Would Jesus believe in evolution?

TLK Valentine said:

I sincerely hope you're not trying to pass yourself off as one of His success stories...

Click to expand...

Success as God would define it ... yes. As you would, probably not.

BobRyan said:

The historic use of junk-science outright fraud that has gone into making blind-faith evolutionism socially acceptable is well documented. Whether you are talking about Piltdown man ... or Othaniel Marsh's contrived "horse series" still on display at the Smithsonian and often called the "best example of evolution" prior to that 50 year fraud and hoax being exposed to the light of day...or if you are talking about "Nebraska man" at the time of the Scopes monkey-on-trial... or the more recent Neanderthal 30 year fraud that was exposed.

(Or maybe it is the ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny decades long hoax exposed and put on trial) -- all of it is "a sign" to the objective unbiased reader that there is something rotten in the house of evolutionism.

Why would anyone want to imagine to themselves that Christ would teach/or/believe that amoebas turn into horses "given enough time and chance on mount improbable"??

in Christ,

Bob

Click to expand...

Yes and talking snakes, flat earth, geocentrism, whales being fish, bats being fowl, 6000 year old universe, dinosaurs living with people, a person living in the stomach of a whale, flowering plants before the sun, etc ad infinitum. Yeah junk science indeed!

By the way what language did the snake speak in.... oh don't tell me let me guess..... ENGLISH

Dear me

mzungu said:

Yes and talking snakes, flat earth, geocentrism, whales being fish, bats being fowl, 6000 year old universe, dinosaurs living with people, a person living in the stomach of a whale, flowering plants before the sun, etc ad infinitum. Yeah junk science indeed!

By hte way what language did the snake speak in.... oh don't tell me let me guess..... ENGLISH

Dear me

Click to expand...

What language does metal speak in?

Greg1234 said:

What language does metal speak in?

Click to expand...

NONE!

mzungu said:

NONE!

Click to expand...

You've never seen a person with metal to their ear and even talking to it?

Greg1234 said:

You've never seen a person with metal to their ear and even talking to it?

Click to expand...

Have you ever had a conversation with a piece of metal Boy this Thread gets weirder by the post!


murder by death - YouTube

BobRyan said:

The example of the dark ages so near and dear to our atheist friends as they try to prove that evolutionism's atheism is not so bad as Christianity - ignores the slaughter conducted in the 20th century by evolutionist-driven Nazi and Communist countries. Slaughter that far surpasses all of the dark ages combined.

It also ignores the fact that the "lesson learned" in the dark ages is that replacing the Bible with "man-made-tradition" only leads the world into darkness. It was restoration of a "Sola scriptura" testing of doctrine - that took the world out of those dark ages.

The very book evolutionists are so anxious to trash - is the mechanism used to end the dark ages!

How odd that they think that distrust in the Bible is an idea given wings when noticing that the Bible ended the Dark Ages!

in Christ,

Bob

Click to expand...

Still didn't answer my question, did you? Nobody is trashing the Bible here (or any other religious book), martyrdom complex much? I simply asked for one example of a religious government that is free, democratic and successful.

The question that I answered to was about religious governments, not "Christian" ones. You want modern examples of modern evil religious governments? Pick any radical Muslim country.

Now, I will ask again, please provide one example of a free successful democracy that is not secular.

BondiHarry said:

NO, all life shares some common denominators, this hardly means all life shares a common ancestor.

Click to expand...

Biologists do not claim that common ancestry is true because all life shares common denominators. Biologists do claim that life shares a common ancestor because of the PATTERN of shared denominators. It is the pattern of shared features which points to evolution. That pattern is a nested hierarchy.

A nested hierarchy makes zero sense if species or kinds were created separately. There is no reason any designer would limit themselves to a nested hierarchy. None. Humans don't limit themselves to a nested hierarchy when they design things, even when they design new organisms. In fact, why would an all powerful, all knowing supernatural deity who lives outside of space and time, and who has unlimited resources, need to reuse a single design? Why not start from scratch for each new created kind? It would seem that for God it would be just as easy to start from scratch as it would borrowing from other designs.

We didn't add a deity to the formula, God stepped forward and told us about our origins.

Click to expand...

My bible history may be a little rusty, but from what I learned the bible was written by men.

Yet one of the truisms that man's science has established is that life as we know it ONLY comes from life.

Click to expand...

This isn't true. What we have established is that complex, modern organisms do not spontaneously form from inorganic substances in the matter of days or weeks.

God is not a 'religion' but a being infinitely smarter and more powerful than man.

