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

[TenthAveN]

I don't know what you mean by another type of "animal," but if you mean species--yes they do. We have mountains of proof for this.

I don't know what you mean by another type of "animal," but if you mean species--yes they do. We have mountains of proof for this.

And by species, do we mean two animals who share similar characteristics?

 

[April_Rose]

Why does that matter?

Do you look exactly like your parents?

No I'm adopted but that wasn't even my point.

So you'd consider yourself more of an old earth creationist?

Pretty much.

It’s hard to measure how many years it was exactly between now and creation because we don’t really know how old Adam was when he was created, or if his creation was to be treated as his birth

True, but I don't think that you would considered it his "birth" when he and Eve were the only humans who were never babies or children.

 

[MehGuy]

Pretty much.

Alright. I guess you have a lot more leeway with that system, lol.

 

[AV1611VET]

It’s hard to measure how many years it was exactly between now and creation ...

May I make a suggestion? use Ussher's calculations for the sake of Occam's Razor.

... because we don’t really know how old Adam was when he was created,

20 or 30 I would guess.

 

[coffee4u]

The reason why creation is important actually has nothing to do with the making of things, it's to do with the origin of sin. How man was prior to sin, what changed when he sinned and why he needs a saviour for his sin.

The issue is not the age of the earth or Genesis, but biblical authority —whether we trust the Bible as a whole or not. We don't believe Genesis simply because Genesis says so, we believe Genesis because we believe in Christ. It is from that belief that we then believe in the rest of scripture including Genesis. I think this fact gets lost sometimes in debates about creation vs evolution.

The Bible tells us that sin came to us by one man.
Romans 5:12
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—

Genesis tells us who that one man was and what he did. It tells us that man was made in God's image and that he was a talking walking intelligent man.

John 1 tells us that the Word was Jesus and that the word was God. It also tells us that everything was created through Jesus and for Jesus.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe.
Here it is talking about John the Baptist who preached of Jesus so that we can know the 'Word' means Jesus.


Then when you look through scripture you will see the similarities and differences between Adam and Jesus. The Bible acknowledges Adam as a real person through both the Old and the New Testament, it isn't just in Genesis.

1 Corinthians 15:45
45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

First Adam--Last Adam - creation.com

The New Testament reaffirms that we were made in the image of God
James 3:9
9 With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God.

That the creation suffers from the fall.
Romans 8:22
For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.

When people preach you may hear them say "Repent, and believe the Gospel"
Mark 1:15

15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand, repent and believe in the gospel.”
A person does not need to know anything about creation or evolution to repent of their sin, to ask God for forgiveness based on Jesus’ death and resurrection. But along with that is believing in the miracles that Jesus did and the words that Jesus spoke (he quoted from Genesis) and what the New Testament teaches about Jesus. It teaches that Jesus is God and Creator as well as Savior.
The image man was made in was the image of Christ, because he created man through him and for him.
So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being" the last Adam, a life-giving spirit. The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven (1 Corinthians 15:45-48).
Again the NT reaffirms that mankind was made from the dust/dirt as well as Jesus being the second Adam. Because Jesus is the second Adam, this is why he was tempted in the desert, he was fulfilling his Adam like role. Adam was tempted and failed, Jesus was tempted and succeeded. Jesus is the second Adam to a man not to an ape or ape-like man.

 

[Caliban]

And by species, do we mean two animals who share similar characteristics?

No. Whales and birds share the similar characteristic of breathing--that's not what I mean. I suggest googling, 'what separates species.'

 

[Hans Blaster]

The reason why creation is important actually has nothing to do with the making of things, it's to do with the origin of sin. How man was prior to sin, what changed when he sinned and why he needs a saviour for his sin...

tl;dc

This thread isn't about the theological implications of creationism. It's about the alleged claims made by atheists about whether they think Christians can accept creationism.

 

[Strathos]

I'm almost certain Jesus would disagree with you.

Ask Him yourself then.

 

[Shemjaza]

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.)

Personally I know that lots of Christians accept evolution.

The number I like is that there are more evolution accepting Christians then there are atheists of all sorts.


(Also, there are even some creationist atheists)

(They are pretty weird though.)

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... Evolution assumes that there is no "Grand Designer" and Christianity assumes that Evolution requires that there is no Designer.

I think it's more that the theory of evolution doesn't assume a 'Grand Designer', rather than assuming there is no 'Grand Designer'. IOW no assumption about a 'Grand Designer' is made or needed.

 

[SkyWriting]

I think it's more that the theory of evolution doesn't assume a 'Grand Designer', rather than assuming there is no 'Grand Designer'. IOW no assumption about a 'Grand Designer' is made or needed.

