Luke 17, evolution does not at all undermine evolution. It maybe undermines your own homespun interpretation of the Bible. But many Christians think otherwise and certainly have a right to do so.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?
- Thread starter Senod2
- Start date
- Status
EastCoast, those are all bogus arguments promoted by creation-science propaganda. Even creation-science people have and to take these back. More than one creation-science source now admits that the moon-dust argument is totally invalid. Also, evolution has been observed with bacteria in the lab. And since you insist on things being directly observed, nobody directly observed God making the world in six days either. So you, too, are going on speculation.
Upvote
0
Well, Extraneous, I think you are forgetting that down through the ages, Christians have demonized and denounced as a thing of teh Devil anything they did not like or understand. The list is endless. Eye glasses were seen as a thing of teh Devil. The geocentric view of the solar system was seen as a thing of the Devil. The Poe was and still is called the Antichrist. The Pope called the Reformers the Antichrist. Biblical scholars who disagreed with the conservative Christian version of the Bible were denounced as of the Devil. Look what happened to Albert Schweitzer. Did you know he was a theologian and pastor? Did you know he got the boot from the Reformed church simply because he wrote a book questioning the historicity of teh NT accounts of Christ? If they do it to them, the will certainly do it to the rest of us. So when I see all this inflammatory rhetoric denouncing evolution as a thing of the Devil, I am not at all surprised It just goes in one ear and out the other. I know it for what it is: Just another example of a neurotic form of thinking that plagues Christianity.
Upvote
0
Extraneous, you need to pay attention to what I am saying. I am talking about the Pharisees, and yes, they did believe we were saved by the law, which had to be followed to the letter.
Upvote
0
Extraneous, Paul definitely did not say we all had to think alike. Conflict and debate need not cause one to stumble. Your posts remind me of St. Augustine. He argued that we should keep our mouths shut even if we were right, lest we disturb the unity of the church. Note: even if you are right. That's how neurotic this whole think-alike thing ge5ts.
Upvote
0
Extraneous, if you are going to correct others, yes, there will be disagreements and arguments. If you can't accept that, then don't bother. Now, you can ridicule my education all you want. All that goes to p[rove is that you are a very anti-intellectual person who has no respect for higher education.
Upvote
0
EastCoast, Christ did not teach science. Also, when you bring up other religions, it seems to be to be extremely arrogant to assume your religion is right and everyone else's faith is wrong. I call that Christian Imperialism, and it is one of the big things that has given the Christian religion a bad reputation and rightly so. NO religion can claim to have a monopoly on God. Every religion has its strengths and then its weak points.
Upvote
0
That's because nobody here has had much education in theology and biblical studies. They are going on their expectations as laity. Bad way to approach biblical and theological scholarship. Also, as I pointed out in a previous post, any biblical scholar who disagrees with the fundamentality version of teh Bible is automatically written off as possessed by the Devil, ignorant, lacking in Spirit, you name it. Why should I be an exception?
Upvote
0
KW, there are many things in the Bible I agree with. You don't see 6that because your wo5rking from a fundamentalist viewpoint, which, unfortunately, assumes those who disagree with the fundamentalist version of teh Bible are Bible haters, etc.
Upvote
0
If they are all bogus, as you claim, then give us the refuting evidence. Otherwise, you are just talking through your hat...
Yeah, about that bacteria thing... in the end, they still were bacteria... it's the same as the much ballyhooed experiment on fruit flies.... something like 10,000 generations were mutated though radiation and not only did the fruit fly still remain a fruit fly but after they stopped radiating them, the fruit flies reverted back to their pre radiated state within a few generations.
You may not have liked a couple of examples I gave and that's fine, but what I gave was actual 'observable' evidence for a young earth creation. If you want to go down the list and refute them, that would be a better format, I would think, although, I asked for your evidence supporting evolution. (not speciation, that's actually adaptation not evolution)
Notice, I didn't try and state that anyone actually saw God create, that's a rather lame statement Hog.. what I did present was observable examples that point to a young earth creation.
Upvote
0
Hog, I'm going to help you out to help me out, if that's ok?
When you read a post you want to comment on, click the "Reply" button in the bottom right hand corner of that post. It will then bring you to the reply box at the bottom but with the posters words that you are referring to also included.
I hope this was explained well... it's 3AM where I'm at.
Upvote
0
Hog, if you know more than the rest of us, theologically speaking, why do you come here? Is it to teach us or to be taught? Is it to gain perspective through others' experiences or to proudly "show us your stuff"? Is this how you are using your theological training? You said you don't belong to any particular denomination, so is your faith based on your own reading of the Bible or do you ascribe to one denominations theology more than another?
Sorry for all the pointed questions, I'm just trying to figure you out. You remind me a lot of a poster that used to come on here calling herself Stinsonmarie. She was also a self described overly educated theologian that had some strange ideas on what the Bible stated.
