The Instigator
T_parkour
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
captainamericatheavenger
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Evolutionism and old-earth creationism can go together.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 504 times Debate No: 55682
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

T_parkour

Pro

As a theistic evolutionist, I believe that evolution can coincide with old-earth creationism. Con's job will to prove that evolution and creation disagree with each other. Round 1 will be for acceptance, round 2 will be for arguments/evidence, and round 3 will be for rebuttals and final arguments.

I thank Con in advance for participating in this debate.
captainamericatheavenger

Con

Now first, I am going to assume by the nature of the comments that you are talking about the creation account relayed in Genesis. Now for this debate I see it being a battle of literal six days, verus a metaphoric six days. Now evolution takes millions of years, and that is the first reason that this resolution falls short. That brings me to CONTENTION 1: which is a six day creation. If evolution were true, the Bible would not say, " the morning and the evening were the sixth day", or etc. no doubt the affirmative team will reply that this was not a literal day. So I am going to head that off at the pass. One must remember about the pentetuch. That genesis was not written while it happened. Genesis was written probably a thousand years later by Moses.
Exodus 17:14 A " Than the Lord said to Moses, " write this for a memorial and recount it for the hearing of Joshua."
(NIV, Exodus, 17:14A)
Now by then the day had been established for a long time. So if Moses meant millions of years, he would not have said six days. This brings me to CONTENTION 2: which is biblical disagreement. Now the Bible has a specific blueprint for creation. One day the Bible says fish were created, another man. Now God through Moses, mentions man speciffacly. It says in Genesis 1:26 A " Than God said," let us make man in our own image".
( NIV, Genesis 1:26 A)
This means that MAN WAS CREATED. Now if he was created in one day, how could he evolve in millions of years.
and last I would like to say, If the affirmative team is talking of greek creation, or hindu creation. Than I cannot continue this debate, as I have no knowledge of those subjects.
I would like to thank the affirmative team. And I do sincerly hope that the judges cast a negative ballot. Thank you and I now end this speech.
Debate Round No. 1
T_parkour

Pro

I'm not necessarily talking about a metaphoric six days, but just a different meaning of the word "day". If we look at the Hebrew language in which the Old Testament was first written, we see that there are much fewer words in the language than English (English has around half a million words, whereas Hebrew has 8,700). Because of this, some words had multiple similar meanings, as is the case in the creation story. The Hebrew word used for "day" is "Yom". It has several meanings, all pertaining to time. Here are ways it is used in the Old Testament:
1. A growing season, about a couple months (Genesis 4:3).
2. Forty literal 24-hour days (Deuteronomy 10:10).
3. Forty years (I Kings 11:42).
4. Forever (Isaiah 30:8).
5. A year (I Kings 1:1).
6. Age (Genesis 18:11 and 24:1).
7. A lifetime (Genesis 47:28).
8. Ago (I Samuel 9:20).
9. Always - lifetime (Deuteronomy 5:29, 6:24, and 14:23)
10. Season - several months (Genesis 40:4)
11. Chronicles
12. Continually/continuance (Psalm 139:16)
13. A long period of time of unspecified length (Deuteronomy 19:9)
14. Evermore - a lifetime or eternity (Deuteronomy 28:29)
As you can see, Yom isn't just used for a 24-hour period. It could very well mean millions of years in the context of Genesis 1, allowing plenty of time for evolution to take place.
captainamericatheavenger

Con

Now, first I would like to start by stating that I admire the affirmatives biblical knowledge. Now on with my 1st rebuttal. Now my first argument shall be simply a logic one. Now lets examine these to seemingly, and for good reason, polar opposites. Now these two can exist about as much as ice can exist in the sun. Now here is my reasoning. The first thing the theory of evolution does, is it undermines God. God is definitely powerful if he speaks the universe into existence. But not nearly as much if he creates a single bacteria and leaves it to explode. Now this also undermines Gods love. God himself created man from the dust of the earth. He took great care in this, and he created the earth for our pleasure. Now, if evolution is true, than God simply left a bacteria, and said. Hey, lets see what happens. And would a loving, caring God, who died for you, allow natural selection to happen. For things to be picked off one by one. Now also, when talking of evolution, people always debate the past, but what of the future. If evolution continues, than eventually man will become as God. Which will not, cannot, and should not happen. Now to clarify the affirmatives argument. The Hebrew word Yom is completely dependent on the context. Now in the old testament there are over 2,000 times the word Yom appears outside of Genesis 1. But in only 359 of these, does a number appear after the word. All of these other 359 times the number appears afterwards, it is obviously a day. And as you can guess, the word Yom in Genesis 1, every time, has a number. This means the Hebrew word case of the affirmative team, has literally been taken out of context. And lastly. and I wont elaborate on this, but I will just put this question in our readers minds. Would God send his only son, to die, for a monkey.
In closing, I again thank the affirmative team, and would like to say, I truly encourage your biblical knowledge.
Thank you, and I now surrender the virtual platform.
This is my sources source. I encourage you to read it. It is Hebrew research.

http://creation.com... > V17;
Debate Round No. 2
T_parkour

Pro

Thank you for the compliment, but honestly I found that out because I had heard something about it one time and decided to look into it.

Yes, I will admit that you are correct about the context issue. I too used that source, as well as a couple others which said the same thing, but in the spirit of a lively debate I opted not to use that as it would hurt my argument.
Now to answer your logic argument. God did not leave anything to chance; He had a plan since before creation, showing that He truly is a loving god. And I do not see the connection between natural selection and whether or not God is loving. He had a plan for the species that were "picked off," and that was his plan for them: to be stepping stones in the chain of events that eventually created Homo sapiens.
As for man becoming like God, I agree that it "will not, cannot, and should not happen." Evolution could not develop omniscience, omnipotence, or omnipresence in a species. Evolution is a constant flow of adapting and becoming more fit to survive in the environment, and I highly doubt that speaking things into being will ever be necessary to survive.
Lastly, to answer your final question, we are not monkeys. We may be closely related to monkeys, but we ourselves are not monkeys. So no, God would not send His Son to die for a monkey.

As this is my final argument opportunity, I would like to thank Con now for being an excellent debate opponent. You have brought up some very good points and I sincerely believe that both of us learned something, whether it was something small or life changing (although it probably wasn't life changing).
captainamericatheavenger

Con

I would also like to finish by thanking the affirmative team, and by stating that although he did argue the points of my previous argument, he did drop one, being that evolution takes millions of years, and I proved it was six literal days. By proper criteria that argument does go to the negative. And I would like to push farther two things. First, if evolution is true, than we jumped from soulless monkeys, to humans made in the image of God. Now, if we can make that jump, what's to say we can't jump the chasm between mortality and omnipotence. And also, if we have souls... where could we have gotten them from. Do monkeys have souls, no. So where did they come from. And in Genesis it says we are created in the image of God. Well if evolution l real, than when did we become humans, when did we gain souls, and when did we gain the image of God.
I would like to thank the affirmative team. And would like to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this debate. And would like to encourage the affirmative team to keep reading the Bible.
Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by T_parkour 3 years ago
T_parkour
Creationism in which the earth is older that 6,000 years.
Posted by Motormouth 3 years ago
Motormouth
What do you mean old earth creationism?
No votes have been placed for this debate.