Then there must be some scientific excuse for why life exists and why it evolves and why it persists and what it's purpose is and how it benefits the rest of non-living matter or what forces create it or sustain it. Some scientific reasons why. At least one.


Lamberts Cosine Law Kelvin Planck Statement
Dalemberts Principle Clausius Statement
Law Of Conservation Of Mass Fouriers Law
Hubbles Law Bells Theorem
Boltzmann Equation Lagrangian Point
Beer Lambert Law Maxwell Relations
Van Der Waals Equation Carnots Theorem
Fermi Paradox Helmholtz Equation
Helmholtz Free Energy Ficks Law Of Diffusion
Raman Scattering Wiens Law
Dirac Equation Mach Number
Coulomb’s Law Avogadro’s Hypothesis
Law of Conservation of Energy Archimedes’ Principle
Biot-Savart Law Faraday’s Law
Ampere’s Law Faraday’s Laws of Electrolysis
Planck Equation Kirchhoff’s law
Kirchoff’s Second Law Newton’s law of universal gravitation
Maxwell’s Equations Bernoulli’s Principle
Electric Potential due to a Point charge Zeroth Law of Thermodynamics
Gauss’ Law First law of thermodynamics
Lenz’s Law Wein’s Displacement Law
Ohm’s Law Law of Equipartition of Energy
Joule’s Laws Laws of reflection
Brewster’s law Radioactive Decay Law
Bragg’s Law Murphy’s Law
Doppler Effect Einstein Field Equation
Casimir Effect Stefan-Boltzmann Law
Moseley’s Law Superposition Principle
Newton’s Laws of Motion Thermodynamics
Laws of Friction Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle
Pascal’s Law Wave-Particle Duality
Snell’s law Fermat’s Principle
Boyle’s Law Huygens’ Principle
Pascal’s Law Ideal Gas Law
Equivalence Principle Joule-Thomson Effect
Curie-Weiss Law Law of Conservation of Linear Momentum
Curie’s Law Wiedemann-Franz Law
Newton’s Second law of motion Newton’s First law of motion
Newton’s Third law of motion Continuity Equation
Chandrasekhar Limit Kirchhoff’s First Law

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Caves are rare, so man never really lived in caves with the occasional exceptions.
It's not a place where any species hangs out.

Except for all the cave-dwelling species... and some bat species literally hang out in caves

 

[SkyWriting]

Just curious but where are you getting the six thousand number from?

How Old Is the Earth? | Answers in Genesis

 

[SkyWriting]

Except for all the cave-dwelling species... and some bat species literally hang out in caves

And just like humanity, most bat species do not go near them. Just a tiny fraction of the total population.

 

[SkyWriting]

It’s hard to measure how many years it was exactly between now and creation because we don’t really know how old Adam was when he was created, or if his creation was to be treated as his birth

And we don't know the age of the earth because the description of it is of an ancient landscape. Not freshly formed. Perhaps when animals were re-created into humans and given the breath of life would be easier to imagine.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Then there must be some scientific excuse for why life exists and why it evolves and why it persists and what it's purpose is and how it benefits the rest of non-living matter or what forces create it or sustain it. Some scientific reasons why. At least one.

A scientific excuse - what is that?

There are causal explanations for the existence of life and its persistence (the former still uncertain), but in what sense do you think life benefits non-living matter? What does 'benefit' mean in the context of non-living matter?

The physical forces particularly relevant to the creation and sustenance of life are gravity and electromagnetism - mostly the latter.

As I understand it, the most fundamental explanation or reason known for life existing is the Past Hypothesis in conjunction with the fundamental laws of physics and the big bang. The Past Hypothesis is that entropy was lower in the past than it is now (hence the 'arrow of time').

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Appealing to an authority is a logical falacy; it's intellectually dishonest.

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.

I'm far more interested in why someone might accept something as true or not. Does an atheist accept evidence for evolution because it seems the best explanation, or does he do it just because he trusts the experts?

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).

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Again, this is all speculation as there were no cameras back then and none of us were around to know what humans looked like.

We have bones, which can tell us size, weight, morphology, musculature, and even general facial features.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ask Him yourself then.

I don't need to.

Notice here, where He quotes from both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, taking them literally:

Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

Vs 4 He quotes from Genesis 1, and vs 5 He quotes from Genesis 2.

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Genesis 2:24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

And just like humanity, most bat species do not go near them. Just a tiny fraction of the total population.

That's true of many terrestrial habitats. Nevertheless, each does have occupant species.