Atheists, Why Do You Believe That Christians Cannot Accept Evolution?

[Strathos]

Strathos, what do those As and Os stand for in your avatar?

You'll find your answer in Revelation 1:8

 

[AV1611VET]

You'll find your answer in Revelation 1:8

Thank you, sir!

 

[Caliban]

You don't because you don't believe in God .... you are a animal or think of yourself as something else rather than a child of God ... so there are all kinds of things you can attribute the depravity of mankind on.

Correct, I don't see myself (or anyone else) as a "child of God." I see no reason to conclude these theological claims such as the one you made that depravity exists. It is much more simple that that; people hurt others and cause chaos in society. I don't think anyone is justified when they attempt to spiritualize that problem. You have the burden of proof if you claim otherwise.

 

[SigurdReginson]

Not necessarily. The logical fallacy is usually the appeal to false or irrelevant authority, e.g. citing a biologist's opinion on a physics question. Less commonly, it is the use of an authority as the sole or primary support for a claim, e.g. "black holes radiate because Stephen Hawking says so" is not a valid argument.

For the vast majority of atheists, whether or not they are aware of or accept the evidence for it, there is no alternative explanation (there may be a few alternative fringe views).

Appealing to authority is absolutely a logical fallacy. Whether it's false or irrelevant authority or not.

Professionals certainly know more on a specific topic than laymen, and expertise is necessary to get to the heart of matter, which is why we value the opinions of doctors and such. At the end of the day, though, they are fallible; this is why second opinions are a thing.

When citing evidence, though, someone's opinion isn't enough; wether he has expertise in the field or not. That's what the scientific method and peer review are for; refined and raw data.

As for the vast majority of atheists, yah, I'd agree with that. Hundreds of years have done wonders in narrowing down viable theories into what we have today. The fires of peer review have purified the metals from the slag. That said, no theories are untouchable, and evolution is no different. I don't see taking down evolution any time soon, though. There's just too much evidence supporting it, and the body of evidence just keeps growing year after year.

 

[SigurdReginson]

You'll find your answer in Revelation 1:8

Reminds me of the magic squares utilized by early christians.

 

[TexFire316]

I was just wondering because I saw this video and evolution doesn't necessarily revolve around the fact that monkeys turned into humans. So I really want to hear your insight on this. (Although I agree with the fact that religion should never be forced on anybody.)

Because I know who did it. It was the Creator, He told me so.

 

[Strathos]

Reminds me of the magic squares utilized by early christians.

View attachment 283379

It is based on the hidden meaning of the Sator Square. I got the idea when I saw one on display at a museum (before the pandemic broke out, of course).

 

[Shemjaza]

How can an atheist accept creation though?

They believe life was created by friendly space aliens.

 

[eleos1954]

Correct, I don't see myself (or anyone else) as a "child of God." I see no reason to conclude these theological claims such as the one you made that depravity exists. It is much more simple that that; people hurt others and cause chaos in society. I don't think anyone is justified when they attempt to spiritualize that problem. You have the burden of proof if you claim otherwise.

The evolution model is built on theory .... the scientific community calls it the theory of evolution themselves and rightfully so .... they are honest about it ... when the scientific community changes it to the Fact of Evolution themselves .... let me know ... and if you don't like that or disagree with that .... talk to them about that.

Depravity exists and is getting worse just as predicted in His Word. Earth's climate is failing just as predicted in His Word.

He created them male and female after their kind ..... and that is what we see.

For since the creation of the world his invisible attributes, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:20).

I believe this ... you do not ..... fine .... go live in the jungle with your relatives and see how that goes.

 

[Hans Blaster]

I believe this ... you do not ..... fine .... go live in the jungle with your ancestors and see how that goes.

My ancestors are mostly dead.

 

[Gene2memE]

The evolution model is built on theory

Not theory, observations.

Are you actually aware of what a theory is in scientific terms?

.... the scientific community calls it the theory of evolution themselves and rightfully so .... they are honest about it

In answer to my above question, the answer is clearly no.

... when the scientific community changes it to the Fact of Evolution themselves .... let me know ... and if you don't like that or disagree with that .... talk to them about that.

(we need a better facepalm emoji)

Evolution is a fact.

The Theory of Evolution is the scientific explanation for the observed facts of evolution. A theory must have explanatory power, be testable (verifiable) and have predictive power.

This is such an old canard.

Here's the NCSE on the subject from 32 years ago:
Theory and the Fact of Evolution | National Center for Science Education

 

[Caliban]

The evolution model is built on theory .... the scientific community calls it the theory of evolution themselves and rightfully so .... they are honest about it ... when the scientific community changes it to the Fact of Evolution themselves .... let me know ... and if you don't like that or disagree with that .... talk to them about that.

In science a theory is different from they way most people use it. Be sure to distinguish between the colloquial use of theory as one idea out of many (a hypothesis), and the scientific use of theory--as an established set of facts leading to an empirical conclusion. When scientists talk about Germ Theory or the Theory of Gravity, or of Evolutionary Theory, they are not employing the colloquial form of the word.

Depravity exists and is getting worse just as predicted in His Word. Earth's climate is failing just as predicted in His Word.

I probably won't be able to change your mind here, but I strongly disagree for good reasons. If you want to discuss these reasons--let me know, I'd be happy to talk about it.

