Skip to content

Unexplainable.net

Watching The World Change

  • The Billy Meier Story UFOs and Aliens
  • Last Will and Testament Facts Information and Theories
  • Motive to Visit Earth Not So Alien UFOs and Aliens
  • Dinosaurs Named After People Information and Theories
  • Methods of Ancient Communication Ancient Civilizations
  • Real Life Super Powers Simply Unexplainable
  • Attractions of Mogao Caves Ancient Civilizations
  • Lasers Discover Ancient Mayan City Information and Theories

Genesis is an Evolutionary Account

Posted on June 8, 2013 By jim No Comments on Genesis is an Evolutionary Account


Normal
0

 

PRE”‘HISTORY

 

… Thus saith Jehovah, who stretcheth
forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the
spirit of man within him: (Zechariah 12:1)

 

I. THE “CREATION VERSUS
EVOLUTION”

CONTROVERSY, OR: “MUCH
ADO ABOUT NOTHING”

 

…The
more famous subject of Darwin’s uniformitarianism, usually termed  “evolution,” comes to the front.
This is always a controversial and emotional subject, and is usually discussed
in a quasi”‘scientific manner.
128

 

In dealing
with the subject of this section, I will endeavor to avoid the above pitfall by
being as logical and objective as possible. Let the reader be the judge of
whether or not I succeed in doing so. I shall first discuss the merits and
foibles of the “pro-evolution” argument and show where objectivity
ended and human error began.

 

… The
validity of evolution would not, in the
slightest degree, diminish the evidential necessity of the existence of God, nor would it preclude the validity of divine
creation.

 

…
Evolutionists for non­scientific reasons have erroneously discarded the Genesis
account and, equally erroneously, religionists have discarded evolution as
being contradictory to a Genesis account.

Now it is time
to logically examine the merits and foibles of the “pro-­Creation”
argument.

 

If the Bible
is the Word of God, then science cannot help but sub­stantiate its validity-
there should be no actual conflict between the two. The paramount question, for
both “evolutionists” and “Creationists,” should be:
“Do evolution and Genesis concur?” In other words, is Genesis
(particularly Chapters One and Two) an account of the evolutionary process, as
we understand it?

 

What can we
deduce logically with regards to how life in general, and man in particular
have gotten here? Remember that man has free will and that entails certain
ramifications necessary to prevent undue influence of that free will.

If the six
days of restoration were literal, then evidence of man would suddenly appear in
the fossil record starting in 4004 B.C. Any supernatural creation per se would
leave unmistakable evidence of its occurrence, thus interfering with free will.
We should expect that God used a “natural,” progressive means of
forming man. What is time to God other than a necessary process? Time is not the
barrier to Him that it is to us. Why should we not expect God to have used eons
of time to bring about life as we know it? Why do some people insist that God
brought about life instantaneously: would such a means really be any more
miraculous?

Furthermore,
in any supernatural manifestations to man of a magnitude that would leave
archeologically verifiable traces, we should expect that God would likewise use
a natural means of accomplishing such stupendous events”‘ a means in accordance
with the laws of the physical universe.

According to
the ramifications of free will, then, whenever traces of God’s actions are of a
nature or magnitude sufficient to leave verifiable traces, He will accomplish
these actions in conformity to the laws of the physical universe. Thus, we should
logically expect that evolution was used by God to form man and that
catastrophism was used by God in His major supernatural dealings with man.
Also, just as any skillful artist will personally put the final finishing
touches on a great masterpiece, we should expect to find subtle traces of direct
divine
intervention.

In the three
following subsections, I will put forward both Scriptural and scientific
evidence substantiating that all three of these processes”‘evolution,
catastrophism, and direct divine intervention”‘ have indeed occurred.

 

For
we are told that in the beginning God created (bara) the heaven and the earth;
but the Scriptures never affirm that He did this in the
six
days. The work of those days was, as we shall presently see, quite a different thing from original creation: they
were times of restoration, and the word asah is generally used in connection
with them.