Upvote
0
Extraneous
Well-Known Member
You twisted just about every scripture you referenced, which proves you are not using any known theological education but instead your own opinion. You criticize pharisees on one hand but then follow their same example. They were educated as well, and boasted in it, just as you do, yet they were blind, just as you are. Please, dont respond to me anymore, i would rather not waste words with you.
John 9:39 And Jesus said, “For judgment I have come into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may be made blind.”
40 Then some of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these words, and said to Him, “Are we blind also?”
41 Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.
1 Co 3:18 Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. 19 For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their own craftiness”; [a] 20 and again, “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile.”
1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
19 For it is written:
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”[a]
20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Glory Only in the Lord
26 For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called. 27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to put to shame the things which are mighty; 28 and the base things of the world and the things which are despised God has chosen, and the things which are not, to bring to nothing the things that are, 29 that no flesh should glory in His presence. 30 But of Him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God—and righteousness and sanctification and redemption— 31 that, as it is written, “He who glories, let him glory in the Lord.”[c]
Upvote
0
Look, Extraneous, I don't think you quite get the picture here. The Bible is one thing. Your interpretation is something wholly different. You have not presented just Scripture here. Y9ou have also presented your opinion, underline your opinion, as to what Paul is saying. OK, fine. Expressing opinions ids what this forum is for. But an opinion is just that, it is a mere opinion. Your opinion on Paul is just one among a zilli0on others. So if you had simply said, "Well, that's my opinion<' and stopped right there, no problem. But you seemed to go way over the line. You seem to be assuming every Christian on the planet should believe what you have to say. So the question is, Who says you are right? Who says you really know anything about the Bible and Paul at all? I, for one, can't even begin to see how you have the authority to insist all Christians comply with your beliefs. Are you an ordained pastor? A biblical scholar? Were you elected as the representative of some Christian community? Do you even bother to attend church? I wonder. Why should I belief your word over and against a major Pauline scholar such as Johannes Munch, whose careful research completely debunks anything you have to say here about Paul? And please don't give me those lame excuses that he wasn't a good Christian, too worldly, etc.
Upvote
0
I came here because solid theological debate and discussion helps you sharpen up your mental reflexes. The problem I am having is that I am not being challenged enough here. Too many posts here are simply inflammatory rhetoric from unqualified persons. But OK. I can roll with that. I did not say that I was not a member of a denomination. Where did you get that idea? I am PCUSA and studied in a PCUSA seminary. However, my theological interests cut across denominations. My views on Scripture come from the advanced course work I did in modern biblical studies. When you talk of being "overly educated" and having "strange views on the Bible," I wish I had a nickel for every time I have heard that. Generally such remarks come from lay expectations on what theologians should be like. You have to bear in mind there is a huge town-gown riff. I don't think that the laity realize that enough. There is the world of the laity. OK, fine. Nothing wrong in being a lay person. The problem is that many laity naively expect that somehow the academic world of theological and biblical scholarship is an extension of what they learned in church and Sunday-school class. Forget it. The academic world is light years removed from the laity. it is a completely different ballgame, with different rules, goals, and can reach conclusions some laity may find quite strange or disturbing. I accept that as simply an occupational hazard.
Upvote
0
There are tons of evidence to sup[port evolution. That's why it is accepted in the scientific community. For example, AR Wallace, a colleague of Darwin, who actually came up with the idea of survival of the fittest, spent years and years doing painstaking research and collecting specimens in jungles. He was able to identify about 5,000 new species. He lived nature, he became one with nature. One of the things he noticed in his through collection of insects, anyway, is that there are definite changes taking place within a species, and that if you compare one species with another, the really isn't any hard-and-fast dividing line where one ends and the other begins. This shot down the natural theology of the day, which argued that the species simply cannot change. And there are tons of evidence from fossils, and cosmology, which finds the universe to be billions of years old. And that's just for starters. You seem to like creation-science material. I do not. I find it generally the unqualified judgment of unqualified persons who do sport even phony degrees. They love to present the old human-footprint-with-the-dinosaur argument. And that's interesting because this whole theory was completely debunked and even creation-science people themselves admit it is a weak case. Setterfield tried to argue that c was infinite at the beginning of creation but has slowed down ever since. He had no evidence. So he tried to argue he was right based on the fact that estimates of c had been getting slower over the years. However, that proved to be bogus . Throughout history, up to the present, c has been estimated as faster and faster. Also c is one of the most constant elements in science. It has been measured many times and it never varies. On and on it goes. I have yet to find them present any definitive research or argument to support their position.
You have to remember that the march of human knowledge always goes forward, never backward. So, even if science would come up with an alternative to evolution, it certainly would not be back to the natural theology of Darwin's day.
Upvote
0
Colter
Member
Oh I do agree that the Hebrews speculated about a 6 day creation, they were just wrong. But having bought into the church governments teaching that their writings are the infallible writings of God, then the reality of our material world must be bent to fit the Golden Calf.
And if we are to believe in the Hebrews flood story then life rapidly replenished the earth AND other races of people evolved from Noah.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
