Theistic Evolution

[BenFranklinFan]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

 

[viole]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

Is God also involved in the fine timing of asteroids hitting the earth at the right moment, so that rats looking creatures can leave their stinking hole to become, eventually, the very reason He created the universe for?

Really?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Axe Elf]

Is God also involved in the fine timing of asteroids hitting the earth at the right moment, so that rats looking creatures can leave their stinking hole to become, eventually, the very reason He created the universe?

The "very reason He created the universe" is a matter of subjective opinion--but yes, God structured all of time when He structured all of space, every moment just as fastidiously designed as every millimeter. We know this is true (at least, if God IS the creator of the universe), because as Einstein and others have shown us, space and time are but two aspects of the same thing. God could not have structured the expanse of space without structuring the expanse of time as well.

Really?

Yes, really!

 

[Axe Elf]

The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally.

Detailed?

First there were swimmy things, then crawly and flying things, then animals, and then man.

While roughly reflective of the generally-accepted order of evolution, I wouldn't say that the Genesis account is "detailed" in any way.

 

[YmirGF]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

While it is true that reducing discussions to a vague terminology Olympics might make things more understandable one runs the risk of losing meaning altogether.

 

[BenFranklinFan]

Detailed?

First there were swimmy things, then crawly and flying things, then animals, and then man.

While roughly reflective of the generally-accepted order of evolution, I wouldn't say that the Genesis account is "detailed" in any way.

I meant beautiful woops

 

[LuisDantas]

Myself, I think that is stretching readings for no good reason.

 

[Ellen Brown]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

Finally, the voice of common sense !!!

 

[David T]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

Eve ate the apple that's the story. Its intro is not the story just the setting is all. Reading comprehension in metaphysics generally is illiterate.

 

[Audie]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

WHY do you believe that?

 

[YmirGF]

Finally, the voice of common sense !!!

All he is saying is that Genesis is metaphorical. That is hardly a revelation. What do you see in his words that is so sensible?

 

[Ellen Brown]

All he is saying is that Genesis is metaphorical. That is hardly a revelation. What do you see in his words that is so sensible?

I don't feel that what he is saying is limited to the book of Genesis. For me, it encompasses that whole Evolution/Creation issue and so much else.

 

[metis]

I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process.

I tend to believe God was involved in some way but I don't know the specifics as it's waaaaaaaay beyond my pay grade.

 

[ecco]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

So, like every other person of every other religion, you pick and choose what to believe as historical fact and what to regard as allegory.

Nothing new here.

 

[Jose Fly]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process.

In what way?

 

[Sapiens]

My position on the evolution-creation debate is theistic evolution. I believe that God was directly involved in the evolutionary process. The Genesis account, while detailed, shouldn't be taken literally. I interpret the days as stages of creation, rather than literal 24 hour days. For example, when the author states that God commanded something to be created, and it occurred in a "day", what it is is a marker for a different stage of creation ( 100 of millions of years).

Ah ,,, so god(s) don't play dice with the universe, they just blow on the dice.