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

[VirOptimus]

But I'm asking someone who thinks the text doesn't contradict reality.

There is more to truth than literal.

 

[solid_core]

I am a Christian and I am kind of agnostic regarding this issue. I do not have any firm belief regarding how the universe and we technically came to be.

But I see the theistic evolution as the most probable possibility. But if, when I die, I will learn that actually YEC (or simulation hypothesis or gap theory or progressive creationism or somethinge else) was right, it does not matter to me, because I do not base any important theology on the literal reading of Genesis.

You can do good deeds and believe in all important doctrines of Christianity no matter how old the universe is or no matter whether we were created in an instance or in a slow process or in some kind of a combination of those.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

You can't understand unless you have a personal experience with God.

I understand English. Telling someone that believing without evidence is preferable over wanting to see evidence before believing is literally an appeal to credulity and gullibility.

 

[eleos1954]

You've just repeated vague statements about possibility.

People are welcome to their own beliefs... but you wrote as if you had actual detailed reasons. It seems that your argument is that you have an emotional reaction to the complexity of the life and the cosmos and have just declared that it must be designed.

Given that we have so many mechanisms for change and complexity I've just never seen a justification for assuming design. The pattern of sand and flotsam left by the high tide can be intricate and even beautiful... but few assume it was deliberately designed because of it.

random means no specific patterns and no way of observing, testing nor predicting them

as with random selection in regard to the theory of evolution ... can only be theorized.

 

[Halbhh]

Then let's make it tougher, shall we?

How do you account for these seven points of contrast:

1. Earth before Sun
2. Light before Sun
3. Plants before marine organisms
4. Fruit bearing trees before fish
5. Birds before insects
6. Plants before Sun
7. Man before rain

Is this just a discussion for fun? That would be ok. Believers are to avoid of course falling at any point into only being contentious (as this topic seems to often trip people into!) --
Romans 14:1 Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on his opinions. (where disputable is of course about details that we are not told in clear direct ways).

So, yes, I have a view that is different on some of those theories/interpretations in that list (which combines both scripture and added ideas, together, a combination), and I take all the text as both literal and figurative at the same time, and every word accurately telling us interesting things.

But to be read with a true listening, so that first and foremost one gets the real, profound messages, such as in this chapter a message to us that is repeated 7 times.

(so, if you want, we can discuss this when I have time, but at the moment I have quite a lot that has to be done today and tomorrow)

 

[AV1611VET]

There is more to truth than literal.

That is correct.

Miracles, the supernatural, the kingdom of God, the spiritual, just to name some.

Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

 

[VirOptimus]

That is correct.

Miracles, the supernatural, the kingdom of God, the spiritual, just to name some.

Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Yes, thats your belief.

 

[AV1611VET]

I understand English. Telling someone that believing without evidence is preferable over wanting to see evidence before believing is literally an appeal to credulity and gullibility.

When John the Baptist was in prison and had a lapse of faith and sent two of his disciples to Jesus asking for authenticity, is this how the story should have ended?

Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

Ending: Wait! On second thought, that would be making John appeal to credulity and gullibility! Maybe I'd better go to him in Person and change the prison water into wine or something!

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, thats your belief.

Yup.

 

[Paulos23]

Then let's make it tougher, shall we?

How do you account for these seven points of contrast:

1. Earth before Sun
2. Light before Sun
3. Plants before marine organisms
4. Fruit bearing trees before fish
5. Birds before insects
6. Plants before Sun
7. Man before rain

It is a story.

 

[AV1611VET]

It is a story.

Which, in your opinion, belongs where?

1. science textbooks
2. Grimm's fairy tales
3. The History Channel

 

[Shemjaza]

random means no specific patterns and no way of observing, testing nor predicting them

as with random selection in regard to the theory of evolution ... can only be theorized.

Still vague and non specific... how are you connecting random selection to the theory of evolution?

