As a Christian, how many of you believe in evolution?

[Justatruthseeker]

I don't doubt him. But that "Jesus quoted Genesis..." argument is lame. Jesus used Genesis in his preaching (as did Paul) just as any preacher does, even a liberal preacher who thinks its just a man-made story. What Jesus (or Paul) thought about fundamentalist Protestant Bible doctrine is not made clear.

Oh it is quite clear what Jesus thought about Genesis. He made it very clear he believed in a literal translation. What would be lame is trying to say Jesus relying on scripture (which is approved for teaching) and is God-breathed, was lame..... If you don't believe it you might as well throw it in the trash can......

Then that liberal preacher is just teaching doctrines he doesn't believe in to sound good to the flock that he is likely leading astray......

And yes, you do doubt him...... are you implying Jesus repeated scripture he didn't really believe in???????? Certainly he knew what was true scripture did he not? After all, he was there at creation......

 

[inquiring mind]

As Jesus said.... male and female created He them..... If you doubt him, why believe anything else he had to say????

I don't doubt him. But that "Jesus quoted Genesis..." argument is lame. Jesus used Genesis in his preaching (as did Paul) just as any preacher does, even a liberal preacher who thinks its just a man-made story. What Jesus (or Paul) thought about fundamentalist Protestant Bible doctrine is not made clear.

It's not lame... Jesus quoted and must have read Genesis. Matthew 19:4-5

 

[Speedwell]

Oh it is quite clear what Jesus thought about Genesis. He made it very clear he believed in a literal translation. What would be lame is trying to say Jesus relying on scripture (which is approved for teaching) and is God-breathed, was lame..... If you don't believe it you might as well throw it in the trash can......

Then that liberal preacher is just teaching doctrines he doesn't believe in to sound good to the flock that he is likely leading astray......

And yes, you do doubt him...... are you implying Jesus repeated scripture he didn't really believe in???????? Certainly he knew what was true scripture did he not? After all, he was there at creation......

Careful, you "civility" is slipping. Jesus made very clear that He believed Genesis to be the authoritative word of God. So do I. Jesus never gave us any indication that it had to be literal and inerrant to be the authoritative word of God. Paul didn't either.

 

[pitabread]

Now, where did that come from? I tried to talk to you in your terms... you guys are just too moody.

I'm not wrong though.

 

[inquiring mind]

I'm not wrong though.

Of course you are!

 

[pitabread]

Of course you are!

I've been in these debates for a couple decades now. Believe me, I know the score.

Creationism ends with "Goddidit". That's it.

Thought if you want a more pointed wording of the same, I defer to the Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution:

While creationism explains everything, it offers no understanding beyond, “that’s the way it was created.” No testable predictions can be derived from the creationist explanation. Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. In those few instances where predictions can be inferred from Biblical passages (e.g., groups of related organisms, migration of all animals from the resting place of the ark on Mt. Ararat to their present locations, genetic diversity derived from small founder populations, dispersal ability of organisms in direct proportion to their distance from eastern Turkey), creationism has been scientifically falsified.​

https://botany.org/outreach/evolution.php

 

[pitabread]

Basically what I said... in my opinion the archaeological record just doesn’t conclusively support that ‘Kinds’ gradually appear through long drawn out transformation from other 'Kinds,' despite the pretty picture biology paints in that regard. I just think there's more speculation there than they care to admit. My interpretation is that they seem to appear all at once, and in stages, vary and adapt some, and that’s it. I'm sure that's different from the traditional creationism you're used to arguing against. For me that stays in line with the bible and creation because I don't think we know anything about God's work or His timeframe (what a day represents in creation time or anything else). That's a little loose, but its not loose enough for me to see macro evolution taking place.

Let's step back and consider this, though:

On the one hand, we have the world's collective biologists, trained professionals in the field of biology; and not just contemporary but for the last hundred+ years of biological research. And the collective work of these thousands upon thousands of biologists from different backgrounds, cultures, religious views, etcs, have performed countless hours of published research, evidence, etcs, and all come to one conclusion: that life on Earth appears to share common ancestry.

And on the other hand, you're suggesting they're all wrong.

What makes your interpretation better than theirs? What is it that you are seeing that they aren't?

 

[pitabread]

Considering this is a debate forum and the comment was using a broad brush... I don't think that should be considered an uncivil comment.

What do you do for a living?

Perhaps if we start disparaging your line of work, you'll start to realize how you sound to everyone else.

 

[inquiring mind]

On the one hand, we have the world's collective biologists, trained professionals in the field of biology; and not just contemporary but for the last hundred+ years of biological research. And the collective work of these thousands upon thousands of biologists from different backgrounds, cultures, religious views, etcs, have performed countless hours of published research, evidence, etcs, and all come to one conclusion: that life on Earth appears to share common ancestry.
And on the other hand, you're suggesting they're all wrong.
What makes your interpretation better than theirs? What is it that you are seeing that they aren't?

'Better interpretation' is your phrase, not mine. 'What I'm seeing that they are not' is also your phrasing, not mine. I'm simply saying that similar indicators, derived by like-trained and like-minded professionals doesn't make it so.

 

[inquiring mind]

What do you do for a living?

Perhaps if we start disparaging your line of work, you'll start to realize how you sound to everyone else.

Perhaps you are employed in the only occupation that I know of that doesn’t expect disparaging comments and opinions.

 

[pitabread]

'Better interpretation' is your phrase, not mine. 'What I'm seeing that they are not' is also your phrasing, not mine. I'm simply saying that similar indicators, derived by like-trained and like-minded professionals doesn't make it so.

Dude, you straight up claimed that "macro evolution" is a hoax.

Yet when asked to stand up for your own claims, you get awfully cagey about doing so.

 

[pitabread]

Perhaps you are employed in the only occupation that I know of that doesn’t expect disparaging comments and opinions.

Do you think that makes it okay?

 

[inquiring mind]

Dude, you straight up claimed that "macro evolution" is a hoax.

Yet when asked to stand up for your own claims, you get awfully cagey about doing so.

Who's calling who dude?

 

[pitabread]

Who's calling who dude?

Your profile says you're a dude. Are you not?

 

[inquiring mind]

Your profile says you're a dude. Are you not?

You got it dude!

 

[pitabread]

You got it dude!

Your profile is a lie. I don't know what to believe any more.

 

[inquiring mind]

Your profile is a lie. I don't know what to believe any more.

You're not thinking that I can only learn from those here with the same opinion as you, are you?

 

[pitabread]

You're not thinking that I can only learn from those here with the same opinion as you, are you?

Huh?

 

[inquiring mind]

Huh?

What on my profile is a lie?

 

[pitabread]

What on my profile is a lie?

You're profile says you are male, but you just said you were not.