Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[ScottA]

Yes, that is the crux of the problem, ScottA. As yet you have presented no evidence that your ideology or belief system has any sort of solid biblical backing to it. You are simply presenting you opinions as laity on these matters. Fine. But everyone has an opinion and everyone thinks their is right. So the question is, Why should I or anyone else here believe anything you have to say about God, the Bible, Christ, science?

You have said, Test...so, test, then.

 

[redleghunter]

I don't see how I can safely answer that question at the moment sorry.

What about the NT?

 

[Patmos]

You should understand that the vast majority of people who accept the theory of evolution are your fellow Christians.

LOL

Have you done a scientific poll ?

 

[Patmos]

John Lennox, Oxford Math Professor
John Lennox denies evolution - YouTube

 

[Extraneous]

The only way we can love and edify each other is to put away things that divide, and to be of one humble mind, agreeing only on Christ and His word. That's holiness that we are called into. That's impossible however when we love the world with all its politics and other such things that divide us. Also things such as Evolution theory. Its also very difficult when we love denominations more than that single mindedness. That's what i see in scripture, but its like im speaking another language when i say it.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The only way we can love and edify each other is to put away things that divide, and to be of one humble mind, agreeing only on Christ and His word. That's holiness that we are called into. That's impossible however when we love the world with all its politics and other such things that divide us. Also things such as Evolution theory. Its also very difficult when we love denominations more than that single mindedness. That's what i see in scripture, but its like im speaking another language when i say it.

I hear you brother. And when all is said and done, we wind up being in the same world together anyway.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

You probably didn't listen.

Please don't confuse citing a few examples of what is alledged to be a "kind" with actually defining what a "kind" is.

 

[stephen583]

. I merely gave you a prime example of a kind - the 2 humans God made on the 6th real day of real creation week.
(Not low-brow grunting hominids - but rather the most perfect example of all humans - Adam and Eve)

Actually, the more we learn about early hominids and homo-sapiens, the less they appear like "low-brow grunting" animals and the more they appear like us. Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man are very similar to homo sapien, sapien (modern man). Anthropologists now recognize both of these homo sapiens hunted, foraged and lived together in bands, fabricated clothes from animal skins, used fire, constructed stone tools, buried their dead, played flutes and drew pictographs of hunting scenes on the walls of caves. Other Anthropologists say there is no reason from an anatomical standpoint, Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon man did not use a "spoken" language like we do.

So the image of primal man, existing ONLY as "Australopithecus" an (ape-like) creatures which lived hundreds of millions of years ago, is quite disingenuous and amounts to religious "pseudoscience".

As long as Christians continue to shovel this kind of nonsensical religious pseudoscience at their children, their children (who have access to the internet, the Discovery Channel, books and Discover Magazine) will continue to LEAVE the church in droves. Your children are not FOOLS. and they know when they are being LIED to.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"

Albert Einstein

In fact, if you read your Bible (The Book of Genesis) you'll find it was the descendants of Adam and Eve who filled the earth with violence and murder, not primordial man. There is no archeological evidence to suggest homo sapiens slaughtered one another as predators, or in war.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

The only way we can love and edify each other is to put away things that divide, and to be of one humble mind, agreeing only on Christ and His word. That's holiness that we are called into. That's impossible however when we love the world with all its politics and other such things that divide us. Also things such as Evolution theory. Its also very difficult when we love denominations more than that single mindedness. That's what i see in scripture, but its like im speaking another language when i say it.

You are correct that God's people have one mind... those that don't serve another master.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Actually, the more we learn about early hominids and homo-sapiens, the less they appear like "low-brow grunting" animals and the more they appear like us. Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man are very similar to homo sapien, sapien (modern man). Anthropologists now recognize both of these homo sapiens hunted, foraged and lived together in bands, fabricated clothes from animal skins, used fire, constructed stone tools, buried their dead, played flutes and drew pictographs of hunting scenes on the walls of caves. Other Anthropologists say there is no reason from an anatomical standpoint, Neanderthals and Cro-Magnon man did not use a "spoken" language like we do.

So the image of primal man, existing ONLY as "Australopithecus" an (ape-like) creatures which lived hundreds of millions of years ago, is quite disingenuous and amounts to religious "pseudoscience".

As long as Christians continue to shovel this kind of nonsensical religious pseudoscience at their children, their children (who have access to the internet, the Discovery Channel, books and Discover Magazine) will continue to LEAVE the church in droves. Your children are not FOOLS. and they know when they are being LIED to.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"

Albert Einstein

I suspect that much in the way that many Christians in antiquity took issue with a spherical earth (a spherical earth had been known by the ancient Greeks for a long time, some early Christians insisted against this idea as pagan), or the way that in the early modern period many Christians were opposed to heliocentrism (as an example, Luther stood opposed to people like Copernicus), that it's just a matter of time.

