How to choose between creation and evolution.

[AV1611VET]

There is no need to choose. Take both.

Then you'll end up sowing tares among the wheat.

 

[AV1611VET]

Great. Point me to the people who came to the conclusion of creationism without an apriori religious belief. I'll wait.

Adam & Eve

 

[eleos1954]

The Life created life.

John 14:6a Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:

Abiogenesis without Jesus Christ is like a car without fuel.

Yes ... and so it is ... was ... and shall always be. Amen

John 1:1

New Living Translation
In the beginning the Word (Jesus) already existed. The Word (Jesus) was with God, and the Word (Jesus) was God.

 

[pitabread]

Then you'll end up sowing tares among the wheat.

What if you are the one sowing tares? It's mighty presumptuous of you to think otherwise.

 

[AV1611VET]

What if you are the one sowing tares?

Then shame on me.

It's mighty presumptuous of you to think otherwise.

I think not.

If creationism is wheat and evolution is tares, then:

1. Belief in creationism is sowing wheat.
2. Belief in evolution is sowing tares.
3. Belief in both is sowing tares among the wheat.

It's simple logic.

 

[inquiring mind]

If you study evolution, with an open mind, you will likely believe in evolution.

If you study human, animal, and plant anatomy, with an open mind, you will likely believe in creation.

Believing in Creation takes faith in the Almighty; believing in Macro Evolution, man’s speculations, analysis, and determinations. Neither can be proved... that would involve too much knowing. “Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further...” Job 38:11

 

[tas8831]

Believing in Creation takes faith in the Almighty;

Man's mere belief in tall tales and silly stories..

believing in Macro Evolution, man’s speculations, analysis, and determinations. Neither can be proved... that would involve too much knowing. “Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further...” Job 38:11

Another pointless act of sophism...

I always get a kick out of how religionists attempt to drag scientific endeavors down to the level of their religion - the mere belief in the ancient cultural tall tales of their preferred numerologists and mystics.

It must make them oh so special.

 

[tas8831]

delete

 

[tas8831]

Have you proven evolution, and where it started?

Yes.
It started in what is now Santiago, Chile.

Prove me wrong.

 

[tas8831]

delete

 

[Subduction Zone]

Then shame on me.I think not.

If creationism is wheat and evolution is tares, then:

1. Belief in creationism is sowing wheat.
2. Belief in evolution is sowing tares.
3. Belief in both is sowing tares among the wheat.

It's simple logic.

There is a problem with your logic. Your beliefs can be tested. The beliefs of those that accept evolution can be tested. Guess who's ideas are shown to be correct when tested?

 

[pitabread]

If creationism is wheat and evolution is tares, then:

1. Belief in creationism is sowing wheat.
2. Belief in evolution is sowing tares.
3. Belief in both is sowing tares among the wheat.

It's simple logic.

And if it's the other way around?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Believing in Creation takes faith in the Almighty; believing in Macro Evolution, man’s speculations, analysis, and determinations. Neither can be proved... that would involve too much knowing. “Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further...” Job 38:11

There is no such sign. Instead when we look the image keeps getting clearer and clearer. It is only those that run away from the scientific method, yet ironically depending upon its products to do so, that cannot see this. Accepting macroevolution only takes learning. Concepts can be tested and are constantly tested. Belief in creationism involves running away from valid tests of one's beliefs.

 

[pitabread]

There is a problem with your logic. Your beliefs can be tested. The beliefs of those that accept evolution can be tested. Guess who's ideas are shown to be correct when tested?

The problem is that AV1611VET believes in an inherently deceptive universe. At which point all bets are off.

 

[pitabread]

Believing in Creation takes faith in the Almighty; believing in Macro Evolution, man’s speculations, analysis, and determinations. Neither can be proved... that would involve too much knowing.

What matters is what the evidence supports. The evidence does not support creationism.

In fact, contrary to the OP, creationist beliefs seem dependent on *not* studying nature. Those who are in the business of studying nature (e.g. biologists) have concluded that species are the result of evolutionary processes and not special, instantaneous creation.

 

[Brightmoon]

Then shame on me.I think not.

If creationism is wheat and evolution is tares, then:

1. Belief in creationism is sowing wheat.
2. Belief in evolution is sowing tares.
3. Belief in both is sowing tares among the wheat.

It's simple logic.

You do realize that tare is an old fashioned word for weeds and the official definition of a weed is a plant growing where you don’t want it. Oh an your logic is actually a non sequitur because you analogy doesn’t work . To accurately reflect the reality I’m going to borrow this quote from Dan Dare

 

[Subduction Zone]

The problem is that AV1611VET believes in an inherently deceptive universe. At which point all bets are off.

I know. To me one has to believe in a dishonest God to interpret Genesis literally. One ends up contradicting the verse:

Titus 1:2 New International Version (NIV)
2 in the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time,

And countless other verses that say that God cannot lie or be misleading. The evidence out there clearly supports the scientific interpretation of the past which includes evolution and not a literal interpretation of Genesis.

 

[Brightmoon]

That’s one thing that bugs me about creationism. Why would you believe in a god who lies?

 

[pitabread]

That’s one thing that bugs me about creationism. Why would you believe in a god who lies?

That's the funny thing about humans. Anything can be rationalized.

Though what creationists should be worried about is if they are being inherently deceived, how would they ever know? They don't seem to have any way to validate their own ideas.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is a problem with your logic. Your beliefs can be tested. The beliefs of those that accept evolution can be tested. Guess who's ideas are shown to be correct when tested?

If you think creationism can be tested, I have a wheat farm in Antarctica I'd like to sell you.