Do Evolutionary Theory And Scripture Contradict Each Other?

(@anybody who’s username I don’t remember)

I stumbled upon this verse from Exodus today:

“For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day.Therefore, the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exodus 20:11)

Any mistakes or errors are, naturally, my own (not scriptures’s).

Here God says that he made the universe in 6 literal days…again.

I’m not going to argue with you. Yep, that’s what it says. Do you want to discuss what it means?

What are your thoughts???

Wait a second. I never saw that before. Ok…this…is…big. Mentally, like I just threw out all that data of 30 different ways we know as a matter of fact that the universe is extremely old. Like the entire enterprise of science is pretty much dead to me. I am pretty excited as I always hated those evolutionists.

I am now speed reading the books of Moses. I also found some other reasons we are supposed to have the Sabbath real quick (Deuteronomy 5:12-15). Strange, it seems that we are supposed to observe the Sabbath because of the Exodus, not creation. Also weird the 7th day in Genesis doesn’t even have morning and evening. I don’t see how that day could be 24 hours.

I also learned about the practice of Shmita. Wait a second. That is also the pattern of seven but it’s seven years, not seven days.


That doesn’t seem to be what the verse I quoted above says…

This came up a few days ago on a different thread. You can check my response here. What biblical reasons are there to accept the scientific view of the earth as billions of years old? - #18 by cwhenderson


If (gleaned from your linked post) I am to assume that you don’t think God needed a day of rest…

Why did God need to use Evolution (used in a broad sense) to create the world? (Or why do you think He had to have used it?)

Agreed, I do not believe the Almighty God needed a day of rest. Neither do I believe that He needed to use evolution. He could have used any tool He wished (or no tool at all), but I believe based on the scientific evidence in multiple fields that evolution is the tool He chose for the creative work.

Deuteronomy 5:12-15

12 Be careful to remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy as the Lord your God has commanded you. 13 You are to labor six days and do all your work, 14 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. Do not do any work—you, your son or daughter, your male or female slave, your ox or donkey, any of your livestock, or the resident alien who lives within your city gates, so that your male and female slaves may rest as you do. 15 Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out of there with a strong hand and an outstretched arm. That is why the Lord your God has commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

I also showed you a pattern of sevens in the Old Testament that is also based upon this pattern, six ______ of work and one _______ of rest. It is a pattern that they followed and thus the Genesis narrative was written to follow that pattern. Do you think that God needed to do things in 7 days? Or was it written that way for the Israelites? In other words, it is a general pattern that the text was written in that applies to different things in their culture. Weekly it was 6 days of work and a Sabbath rest. The land had six years of work and one year of rest. Why were they in Babylon for ‘70’ years? Because they ignored God’s Sabbath year for 490 years and he was making them obey it.

Here are some pretty conservative writers that also seem to notice that the number seven holds particular meaning and thus appears all over the place. 7 literal 24 hour days in Genesis is not even the point, why 7 days? 7 is the number of completeness or divine perfection. It says that mankind is made on day 6 because 6 is the number of man. That’s why.

You just come in here and completely hand wave one single Scripture that somehow can mean you get to reject everything we’ve said previously.

Those two verses are not mutually exclusive.

@cwhenderson Why do you feel the need to modify the Bible to accommodate Evolution? The ways you add it in seem very much to be “reading (things) into scripture” (something I am not keen on people doing…even [and especially] young earth creationists).

Evolution does not seem to be correct enough (at all) that the Scriptures should be modified to agree with it.


@pevaquark[quote=“pevaquark, post:140, topic:36218”]
You just come in here and completely hand wave one single Scripture that somehow can mean you get to reject everything we’ve said previously.

Peace. I was just wondering people’s thoughts on this verse.

What have you said previously that I was hitherto “unable” to reject???

I can’t expect you to engage the scientific evidence about a recent creation or @gbrooks9 and his beautiful picture of measuring ice cores back hundreds of thousands of years that show no global flood either 4,000 years ago.

Sorry, I’m just a little confused in that we actually read a ton of stuff into the text when we read Genesis. All of us, especially YECs like yourself.

  • Like anytime you imagine the Earth as a sphere, and the firmament as the atmosphere, or the sun in the center of our solar system and the stars super far away not in a fixed dome.
  • And then we go even further and we read ‘no death before the fall’ into the text.
  • We read ‘no people outside the garden’ into the text.
  • We read a lot into the text that isn’t even there.
  • We read that God instantaneously poofed the trees into existence (despite not being there when the Garden was being made presumably on day 6), yet the text says the earth produced vegetation with their seeds.
  • We read that the moon is actually a lesser light, despite not being a light at all.
  • We read that Adam was supposed to die on the day he eats of the tree (what did God mean? surely God didn’t mean the plain reading here)

Was Adam really made from the dust of the ground? The text says yeah obviously so then we can ask why the mineral components of our bodies are so different than the mineral components of your average soil. Where’d all the carbon come from, I’d like to know. Incidentally, since the bulk of soil carbon is introduced to the earth from the decay of plant and animal matter, the “dust” from which God supposedly formed the first human body would have contained much less carbon even than it does today (which is still way less than the amount present in organic life forms like us). Not to mention that several common soil compounds would kill us were they present in our bodies at the same level they are in the earth’s crust.

Here’s a nice little list of plain reading contradictions as well:

Before we go further, why do EC’s like yourself (correct me if I’m wrong) seem to think that this is such a convincing argument???

If God was using a figurative interpretation of the word “day” here, why do you say that means he didn’t use a literal interpretation of “day” on the creation days? That strikes me as poor logic…


One More thing:
The Scriptures also say: “The wages of sin is death.” Since Adam sinned (by disobeying God), He incurred the wages of that: death.

What kind of death (e.g: cellular death etc.)???

What other people would there have been?

Nowhere do I see anything against this in the Genesis account (if it is there, please show me [because I do not want to proceed in error if that is, indeed, where I am])

Your wording confuses me a bit on this one…