Click to expand...

Then why would God limit himself to a nested hierarchy, the very pattern that we would expect from the observed process of evolution?

BobRyan said:

Why would anyone want to imagine to themselves that Christ would teach/or/believe that amoebas turn into horses "given enough time and chance on mount improbable"??

in Christ,

Bob

Click to expand...

I wouldn't expect an honest person to misrepresent a scientific theory or the evidence that supports it in the manner you have. Was Jesus an honest person?

dysert said:

What the poll question says is, "Would Jesus believe in evolution?"

I quoted Heb. 11:3 ("By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.") because it says 2 things: (1) the worlds were framed by the word of God, not by billions of years of mutations, and (2) the things which are seen (the material world) were not made of things which are visible (in other words, the material world was created by the immaterial).

Since Jesus was there at creation, He obviously knew about creation. He would only believe what's true.

Click to expand...

In that case he wouldn't have to "believe in evolution". He would know it is true.

Loudmouth said:

Biologists do not claim that common ancestry is true because all life shares common denominators. Biologists do claim that life shares a common ancestor because of the PATTERN of shared denominators. It is the pattern of shared features which points to evolution. That pattern is a nested hierarchy.

A nested hierarchy makes zero sense if species or kinds were created separately. There is no reason any designer would limit themselves to a nested hierarchy. None. Humans don't limit themselves to a nested hierarchy when they design things, even when they design new organisms. In fact, why would an all powerful, all knowing supernatural deity who lives outside of space and time, and who has unlimited resources, need to reuse a single design? Why not start from scratch for each new created kind? It would seem that for God it would be just as easy to start from scratch as it would borrowing from other designs.

Click to expand...

These are questions that only God can answer and He did not address them in the Bible.

I bake and by the use of the same common ingredients I can make cakes, pies, muffins, rolls, bread, cookies and scones. Granted these are not living but would you make the claim that they are part of a 'nested hierarchy' because of the commonality they share?

My bible history may be a little rusty, but from what I learned the bible was written by men.

Click to expand...

Men inspired by God. Men, particularly not 40 of them living in different centuries, come up with the strange ideas (to 'normal' men) that we find in the Bible.

This isn't true. What we have established is that complex, modern organisms do not spontaneously form from inorganic substances in the matter of days or weeks.

Click to expand...

Nor do simple, ancient organisms ... in a matter of day or weeks or centuries or millenia or eons.

Then why would God limit himself to a nested hierarchy, the very pattern that we would expect from the observed process of evolution?

Click to expand...

Again, only He can tell us why He did things the way He did.

CabVet said:

Still didn't answer my question, did you? Nobody is trashing the Bible here (or any other religious book), martyrdom complex much? I simply asked for one example of a religious government that is free, democratic and successful.

The question that I answered to was about religious governments, not "Christian" ones. You want modern examples of modern evil religious governments? Pick any radical Muslim country.

Now, I will ask again, please provide one example of a free successful democracy that is not secular.

Click to expand...

What is the predominant religion in the freest and most successful nation in the world, the same religion that influenced it's founders?

mathetes123 said:

What is the predominant religion in the freest and most successful nation in the world, the same religion that influenced it's founders?

Click to expand...

I like what the Mayflower Compact says:

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the Faith, etc.

Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and advancements of the Christian faith and honor of our King and Country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the Northern parts of Virginia, do by these presents, solemnly and mutually, in the presence of God, and one another, covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic; for our better ordering, and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and by virtue hereof to enact, constitute, and frame, such just and equal laws, ordinances, acts, constitutions, and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most meet and convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise all due submission and obedience.


In witness whereof we have hereunto subscribed our names at Cape Cod the 11th of November, in the year of the reign of our Sovereign Lord King James, of England, France, and Ireland, the eighteenth, and of Scotland the fifty-fourth, 1620.

Click to expand...

CabVet said:

Now, I will ask again, please provide one example of a free successful democracy that is not secular.

Click to expand...

Ultimately we do not have ANY examples of a free successful democracy as they will all ultimately commit suicide. The United States once had a free successful Republic but as democracy took over and the Constitution became 'living' so that pesky amending process could be ignored, we are seeing the loss of freedom and impending economic ruin (which will always result when people realize they can vote themselves money from the government treasury ... as the saying goes, the problem with socialism is you ALWAYS run out of other people's money).

