Creation/evolution3

[Drich]

There seems to be a great intrest here so allow me to repost what has already been done to death:

Very simply put, I point out their is no time line between the creation of man and the fall of man. I also point out that outside of details of creation itself everything mentioned, takes place in the Garden. Basically between the four rivers that define it, God created a picture of the world that would be consistent with the evolutionary progress of man at the time of the fall.

Evolved man or "monkey man" is man without a soul, and In the Garden Man created in the image of God, would be man with a soul. That would leave room for whole complete fossil record that could not biblically be reconciled. It also explains the city Cain moved to and the wives and husbands the children of Adam and Eve took for themselves. (They intermingled with monkey man/woman and pass their gift onto their children.)

Now I know the goto verse to disprove this is in Genesis 5:4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters. 5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

In the English it seems that Adam's total existence was 930 years. But when we look at the Hebrew the word that is translated "lived" is:Chaya it means:1) to live, have life, remain alive, sustain life etc... (In short Mortal life)

At the fall Adam's eternal existence with God died as promised in Gen 2:16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

When they were exiled they were given "Chay" which means a Mortal life, of plants, of animals, dependent on water.
Genesis 3:
17 Then to Adam He said, “Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it’:
“Cursed is the ground for your sake;
In toil you shall eat of it
All the days of your life.

At this point Adam's immortality ended and his clock started on his 930 years. These were all of the days He spent on THIS Earth. (not the Garden/Presents of God/Heaven)


How do we know they were immortal in the Garden with God? because of Genesis 2:16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat;

Amongest those trees was the tree of life. What did the tree of life do?

Genesis 3:22Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"--

So to recap:
God created Man and woman and placed them in the garden. They could have been there a day before eating the forbidden fruit or they could have been there the 900 million bazillion years the scientist believe it took to evolve. Why? because there is no recorded time time between: "In the beginning" and the fall of man. Only speculation because we can count the generations back 6000 or so years.

When in fact all we can really say is that man has been out of the Garden 6000 or so years. We know the Garden was a sanctuary, and that God kept Man created in His image there for an undisclosed amount of time. This does not means the rest of the world did not have to evolve as the undeniable fossil record proves.

Something very important to note this is NOT "Gap theory" or Creation theory as made popular in the 17 century. Even though the empty term Gap Creation theory can apply, as far as I know this is something very new.

(This is creation gap theory:What is the "Gap Theory?" • ChristianAnswers.Net
In short between genesis 1:1 and 1:2 there is a whole nother version of creation story. The problem here is there is added or filler material between the two accounts. )

Why is it important to distance this theory from Gap creation theory?? Because it combines the unmolested Genesis account AS RECORDED IN THE BIBLE, with the evolutionary data we have discovered and can not other wise reconcile. Without Adding anything to scripture or taking anything away. This also explains several other creation "paradoxes" that atheist tend to use to disprove the genesis account.

I have only taken the face value account of Genesis and lined the holes up with the holes in the evolutionary account of origins and they fit together perfectly.

What do you think? I would like to refine and clean up this account of origins and start circulating it. Because there is literally nothing the atheist can say or do to disprove anything. Their standard goto the evidence only further supports the creation account at this point. This takes the account of "origins" out of the atheist arsenal for a legitmate reason they do not believe in God. While on the Atheist website because they saw the logic of this explanation many who originally greeted me with harsh words and complete disrespect started to ask legitimate questions.

If you like to see the actual discourse The website is atheist forums dot org. This place is not for the faint of heart there are little to no rules about what is said or seen there. It is under the religion/Christian category under drich "evolution."

[Nope]

So you believe in both evolution and the creation story?

I had to look it up but Damascus is the oldest still inhabitated city and it was built around 8,000-11,000 bc. You believe prehumans built Damascus?

[Roxy904]

Yeah, I feel free to call pure bullshit on this one. This is one of the craziest theories. The Bible is not an accurate source of information. Look, my mom is very Catholic, and even she knows that you are not supposed to take the Bible literally,

[Jackalope]

There seems to be a great intrest here so allow me to repost what has already been done to death:

Only in the same way that there's great interest in the bearded lady and dog-faced boy in a circus sideshow.

[robvalue]

What the hell? I've seen some crazy ass rationalizations buts this is striving for the top of the list. I can only assume you're training for the cognitive dissidence gold in the next Olympics.

Atheists don't need to disprove anything in the bible. As with any baseless assertion, and especially one including supernatural elements, we dismiss it as useless until supporting evidence is given. Believing whatever you want until someone proves it to be actually impossible, which may itself be impossible, is an argument from ignorance. Again.

[Tonus]

At this point Adam's immortality ended and his clock started on his 930 years. These were all of the days He spent on THIS Earth. (not the Garden/Presents of God/Heaven)

But that's not specified in the Bible, so it's something you had to propose in order to make the theory work. Given the freedom to make changes that invalidate what is actually written, you could support just about any theory.

[robvalue]

Indeed, non-crazy people have had to admit that the bible is not entirely literal, because continuing to hold that view puts you at odds with reality and scientific knowledge.

[Lucanus]

Yeah, I feel free to call pure bullshit on this one. This is one of the craziest theories. The Bible is not an accurate source of information. Look, my mom is very Catholic, and even she knows that you are not supposed to take the Bible literally,

You've got to understand that Catholics are not Bible Believing - Special Snowflake Christians ® to Drich, so your mum doesn't count.

[Drich]

Bottom line of this theory is that the bible doesn't provide a time line between the last day of creation and the day of the fall of man. The rest is indeed speculation and how it all COULD have worked out. But in the end with no given time line between the end of the seven days of creation and the day of the fall of man. The whole fossil record could be accounted for.

[Lucanus]

That's how science is made: working your way backwards from the conclusions so that all your preconceptions fit into the big picture.