The theory of evolution is based on non-random selection. Genetic variation creates a statistical increase in the likelihood of survival and reproduction.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

When John the Baptist was in prison and had a lapse of faith and sent two of his disciples to Jesus asking for authenticity, is this how the story should have ended?

Luke 7:22 Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached.

Ending: Wait! On second thought, that would be making John appeal to credulity and gullibility! Maybe I'd better go to him in Person and change the prison water into wine or something!

Eyewitness reports from sources you trust are obviously better than unsupported claims from a stranger; but even so, if they came back with a story like that you'd ask them how much they'd been drinking, and if they insisted, you'd want to see for yourself.

I suppose we're more aware today of how easily people can be led to believe ridiculous things, so we can give them some leeway; but even so, given the claims, I'd question the assumption that the the story in Luke is an accurate report of events.

 

[Strathos]

I understand English. Telling someone that believing without evidence is preferable over wanting to see evidence before believing is literally an appeal to credulity and gullibility.

I understand why you think that.

 

[AV1611VET]

... you'd want to see for yourself.

I would imagine, if you were in prison facing being beheaded, you would want to see anything for yourself, just so you could get out.*

Spiritually speaking, some are locked inside their own prison, and the warden is not about to let them out.

Nor do they want out, because the warden (science) has duped them into thinking they are anywhere but in prison, and are living in luxury.

* It's not recorded, but I'd like to think that the testimony John's disciples brought back to him ... what does academia call it? heresay? ... was sufficient enough for John.

 

[Paulos23]

Which, in your opinion, belongs where?

1. science textbooks
2. Grimm's fairy tales
3. The History Channel

Not 1, it is not science.
Not 2, not dark enough.
Not 3, the channel is not about history anymore but making a buck.

I would go with it (and only if you remove the books of Genisis from the rest of the Bible) going into the fiction section, or creation stories.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would go with it (and only if you remove the books of Genisis from the rest of the Bible) going into the fiction section, or creation stories.

I wonder how an atheist would feel working in a bookstore?

Would he follow his boss' instructions against his own judgement without suffering cognitive dissonance or feeling at the end of the day he did a good job?

Or would he stick to his convictions and refuse to do some things?

Boss: Put these Bibles in the Bible section.
Atheist: I beg pardon? where?
Boss: In the Bible section.
Atheist: You mean in the Fiction section?
Boss: Did I stutter?
Atheist: I'm sorry, I can't do that.
Boss: Why not.
Atheist: It's against my better judgement.
Boss: Adios.

 

[VirOptimus]

I wonder how an atheist would feel working in a bookstore?

Would he follow his boss' instructions against his own judgement without suffering cognitive dissonance or feeling at the end of the day he did a good job?

Or would he stick to his convictions and refuse to do some things?

Boss: Put these Bibles in the Bible section.
Atheist: I beg pardon? where?
Boss: In the Bible section.
Atheist: You mean in the Fiction section?
Boss: Did I stutter?
Atheist: I'm sorry, I can't do that.
Boss: Why not.
Atheist: It's against my better judgement.
Boss: Adios.

Ohh a powerfantasy where you are proven right, how convincing (and mature).

 

[Paulos23]

I wonder how an atheist would feel working in a bookstore?

Would he follow his boss' instructions against his own judgement without suffering cognitive dissonance or feeling at the end of the day he did a good job?

Or would he stick to his convictions and refuse to do some things?

Boss: Put these Bibles in the Bible section.
Atheist: I beg pardon? where?
Boss: In the Bible section.
Atheist: You mean in the Fiction section?
Boss: Did I stutter?
Atheist: I'm sorry, I can't do that.
Boss: Why not.
Atheist: It's against my better judgement.
Boss: Adios.

I could see Bibles going in the Christain section or the Religion section.

But it doesn't belong in Science or Non-Fiction.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I understand why you think that.

It's why the old Russian aphorism is "Trust, but verify", not "Trust unreservedly".