Now
asah signifies to make, fashion,
or prepare out of existing material; as, for instance, to build a ship, erect a
house, or prepare a meal.
139

 

Firstly, God formed
the physical body of man from the dust (specifically clay)
of the ground.

 

The
evolution of life presents a similar problem, and may have followed the same
kind of sequence, beginning with the existence of a suitable crystal, probably
a very small one, relatively insoluble in water. A colloidal mineral would be
ideal, and none is in fact more common, or better suited to the needs of a primitive gene, or
more appropriate in a biblical sense, than clay.

 

Probably
some lines of Neanderthal man died out, but it seems likely that a line in the
Middle East went on directly to us, Homo sapiens.
162

 

This offspring
was Adam; and he then received a spirit with which, by the exercise of his free
will, he could choose to receive God Himself into this new part of him and thus
express God. It was at this point in his evolution that man became a conscious
being. But this incurs a problem: Adam was unique. If Adam mated with others of
the pre”‘Adamic population, there would be a fifty percent chance that his
offspring would be heterozygous and consequently would not have free will,
while having a spirit. Thus all of Adam’s immediate offspring must be
homozygous for this trait, for him to truly be the “first man” of the
Adamic race of man. Therefore, Adam must have a mate who is also homozygous for
the same genetic trait. But Adam alone was homozygous for this trait.

How did God
solve this problem?

 

And Jehovah God said, It is not
good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helpmeet for him…. And
Jehovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, he slept; and he took one
of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; and the rib, which
Jehovah God had taken from the man, builded he into a woman and brought her
unto the man. And the man said, This is
now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman,
because she was taken out of Man. (Gen. 2:18, 21”‘23)

 

It is possible to
clone a woman from a man. However, it is not possible to clone a man from a woman.

 

The sixty”‘four
dollar question: Who was Cain’s wife?

It is clear
from the order of these verses that Cain’s wife was not a member of his
immediate family (which would be a direct violation of the Mosaic laws against
incest) ”‘ something that would necessarily be the case if Adam and Eve were the
literal, abracadabra style of first man and woman. Who, then, was she?

Cain’s wife was one
of the offspring of Adam’s heterozygous contemporaries.

 

If Adam and
Eve were in a literal sense the instant (bara) solitary couple who were the
progenitors of the human race, then why didn’t God save only Noah and his wife
(especially since Noah was the only one of his generation whom God stated that
He had found righteous) and start again with just one couple? The answer is
that this would provide too small a genetic pool, just as Adam and Eve were not
the first man and woman per se but the first man and woman as we their
descendants today are: with free will and a human spirit.

 

To promote the
literality of the six days of restoration makes equally as much sense as the
Roman Catholic Church’s defense of the earth as the center of the universe in
the time of Copernicus. It is theologically incorrect to think that the 6 days
were literal 24-hour days, since time elements (lights) were not assigned until
the 4th day. The damage done by such misguided, and scripturally
mistaken believers, in making Christians appear to be ignorant and illogical
people, has been inestimable. What would cause some of the better scientific
minds of the last century to illogically jump to conclusions in a frenzied
effort to discredit the Bible in general and Genesis in particular? What would
cause religious people to feel compelled to attack evolution as if they were
defending the Faith? The answer to these questions is obvious if we rephrase
them with the word who instead of what. Who has always endeavored to
cause the human race to strain out a gnat and swallow a camel? None other than
our most subtle enemy, Satan.

Who can say that God is not everywhere
else in the universe where He has created habitable planets raising up
intelligent life by the same processes and for the same Divine Purpose that He
has done so here on Earth? This is why we have not heard from these
other civilizations.

What about the incarnation of God as a man?

 

else must he (Christ) often
have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once at the end of the
ages hath he been manifested to put away sin by the sacrifice himself. (Heb.
9:26)

 

How could this
verse be true, if God is doing the same thing elsewhere in the universe? He
only incarnated into the four”‘dimensional physical universe one time. Wouldn’t
the working out by God of His Divine Purpose elsewhere in the universe also
require His incarnation elsewhere? Yes! Wouldn’t this contradict the above
verse? No!

