Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[Astrid]

On the contrary. Many creationists are quite clear about what a lie is. Henry Morris, the founder of modern creationism, put it succinctly: "The purpose of the theory of evolution is to deny the existence of God." (emphasis added)

To believe that requires great ignorance.

So is he lying or extremely ignorant or maybe both

 

[AV1611VET]

Hey, any time you want to talk about joy, blessing, forgiveness, charity, benevolence, or forbearance, I'll be all ears.

You were more than ears, chief.

You had it all.

It's your feet that I'm questioning.

Why'd you walk out on all that?

Was Paul right when he said embracing evolution can lead to atheism?

 

[stevil]

God says He created man and evolution says that God did not create man.
One of them is wrong.
Christians believe that God has the better track record at telling the truth.

Evolution doesn't talk about god at all.
Catholics beleive in god and also believe in evolution, they don't believe there is a contradiction between these two positions.

 

[atpollard]

The real reason is they do not believe that Genesis can be rightly interpreted in any way that deviates from the Earth being created within 144 hours around (roughly) 5782 years ago. An attack on that interpretation to them is an attack on the faith itself, because they consider their method of interpretation to be foundational to the faith.

Too narrow minded an explanation.
I view Genesis 1 as a Polemic against other creation myths, as such it is primarily theological rather than literal with references that point to theological concepts diametrically opposed to other ancient religions. As a quick example, virtually all other creation mythologies start with the birth of the gods (typically from the primordial water), but Genesis begins with the eternal extant God hovering over the primordial water and commanding it. This has important theological implications.

With respect to creation, one fact that Genesis establishes is that God creates everything and the MODE by which God creates man is different from the mode by which God creates everything else. This BIBLICAL TRUTH extends far beyond Genesis and runs far deeper, theologically speaking, than some tripe about 144 hours. You have the cart pulling the horse. It is the deeper truth that drives some to believe in 144 hours, not a need for 144 hours that demands faith in a deeper truth: God created Man distinct from animals.

Part of the anti-animism of the Genesis Polemic. The Earth is NOT our mother and we are not "one with nature".

 

[ottawak]

You were more than ears, chief.

You had it all.

It's your feet that I'm questioning.

Why'd you walk out on all that?

Was Paul right when he said embracing evolution can lead to atheism?

Paul said that? Anyway, TKLV is an agnostic, not an atheist.

 

[AV1611VET]

Evolution doesn't talk about god at all.

I wouldn't either if I was evolution.

Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

 

[AV1611VET]

Paul said that?

Affirmative.

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Anyway, TKLV is an agnostic, not an atheist.

Thanks for the correction.

He's an agnostic that talks like an atheist.

 

[atpollard]

That may be so. For example your statement about
evolution is not true.

Could you be more specific? What in my statement about evolution is not true?

Evolution claims than Men and Chimpanzees both evolved from a common primate ancestor.
How does that not deny man as a special act of creation (named "Adam") by God?

 

[ottawak]

I wouldn't either if I was evolution.

Isaiah 29:16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

Correct. Because the theory of evolution only explains how it was done, not who did it.

 

[ottawak]

Could you be more specific? What in my statement about evolution is not true?

Evolution claims than Men and Chimpanzees both evolved from a common primate ancestor.
How does that not deny man as a special act of creation (named "Adam") by God?

It was a special creation whether God made man out of a handful of dust or a precursor primate. You're just arguing about the starting materials.

 

[AV1611VET]

Correct. Because the theory of evolution only explains how it was done, not who did it.

But the theory of evolution says how long it took to do it.

And it's off by millions of years.

 

[AV1611VET]

It was a special creation whether God made man out of a handful of dust or a precursor primate. You're just arguing about the starting materials.

I think there's more to it than that -- much more.

 

[ottawak]

But the theory of evolution says how long it took to do it.

And it's off by millions of years.

And so we are back to the Bible again. These discussions are never really about anythiing but how to read Genesis.

 

[stevil]

I wouldn't either if I was evolution.

A person can't be evolution.
Scientists came up with the ToE using the scientific method. They base their method off evidence, and observable and falsifiable claims. God doesn't meet this criteria and so isn't in the purview of science.

 

[atpollard]

Do you believe that a natural explanation for a phenomenon excludes divine causality? This is an interesting theological question. Most Christians believe that it does not.

The Bible states that God created Adam:

• [Genesis 1:27 NASB20] 27 So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
• [Genesis 5:1 NASB20] 1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. On the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God.
• [1 Corinthians 11:9 NASB20] 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman's sake, but woman for the man's sake.
• [1 Corinthians 15:45 NASB20] 45 So also it is written: "The first MAN, Adam, BECAME A LIVING PERSON." The last Adam [was] a life-giving spirit.
• [1 Timothy 2:13 NASB20] 13 For [it was] Adam [who] was first created, [and] then Eve.

Can a "natural explanation for [THIS] phenomenon" be found that will affirm the truth of the "God-breathed" narrative and support "divine causality"?

A multitude of small changes from Homo Hablis to Homo erectus to Homo heidelbergensis to Homo neanderthalensis to Homo sapien does not support the "God made the first man 'Adam'" narrative. So "a natural explanation" for MAN that includes "divine causality" is likely to do harm to either the given "natural explanation" or the given "divine causality" (or both). It is a laudable goal, but likely one fore-doomed to failure ... like creating a "married bachelor".

 

[stevil]

And so we are back to the Bible again. These discussions are never really about anythiing but how to read Genesis.

And so these discussions about the bible should probably be in the Christian section of this forum so that it doesn't get bogged down with atheists talking about science.

 

[atpollard]

It was a special creation whether God made man out of a handful of dust or a precursor primate. You're just arguing about the starting materials.

Special acts of creation are not the mechanism of evolution. Many small changes over a long time are the mechanism. So you are denying evolution and just arguing Genesis with God grabbing one of the animals instead of a handful of clay.

 

[BNR32FAN]

There is self- deception, as in choosing to believe
obvious nonsense. Lying to self.
And theres this, and more

Invincible ignorance fallacy - Wikipedia

Theres a lot of things to to call it when a person
cannot accept proof that they are mistaken.

Proof is something that is undeniable, you haven’t given any proof all you’ve given is evidence, there’s a difference. And by the way welcome to CHRISTIAN Forums. Going to a CHRISTIAN forum and expecting CHRISTIANS to disregard the word of God then getting mad about it when they won’t and resorting to rude and disrespectful comments is childish and immature behavior. It would be like me going to an atheist website expecting people to praise God, it’s a ridiculous expectation. So this should come as no surprise to you that I would hold to my position despite anything you say because I’ve been thru these discussions several times. You can’t prove me wrong and I can’t prove you wrong so it should just be a discussion of examining evidence but in the end neither of us can expect the other to concede based on inconclusive evidence.

 

[atpollard]

Evolution doesn't talk about god at all.

... but it DOES talk about the creation of man through incremental evolutionary changes that contradict the "God made Adam" explanation. So it SCREAMS in its silence.

 

[BNR32FAN]

" what is if a persons mistake is pointed out to them
but they persist in the claim anyway"?

Your lil anecdote illusrates an example in which
the error is pointed out.

Now what do you call it if they persist in their
claim anyway?

I would call it a lie