For me, it's either theistic evolution or nothing.

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

theFijian said:
What if evidence arises to disprove evolution?

Let's see it.

theFijian said:
I don't 'believe' in evolution, instead I accept it based upon the evidence. If evidence was to arise which pointed to a different theory of how the diversity of life arose on the planet, then I would most likely accept that, based on the evidence. My belief in Christianity would remain largely untouched.

Precisely

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Resha Caner said:
Are you sure contrary evidence would be recognized if it were found?

Fetch some out and lt's see.

Resha Caner said:
Especially since no one is really looking for it.

That what YECs are all about, innit

Resha Caner said:
So, again, I suspect that any evidence which might suggest problems with evolution is more subtle than most people would expect. Everyone seems to be looking for the big kill.

Here's the trick, bruv. The Christian Faith isn't based on either evolution or the lack thereof. If evolution is somehow proven absolutely true, my response is "OK". If evolution is proven absolutely false, my response is "OK". The Christian Faith is what it is, evolution be blowed.

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Willtor said:
In large parts of the U.S. your social identity is tied up in which church you attend.

I'd be keen to know where that is. Living in the very Buckle of the Bible Belt (Nashville, Tennessee), I don't have have any idea what church of the many, many here would give anyone any boost in social standing. In fact, I'd be at a loss to tell you what church any prominent Nashvillian attends. I'd know if they were Korean, of course, because it's a small set (+- 8K Koreans in the metro area), and only a dozen of so Korean churches, and I'm part of the Korean community. But even in this small subset of the population here, I couldn't tell you of anyone whose prominence or lack thereof depends on his position in any particular church.

That strikes me as one of those "oh, well in some places where you go to church is all important"... If You Know What I Mean." deals. If you're stuck in Backwoods America then you better go along with what the yokels believe If You Know What's Good For You". Right?

My response t that would not be found acceptable in this forum. Just sayin'

Willtor said:
There's a lot of xenophobia,

Oh, do tell! A (biracial) redneck like me is probably gonna be xenophobic as all get out, isn't he? Watch out, he has a shotgun in his truck!

Willtor said:
and homogeneity of belief is crucial

And race...

Willtor said:
to bolstering "our church" versus "that other church."

Right. 'Cause We Know How Those People Are, don't we?

Willtor said:
The "other church" is likely backsliding and unfaithful in some crucial way. It sometimes becomes a race to the bottom of, "who can believe the weirdest thing," and people call it unwavering faith, but really it's just tribalism with Christian decor and science is often a casualty.

Good grief, ,give it a rest. would you? Regional and religious bigptry is as poisonous as any other kind.

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

abysmul said:
For me, it's "God did it", after that my opinion on exactly how doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things.

Bang on!

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

roasthawg said:
Ok, I did miss your point. We have differing views on the Bible then... I believe in its inerrancy.

From a technical standpoint, it ain't inerrant.

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Not_By_Chance said:
Aren't you forgetting that the author was not a human, but the creator of the entire universe and life itself? If He doesn't have all the answers then who does?

And He's gonna explain it to those X000 BC read ers how, then? Or to the geezer who's writing it all down?

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Hoghead1 said:
essentially males.

Now if women had been writing it down...

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Hieronymus said:
No there are not.

Well yeah, here pretty much are.

Hieronymus said:
Seriously, they sell you pure bluff and fluff.

Meaning you haven't read any.

Hieronymus said:
But it is you who is telling us we can't believe in creation.

I believe in creation. God Made everything. Stipulated. Does that made it can't have used evolution as part of His act of creation? No, it does not. Y'all are in the curious position of saying "No, God cannot have done that..." Really?

Hieronymus said:
Hello??

QRZ?

Hieronymus said:
And you don't even know why.

Because.

Hieronymus said:
You assume those who fed you this have the authority in the matter.

And yoiu automatically gainsay them without actually understanding what they s

Hieronymus said:
Or just have the integrity to be agnostic about it.

Have you the courage to do the same?

Jipsah · Mar 16, 2025

Not_By_Chance said:
So is it the word of God or not, that is the question?

No, the question is whether God was giving us technical data or not. He wasn't.

Not_By_Chance said:
If not, we might just as well toss it on the fire.

If you're looking for technical data, toss away,.

Not_By_Chance said:
If it is then we'd better take note of what it says, whether or not it agrees with man's (fallible) ideas.

OK, God created everything. Got it. You want a "how to"? It ain't there.

Not_By_Chance said:
I agree, but God would have made sure that what was written down was accurate

Technically accurate? Why? That's what Id call "Beyond The Scope Of This Document".

Not_By_Chance said:
because...?and truthful before He allowed it to be associated with His name would He not?

Would He have to include the equations as well?

truthuprootsevil · Mar 24, 2025

Ryukil said:
There are mountains of evidence for evolution. It is corroborated by research in every field. Scientists are basically unanimous these days. The only ones who won't give in, after 150 years, are the fundamentalists.

