<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Why Believe in Genesis &#8211; Part 2</title> <atom:link href="http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/</link> <description>Christian Designs, Wallpapers, Tutorials, Articles</description> <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:31:26 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency><meta
name="generator" content="Movable Type Pro 4.25" /> <item><title>By: jbarry</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2952</link> <dc:creator>jbarry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:10:00 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2952</guid> <description>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 &amp; 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</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p><p>What you describe is what we see in Genesis 1 &amp; 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.</p><p>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</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lucas</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2950</link> <dc:creator>Lucas</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 16:06:32 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2950</guid> <description>Neither do I believe it. It has no basis in fact. And it denies the One True Living God YHWH. &lt;b&gt;Bad &quot;scientists&quot;&lt;/b&gt;! ;D</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Neither do I believe it. It has no basis in fact. And it denies the One True Living God YHWH. <b>Bad &#8220;scientists&#8221;</b>! ;D</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: loswl</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2949</link> <dc:creator>loswl</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:50:49 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2949</guid> <description>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 &quot;evolution&quot; 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... &quot;Darwinian Evolution&quot; which promote changes from &lt;b&gt;one specie to another&lt;/b&gt;, basically it promotes &quot;speciation&quot; a process whereby a single ancestral species splits into two or more &lt;b&gt;&quot;different&quot;&lt;/b&gt; species. I totally do not believe that at all. :)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p><p>The only reason, I personally would not use the word &#8220;evolution&#8221; 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&#8230; &#8220;Darwinian Evolution&#8221; which promote changes from <b>one specie to another</b>, basically it promotes &#8220;speciation&#8221; a process whereby a single ancestral species splits into two or more <b>&#8220;different&#8221;</b> species. I totally do not believe that at all. <img
src='http://www.inspiks.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lucas</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2948</link> <dc:creator>Lucas</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:14:02 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2948</guid> <description>I believe what the Bible says: God created everything. However, evolution is also real, and, unlike &quot;scientists&quot; 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&#039;t believe evolution just displaced him since he created it, along with all other real science. Small changes r provable, but that doesn&#039;t mean I believe all life came about through evolution, since that&#039;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&#039;t make sense.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe what the Bible says: God created everything. However, evolution is also real, and, unlike &#8220;scientists&#8221; 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&#8217;t believe evolution just displaced him since he created it, along with all other real science. Small changes r provable, but that doesn&#8217;t mean I believe all life came about through evolution, since that&#8217;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&#8217;t make sense.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lucas</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2947</link> <dc:creator>Lucas</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:05:34 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2947</guid> <description>Science observes that evolution within species (I guess I&#039;m trying to be more specific) is real. However, evolution that creates species isn&#039;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&#039; 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.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Science observes that evolution within species (I guess I&#8217;m trying to be more specific) is real. However, evolution that creates species isn&#8217;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&#8217; 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.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: loswl</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2944</link> <dc:creator>loswl</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 05:10:43 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2944</guid> <description>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 &lt;b&gt; Theistic Evolution&lt;/b&gt; (please correct me if I am wrong)&lt;b&gt;The definition of Theistic Evolution:&lt;/b&gt;
&quot;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.&quot; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution&quot;&gt;Wiki&lt;/a&gt;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&#039;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.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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 <b> Theistic Evolution</b> (please correct me if I am wrong)</p><p><b>The definition of Theistic Evolution:</b><br
/> &#8220;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.&#8221; &#8211; <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution">Wiki</a></p><p>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&#8217;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.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: jbarry</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2943</link> <dc:creator>jbarry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:56:59 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2943</guid> <description>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&#039;s laughable that they teach it as fact. tnx</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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 <img
src='http://www.inspiks.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> I am learning more and more about it and it&#8217;s laughable that they teach it as fact. tnx</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lucas</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2942</link> <dc:creator>Lucas</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:34:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2942</guid> <description>jbarry, I am sorry to inform you that micro- and macro-evolution are purely fictional names for the same thing. I&#039;ve done research into it, and all evolution is basically the same. It&#039;s just that atheists use it as substitute for God. It&#039;s the same kind of evolution, except it&#039;s just being used in the area of creation, instead of the intended area (nature).</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>jbarry, I am sorry to inform you that micro- and macro-evolution are purely fictional names for the same thing. I&#8217;ve done research into it, and all evolution is basically the same. It&#8217;s just that atheists use it as substitute for God. It&#8217;s the same kind of evolution, except it&#8217;s just being used in the area of creation, instead of the intended area (nature).</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: jbarry</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2941</link> <dc:creator>jbarry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2011 01:19:46 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2941</guid> <description>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, &quot;God created all creatures on the earth&quot; - to multiply, each after it&#039;s own kind - this is also observable.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Lucas,<br
/> 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.</p><p>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.</p><p>And yes, as you say, &#8220;God created all creatures on the earth&#8221; &#8211; to multiply, each after it&#8217;s own kind &#8211; this is also observable.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Lucas</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-2935</link> <dc:creator>Lucas</dc:creator> <pubDate>Sun, 26 Jun 2011 17:42:39 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-2935</guid> <description>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. &quot;Scientists&quot;-reading-this, dogs come from wolves, that doesn&#039;t mean wolves came from lizards. :)</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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. &#8220;Scientists&#8221;-reading-this, dogs come from wolves, that doesn&#8217;t mean wolves came from lizards. <img
src='http://www.inspiks.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: loswl</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-1970</link> <dc:creator>loswl</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 14:18:08 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-1970</guid> <description>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.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>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.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: jbarry</title><link>http://www.inspiks.com/why-believe-in-genesis-part2/comment-page-1/#comment-1969</link> <dc:creator>jbarry</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 13:43:06 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.inspiks.com/?p=298#comment-1969</guid> <description>Hi Mr X
The doctrine that proclaims that Jesus is the second Adam is taken from the Bible in Romans 5:11-1611 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 &quot;who is a type of Him who was to come&quot;.
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 1:1-101 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.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mr X<br
/> The doctrine that proclaims that Jesus is the second Adam is taken from the Bible in Romans 5:11-16</p><p>11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.<br
/> 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.</p><p>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.</p><p>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.</p><p>Now that is a figurative description of Christ and Adam &#8211; Adam is describe as one &#8220;who is a type of Him who was to come&#8221;.<br
/> 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.</p><p>Your second pronouncement about Christ is right and is Biblically based in John 1:1-10</p><p> 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.<br
/> 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]<br
/> 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.</p><p>This is another Biblically based doctrine:<br
/> basically the last verse (v10)  explain the whole thing. So yes, we can agree on this.</p><p>10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Served from: www.inspiks.com @ 2012-02-09 10:19:20 by W3 Total Cache -->