According to
the laws of our four”‘dimensional physical universe, God can incarnate on other
worlds at other points in time and still have only incarnated from a spiritual
universe into the physical universe only once. Besides, the reference in
Hebrews 9:26 evidently applies only to our world, the Earth. But even if it is
in reference to our physical universe, there is no contradiction. Thus, there
is nothing scriptural to preclude the identical working out by God of His
purpose through extraterrestrial life forms on other planets in the universe.

Incidentally,
the reasons why the existence of life elsewhere in the universe is not directly
mentioned in the Bible are: First, we do not need to know; second, such knowledge
would violate free will since it would be direct indication of knowledge that
could not be obtained by objective means.

 

AUTHOR’S NOTE:

If God is
indeed consummating New Jerusalems elsewhere in the universe, then there will
be evidence of the sudden emission of increased amounts of energy (seven-fold,
mainly in the visible spectrum) emanating from a singular source. This could
explain otherwise (scientifically speaking) inexplicable phenomena. Whether or
not these phenomena are detectable with our current astronomical capabilities,
I do not know.

Man, you
search the physical universe in a vain quest for answers that cannot possibly
fill your emptiness or satisfy your longing. These
answers can only be found within you, and then only by turning back to your
Creator and receiving Him. All else is truly vanity of vanities, temporal
and finite.

 

FROM: amessageforthehumanrace.org


Recent Submissions

Post navigation

Previous Post: The Rapture
Next Post: Bible Prophecy

Related Posts

  • Christianity the Religious System Recent Submissions
  • Man Caught Using the Illuminati as a Way to Trick Young Girls into Sexual Favors Recent Submissions
  • More than one rapture Recent Submissions
  • The Interesting World Of Informers & Infiltrators Around The U.S. Recent Submissions
  • The Bible being a book of life, not knowledge Recent Submissions
  • Black Knight UFO Photographed by Gemini 7? (PICS) Recent Submissions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • The Meat Eater couple arrested for child abuse
  • The Meat-Eater boxer kidnapped and raped a young school Girl
  • Carnist man arrested for 198 years for raping and shooting a woman
  • Mitch McConnell- Eating Cow Corpses
  • Animal Flesh Eater Arrested: Felony Charges Serious Injury To 3 Month Old!

Recent Comments

No comments to show.

Archives

  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • May 2020
  • June 2018
  • February 2018
  • July 2016
  • May 2016
  • February 2016
  • September 2015
  • July 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • July 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003

Categories

  • Ancient Civilizations
  • Benjamin Fulford Story
  • Corrupt Carnivores
  • Cryptology and Monsters
  • Eating Healthy
  • Ghost And Demons
  • Information and Theories
  • Mars Coverage
  • Meditation And Spirituality
  • Mysteries
  • NASA Articles
  • Other Exciting News
  • Personal Accounts
  • Pictures And Multimedia
  • Political Conspiracies
  • Recent Submissions
  • Religion Articles
  • Self Improvement
  • Simply Unexplainable
  • Space and Astrology
  • Technology Articles
  • True Stories
  • UFOs and Aliens
  • Unexplainable Video Library
  • Unexplainable Weather
  • Julia: The Bloop Sound’s Cousin Simply Unexplainable
  • Mad Scientists: Monkeys and Human Experiments Information and Theories
  • Interesting Headlines of May 2009 Information and Theories
  • The subtle electrical phenomena in DNA and RNA Meditation And Spirituality
  • Tilda Swinton’s Recent W Magazine Photo Shoot Features Questionable Symbolism Information and Theories
  • The 1919 World Series Conspiracy Political Conspiracies
  • A Preexisting Condition Self Improvement
  • Apollo 14 Astronaut Speaks on Aliens Space and Astrology

Copyright © 2023 Unexplainable.net.

Powered by PressBook News Dark theme