It's unfortunate that we don't consider more seriously St. Augustine's sobering statement,

"Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking non-sense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although 'they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.'" - St. Augustine of Hippo, De Genesi ad Litteram, Book I.20.39

-CryptoLutheran

 

[SteveB28]

LOL

Have you done a scientific poll ?

No, but plenty of polling organisations have. In the USA, approximately 70% of citizens identify as Christian. Additionally, around 46% of citizens accept the theory of evolution, whether they think it 'guided by God' or not.

I leave you to do the simple mathematics to show that a majority of those people are likely to be Christian

 

[Patmos]

No, but plenty of polling organisations have. In the USA, approximately 70% of citizens identify as Christian. Additionally, around 46% of citizens accept the theory of evolution, whether they think it 'guided by God' or not.

I leave you to do the simple mathematics to show that a majority of those people are likely to be Christian

Red bits

 

[SteveB28]

That's pretty sad.





Some here are arguing that such a statement is the very opposite of evolutionism's claim and is never the way that evolution is described. -- so then you agree that the Bible does not proclaim evolutionism?

Agreed!

We find agreement on that one point.



=================================
3. Are you familiar with the "pile of dirt will sure enough turn into a horse over time - given a sufficiently large pile of dirt and a sufficiently long period of time filled with just-so stories" form of evolution? Or do you insist that God came here and scattered amoebas around to get things started?



No answer?? Is this the part where you tell us that the there was something way more than 'matter' -- than a "pile of dirt" as the starting point??? this should be good.

===========================================




On the contrary - I just proved that it is the worst option.

[/QUOTE]

To your number 3:

The theory of evolution makes no comment on the origins of life. It is concerned with the descent of species.

Do you call an electrician when your toilet is leaking?

 

[SteveB28]

Red bits

So, you know better when someone identifies as a Christian?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

@EastCoastRemnant (45) Scientific proof. The concepts of “proof” and “confirmation” are incompatible with science, which by its very nature is provisional and self-correcting (McComas, 1996). Hence, it is understandable why Popper (1959) preferred the term “corroboration” to “confirmation,” as all theories can in principle be overturned by new evidence. Nor is the evidence for scientific theories dichotomous; theories virtually always vary in their degree of corroboration. As a consequence, no theory in science, including psychological science, should be regarded as strictly proven. Proofs should be confined to the pages of mathematics textbooks and journals (Kanazawa, 2008).
http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01100/full

How utterly sad that people put their belief in something that is admittedly variable and ever changing.... whereas the Bible has never changed... I think I'll stick with the solid , reliable source, thank you.

 

[KWCrazy]

In the USA, approximately 70% of citizens identify as Christian. Additionally, around 46% of citizens accept the theory of evolution, whether they think it 'guided by God' or not.

Amazingly, of those 46%, none of them can show how their Bible is compatible with evolution because it is not. Belief in evolution requires a rejection of Scriptural teaching. For evolution to be true, much of the Bible has to be a lie. Since the first 3 chapters of Genesis are quoted over 300 times in the New Testament alone, it can be argued that Genesis is foundational. If death and sin did not come into the world through Adam, then it need not be overcome by Jesus. I have stated many times that those who believe the Bible and evolution have a firm understanding of neither. They are mutually exclusive. Want to prove me wrong? Show where the Scriptures tell of the evolution of all living things from a single progenitor over billions of years. I've been asking for decades. No theistic evolutionist can answer.

 

[KWCrazy]

The theory of evolution makes no comment on the origins of life. It is concerned with the descent of species.[/QUOTE]
Darwin's book is called the Origin of Species. Get it straight.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

It absolutely has been witnessed, and I'm pretty sure examples have been pointed out to you before. You don't just get to ignore inconvenient facts.

You still haven't answered my post of the mathematical calculation showing that for evolution to be true, then there had to have been speciation taking place every few days... much more frequent than that if you factor in not only speciation but the multipliers of domain, kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, and genus.
Interesting how we don't have even one example of this over the hundreds of years man has been observing these things? Why do you think this is?

 

[KWCrazy]

As long as Christians continue to shovel this kind of nonsensical religious pseudoscience at their children, their children (who have access to the internet, the Discovery Channel, books and Discover Magazine) will continue to LEAVE the church in droves. Your children are not FOOLS. and they know when they are being LIED to.

The truth does not reside with the internet, the Discovery Channel, or books on evolution. The truth resides in the word of God. It is the evolutionists who lying; who pretend that we live in a world governed exclusively by natural law instead of a word where God has sovereignty over natural law.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Darwin's book is called the Origin of Species. Get it straight.

Of the species, not of life. Get it straight.

-CryptoLutheran