Liberty is not ultimately a secular ideal. There are always people who think they are smarter, wiser and morally superior to others and therefore should be able to dictate to other men what they should be doing (for their own good of course). Liberty is an ideal which comes from God and our Constitutional Republic sprang from the Christian ideals of limited government, freedom of conscience and God given rights of men.

AV1611VET said:

I like what the Mayflower Compact says:

Click to expand...

I'm sure you would, but the Mayflower Compact wasn't American.

Didn't you read the beginning?

In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal subjects of our dread Sovereign Lord King James, by the Grace of God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the Faith, etc.

Click to expand...

Metal Minister said:

Can you name a religious government?

Click to expand...

Taliban, for starters. Of course, one can look at the Middle East, past or present, to see what happens when religion becomes government -- Most people look there and think Islam is inherently the problem, but even your own Bible shows that the Jews weren't exactly all sunshine and rainbows when they were in charge.

And then there's Puritan New England -- forget about Salem for a minute, and look at their persecution of Quakers and Anabaptists; typical religious hypocrisy -- free from persecution only to inflict it on others.

(of course, the Puritans who came to America weren't really escaping religious persecution... but that's the myth, isn't it?)

Just because you couldn't (or didn't want to) think of any examples doesn't mean they don't exist.

TLK Valentine said:

I'm sure you would, but the Mayflower Compact wasn't American.

Click to expand...

I don't care if it was Swahili ... I like it.

In fact, the book of Galatians is called our Magna Charta.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omwPhwevIlU

The "Founding Fathers" were the ones who framed and ratified the Constitution...The ones who wrote,signed and fought for the Declaration of Independence were the ones who had the gumption to stand for the ideal that ultimately lead to the creation of the United States....
I know, way off topic..

BondiHarry said:

These are questions that only God can answer and He did not address them in the Bible.

Click to expand...

The question I would ask is why God chose to create in such a way that all of the evidence pointed to evolution when it never needed to be that way.

I bake and by the use of the same common ingredients I can make cakes, pies, muffins, rolls, bread, cookies and scones. Granted these are not living but would you make the claim that they are part of a 'nested hierarchy' because of the commonality they share?

Click to expand...

No. These confections do not fall into a nested hierarchy of shared and derived attributes. For example, if we grouped them by whether or not they contained blueberries we would have some of pies and some of the scones in a single group, and all the rest in another group. If we grouped them by whether or not they round or square we would get an entirely different grouping. There is no obvious importance to any of the features as a method for grouping them in any way that would resemble a hierarchy.

That is not so with life. We can see that a vertebral column is a very important feature for organizing life. When we organize life by these shared and derived features we find that we get groups within groups. We find that all dogs are mammals, and that all mammals are vertebrates. We find no such sorting with your confections, nor do we find this type of sorting with human designs.

Men inspired by God.

Click to expand...

Which is still not God, and it is fallible men claiming to be inspired by a supernatural being.

Nor do simple, ancient organisms ... in a matter of day or weeks or centuries or millenia or eons.

Click to expand...

Where can I find the experiments that support this claim?

Again, only He can tell us why He did things the way He did.

Click to expand...

Other than trying to fool us, why else would God need to create species so that they fall into a nested hierarchy?

It's a bit like the book "Omphalos: An Attempt to Untie the Geologic Knot" written by Phillip Henry Gosse in 1857. In the book, he argued that God had given the Earth an appearance of a history and age that never occurred. One of Gosse's good friends had this to say about the book:

"Shall I tell you the truth? It is best. Your book is the first that ever made me doubt, and I fear it will make hundreds do so. Your book tends to prove this — that if we accept the fact of absolute creation, God becomes Deus quidam deceptor [‘God who is sometimes a deceiver’]. I do not mean merely in the case of fossils which pretend to be the bones of dead animals; but in the one single case of your newly created scars on the pandanus trunk, your newly created Adam's navel, you make God tell a lie. It is not my reason, but my conscience which revolts here... I cannot... believe that God has written on the rocks one enormous and superfluous lie for all mankind."--Rev. Charles Kingsley

This is exactly what we have with biology. We have a very, very clear history of evolution written in both the fossil record and the genomes of living species. We are being told that it is all a lie. It was put there by God for no discernable reason. It is entirely superfluous, bordering on the lie described by Reverend Charles Kingsley.

So how would Jesus explain this?

Hintenda said:

He wouldn't explain it, he would first deny and then put his fingers in his ears and sing lalalalalalala.

How someone can survive being a creationists for longer than a day is beyond me,
if only because of the lies they must keep telling themselves.

Click to expand...

WOW, what a way to jump in!