in the case of evolution, there is no room for change and people are loosing their jobs because of it. People who speak openly about the misconceptions of the theory, within a classroom setting. Very sad, scientist are not allowed to follow the scientific principles when it pertains to the evolutionary “theory’.

                Although I was introduced to evolution in the class room, I was also introduced to the scientific principles which are a good set of guidelines. It’s good to know that there are still some level minded folks in our class rooms and scientific arena.

                1. loswl Post author August 6, 2010 at 11:08 am

                   I agree with you that Science should leave room for change and as far as I see real science does leave room for change. But the evolution evangelists does not leave room for such change. Evolution has turned into another religion as far as I see and it’s been fed to society like it is the Gospel Truth! Charles Darwin said:

                   “If my theory is true, then we will find millions of transitional stages in the fossil record”

                   We haven’t found one transitional stage in the fossil records, thus the continual search for the “missing link”. May I say the missing links? because we would have to find millions of these links in each species….The missing links are therefore..missing!

                   Evolution is accepted as truth, but it is just a theory from the imaginations of a man. (Charles Darwin)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.