I believe this ... you do not ..... fine .... go live in the jungle with your relatives and see how that goes.

What is with all the rude Christians on this forum today?

 

[eleos1954]

Not theory, observations.

Are you actually aware of what a theory is in scientific terms?



In answer to my above question, the answer is clearly no.



(we need a better facepalm emoji)

Evolution is a fact.

The Theory of Evolution is the scientific explanation for the observed facts of evolution. A theory must have explanatory power, be testable (verifiable) and have predictive power.

This is such an old canard.

Here's the NCSE on the subject from 32 years ago:
Theory and the Fact of Evolution | National Center for Science Education

Are you actually aware of what a theory is in scientific terms?

Of course .... however the basis of the theories within the models and various theories is theory itself. Science calls it the Theory of Evolution and I am in agreement with them .... it is theoretical. If you don't like that word or phrase then talk to them about it.

When they change it from the Theory of Evolution to the Fact of Evolution ... let me know.

You believe you evolved ... ok ... I do not .... also ok

 

[Strathos]

Are you actually aware of what a theory is in scientific terms?

Of course .... however the basis of the theories within the models and various theories is theory itself. Science calls it the Theory of Evolution and I am in agreement with them .... it is theoretical. If you don't like that word or phrase then talk to them about it.

When they change it from the Theory of Evolution to the Fact of Evolution ... let me know.

You believe you evolved ... ok ... I do not .... also ok

Theories in science don't become facts, they explain facts.

 

[eleos1954]

In science a theory is different from they way most people use it. Be sure to distinguish between the colloquial use of theory as one idea out of many (a hypothesis), and the scientific use of theory--as an established set of facts leading to an empirical conclusion. When scientists talk about Germ Theory or the Theory of Gravity, or of Evolutionary Theory, they are not employing the colloquial form of the word.


I probably won't be able to change your mind here, but I strongly disagree for good reasons. If you want to discuss these reasons--let me know, I'd be happy to talk about it.


What is with all the rude Christians on this forum today?

Wasn't meant to be rude ... but factual .... Apes don't recognize us as their own kind because we aren't of their kind.

the "facts" are ever changing .... more is learned as time goes on, the high complexity of things are becoming more apparent

“Because no scientist can show how Darwin’s mechanism can produce the complexity of life, every scientist should be skeptical,” said biologist Douglas Axe, director of Biologic Institute. “The fact that most won’t admit to this exposes the unhealthy effect of peer pressure on scientific discourse.”

Skepticism About Darwinian Evolution Grows as 1,000+ Scientists Share Their Doubts | Evolution News

 

[eleos1954]

Theories in science don't become facts, they explain facts.

Science is now only beginning the realize the tremendous complexity of things.

 

[Gene2memE]

Are you actually aware of what a theory is in scientific terms?

Of course ....

Your answer shows that you don't.

A scientific theory provides an explanatory framework of the body of available facts.

In this case, the Theory of Evolution provides an explanation for the observed heritable changes in biological populations over time (ie evolution).

however the basis of the theories within the models and various theories is theory itself.

No. Just, no.

I wonder, have you actually formally studied anything concerning the underpinnings of the ToE?

If not, I can recommend some free text books and (university level) online courses that cover the basics.

Science calls it the Theory of Evolution and I am in agreement with them .... it is theoretical. If you don't like that word or phrase then talk to them about it.

The scientific usage of the word theory is different from the colloquial usage of the word theory. If you don't like that word or phrase then talk to them about it.

When they change it from the Theory of Evolution to the Fact of Evolution ... let me know.

You believe you evolved ... ok ... I do not .... also ok

That's fine.

Do you have a rational, evidentially supported reason for believing this, or is this a theological commitment?

What alternative do you offer?

 

[Strathos]

Science is now only beginning the realize the tremendous complexity of things.

Rather I would say that the more we learn about the universe, the more we realize how many things there are that we don't know.

 

[April_Rose]

Actually, I'm a fungus.

Well,.. I always believed that you are somewhat of a fun guy.

When you say you can't believe it, do you say that because of a theological belief or because you have analyzed the scientific evidence?

I say I can't believe it because God makes more sense. How would you feel if somebody told you that squirrels are descended from raccoons? (I still can't fathom how we got Chihuahuas from wolves and dogs are ninety-nine percent man-made due to breeding.)

Because I know who did it. It was the Creator, He told me so.

What are you talking about?

 

[Caliban]

Wasn't meant to be rude ... but factual .... Apes don't recognize us as their own kind because we aren't of their kind.

It is rude despite your intention.

the "facts" are ever changing .... more is learned as time goes on, the high complexity of things are becoming more apparent

Facts are not ever changing. Facts are true and remain true. Science continues to make new discoveries and models change based on new discoveries--that does not change the facts. A basic 100 level science class covers this. You misrepresent the scientific method when you propagate this idea.

“Because no scientist can show how Darwin’s mechanism can produce the complexity of life, every scientist should be skeptical,” said biologist Douglas Axe, director of Biologic Institute. “The fact that most won’t admit to this exposes the unhealthy effect of peer pressure on scientific discourse.”

You are talking to a skeptic; I'm always going to agree that people be skeptical. That's good science and critical thinking.