So for me, and many others I'm sure, it's either theistic evolution or we simply can not believe in Christianity.
This is why Christians should stop telling people they can't believe in evolution. Is a person's belief in evolution going to send them to Hell, as long as they believe that Jesus has saved them and they have accepted him? No! As long as the central belief is there, it doesn't matter what a person thinks about the origin of the earth. It's like whether a person believes in post-Trib or pre-Trib. Who the hell cares?

If Christians keep pushing the view that people can't believe in both Christianity and evolution, many potential Christians will be lost. They will be pushed away from the church as it becomes increasingly anachronistic. The will say, "I believe in evolution; of course I can't be a Christian." But that's only because Christians themselves have promoted this view. They have a damn grudge match with evolution. Christianity and evolution need not be mutually exclusive.

I believe in evolution, and in my view, if God was involved, it is an absolutely beautiful phenomenon. It is the work of a master artist, a supremely brilliant engineer. A single-celled organism gave way to all of the life we see on earth around us. It's amazing! Praise be to God for this glorious master work that shows us his incredible ingenuity.

I can understand.

I do believe what man called evolution is the process God used to achieve life upon this earth except for man.

One can even say he seeded the planet, since almost everything alive comes from a seed. And if not from a seed it has some way of reproducing itself.

In chapter 1 of Genesis God told the Earth to bring forth plants after their kind. He told the waters to bring forth life abundantly after their kind. Then he told the Earth to bring forth beast and cattle after their kind. The beast, what we call the dinosaurs and the cattle is what lives today. And considering the most accepted theory of origin of life on Earth, Abiogenesis, that life sprung up spontaneously from none life from the chemicals of the Earth; it can relate and does relate in the same order of the creation written out in the Bible; from when God said let there be light aka Big Bang Singularity.

All except for man, he did not tell the Earth to bring forth man. God formed man from the chemicals (dust) of the Earth and God breathed the breath of life into man himself and God placed man in the garden in the East of Eden which he had already prepared for him.
And one more thing being placed in the garden indicates God formed man somewhere else and put in here.

Job 33:6 · Apr 10, 2025

truthuprootsevil said:
I can understand.

I do believe what man called evolution is the process God used to achieve life upon this earth except for man.

One can even say he seeded the planet, since almost everything alive comes from a seed. And if not from a seed it has some way of reproducing itself.

In chapter 1 of Genesis God told the Earth to bring forth plants after their kind. He told the waters to bring forth life abundantly after their kind. Then he told the Earth to bring forth beast and cattle after their kind. The beast, what we call the dinosaurs and the cattle is what lives today. And considering the most accepted theory of origin of life on Earth, Abiogenesis, that life sprung up spontaneously from none life from the chemicals of the Earth; it can relate and does relate in the same order of the creation written out in the Bible; from when God said let there be light aka Big Bang Singularity.

All except for man, he did not tell the Earth to bring forth man. God formed man from the chemicals (dust) of the Earth and God breathed the breath of life into man himself and God placed man in the garden in the East of Eden which he had already prepared for him.
And one more thing being placed in the garden indicates God formed man somewhere else and put in here.

Biology and paleontology do not depict the "same order" as the days of creation in the Bible. For example, in the Bible, fish and birds come before the beasts of the field. But in biology and paleontology, birds come after land animals.

truthuprootsevil · Apr 20, 2025

Job 33:6 said:
Biology and paleontology do not depict the "same order" as the days of creation in the Bible. For example, in the Bible, fish and birds come before the beasts of the field. But in biology and paleontology, birds come after land animals.

The strangest thing is science still can't figure out whether dinosaurs had feathers or not some say they did and some say they didn't.

Just like science said that animals came before plants referring to the sponge.
Yet after farther discoveries made they now theorize plants are 700 or so million years older than first thought, which makes the plants older than the sponge.

Odds are science will discover that birds were here a lot longer than they now theorize and they evolved from the sea a lot earlier than the dinosaur

truthuprootsevil · Apr 20, 2025

Job 33:6 said:
Biology and paleontology do not depict the "same order" as the days of creation in the Bible. For example, in the Bible, fish and birds come before the beasts of the field. But in biology and paleontology, birds come after land animals.

https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/news/2025/february/origin-feathers-remains-mystery.html

Did Anything Have Feathers Before The Dinosaurs?

A new study asks if it's convergent evolution, or all down to one fluffy ancestor.

www.iflscience.com

The theory is true and feathers "predates" dinosaurs and the ancestor of the feathered dinosaur is the first to have feathers, what was it, could it fly? Well until that Discovery is made we won't know will we. But as it is with science there is a ongoing debate that feathers came before the dinosaur and feathers are connected they say to birds / fowl only. That should take us back to some point in time when God told the waters to bring forth (each in its time but before the feathered dinos.)

Thanks for your reply I'm surprised you didn't bring up creeping things.

For me, it's either theistic evolution or nothing.

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Blood Drinker

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Member

Similar threads