Christian Evolutionist

[Andrea77]

May I ask why there are so many Atheists are on a christian website without sounding offensive?

Do you feel we are all brainwashed and you are here to give us your knowledge?

Or do you feel that Christianity has something you need?

 

[Andrea77]

Indeed, you don't. And now who is correct. Imagine that you don't know whether the earth is spherical or flat, and the only thing to prove that with are the calculations that have been done by pagans. Would you honestly still be so convinced of your own position?

If it only involved the physical and nothing spiritual and there was solid evidence, maybe.

But were is the proof of the evolution Theory?

And if there is no solid proof how do you know that it is not just a brainwashing system. The Bible says God created man in his image it does not say that about animals. Doesn't evolution put man in the same category as animals when the Bible says man is to rule over the animals and that He created man in his image?

 

[nvxplorer]

And if there is no solid proof how do you know that it is not just a brainwashing system.

I ask you to seriously reflect on your statement.

You don't strike me as being a conspiracy nut.

 

[Tomk80]

May I ask why there are so many Atheists are on a christian website without sounding offensive?

Mostly because I like the creation/evolution debate and I like to learn how people think. The idea of creationism is so alien to me, that I am drawn into this more. I'm usually drawn to things I don't understand or that are quite strange to me. Furthermore, I learn a lot here, both about christianity, creationism and biology/geology/astrology (to name just a few areas). Although the learning curve isn't very steep anymore.

Do you feel we are all brainwashed and you are here to give us your knowledge?

I don't think christians are brainwashed. Without wanting to sound offensive, of creationists I'm not sure. Let me explain.

I see some (for me) funny things with creationists. One thing that I mostly notice lately, is a tendency to repeat things that have been shown to be false over and over again. One is the recent tendency of some people here to equate christianity with creationism, even though there are a lot of christians who aren't creationists. You seem to be doing the same in your last post again.

Another thing that interests me in creationists is the apparent fear of changing viewpoints. Over here, I often see the phrase that you don't trust science because it changes it's models all the time. I really don't understand what the bad thing about that is. We have some evidence and draw the best conclusion possible out of it. Then, if new evidence arises and shows that our previous conclusions were false and should be changed, we change it. How is that a bad thing?

There are some other things, but these are the ones that I currently notice most.

Or do you feel that Christianity has something you need?

No, not at all. I have been around christians all my life and I've never really had that feeling. I have gone to church with them, prayed with them, discussed with them, but never found there viewpoints appealing. On moral issues, I agree with them on a lot of points, but then, so do most people. But on the spiritual side, I'm a lot more drawn to buddism than christianity.

 

[Nathan Poe]

May I ask why there are so many Atheists are on a christian website without sounding offensive?

Do you feel we are all brainwashed and you are here to give us your knowledge?

Or do you feel that Christianity has something you need?

We were invited here. These particular formums are labeled "For All Members > Discussion and Debate."

Can't have much of a debate if everyone argues the same side, can you?

 

[Andrea77]

Then, if new evidence arises and shows that our previous conclusions were false and should be changed, we change it. How is that a bad thing?

Because there is never a solid foundation.

We are all different I like yes and no, black and white, truth or lie.

Happy Birthday by the way.

 

[Army of Juan]

Because there is never a solid foundation.

We are all different I like yes and no, black and white, truth or lie.

Happy Birthday by the way.

The world doesn't work that way my dear.

 

[Tomk80]

If it only involved the physical and nothing spiritual and there was solid evidence, maybe.

I'm not sure I'm following you here. How would you discern between the flat earth and the non-flat earth viewpoint. If you didn't know the earth was flat, and all you had was some calculations by pagans to show that it wasn't, which interpretation would you choose? How strong would you think flat-earth guy's reasoning was?

But were is the proof of the evolution Theory?

Again, there isn't any. Proof is for maths and alcohol. There is only evidence. I must really stretch this point, because it is an important scientific philosophical viewpoint that you can never prove a theory to be correct. You can only point to the evidence and state that it is the best explanation given the current evidence.

And if there is no solid proof how do you know that it is not just a brainwashing system.

Mostly because I work in the scienfic process and know that, if something isn't working, it is discarded. If the theory of evolution wouldn't work as an explanation, it would long be discarded. As it is, it is an elegant explanation of why the evidence is what it is, and it is highly useful when explaining new phenomena like arising diseases, resistance to medicins and poisons and a whole lot of other phenomena. We use it because it works. If it didn't work, we wouldn't be using it.

You must understand that evolution is not some sort of religion. It is a scientific theory, which means that it is our current best explanation of why the evidence looks how it looks, given the current evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. It is the strongest conclusion we can currently make, not a doctrine which we have to adhere to.

The Bible says God created man in his image it does not say that about animals. Doesn't evolution put man in the same category as animals when the Bible says man is to rule over the animals and that He created man in his image?

Well, actually biology did that already before evolution came along. Carolus Linneaus, who created our system of classification, already basically stated that, if anyone could point him a reason why he shouldn't classify humans as apes, he would gladly hear about it but that he couldn't think of one characteristic based on which he could do that. That humans are classified as animals isn't a specific evolutionist viewpoint, it was already hinted at before evolution became an explanation.

So maybe the text isn't to be taken so literally and it refers to God giving man a soul after man evolved (in other words, likeness would pertain to spiritual likeness, not physical likeness). Or maybe it was meant that way when it was written down by nomads who didn't know as much about biology as we currently do. That wouldn't mean that it is inherently false, it could still reveal spiritual truths that are the most important. It just means that the bible should not be used as a scientific textbook.

 

[Andrea77]

I just can't understand evolution it makes no sense to me, I have a lot to digest from this thread and I will. But I am going to leave you know as I am shattered.

 

[Tomk80]

Because there is never a solid foundation.

We are all different I like yes and no, black and white, truth or lie.

You may like it, but the you can't claim it.

How can I claim to never be wrong? I can't. That would be claiming that I would be infallable, and I am not. I can be wrong on all the positions I hold and I have no way of objectively determining whether I am right or wrong on all my viewpoints. If I don't want to change my viewpoint when I am shown to be wrong, I am claiming that I am infallable on a subject. But I recognize that I am not and that humans are not. Why would I try to claim such infallability on any viewpoint, even religion, when I cannot make that claim? Wouldn't claiming such be the height of hypocricy?

Happy Birthday by the way.

That's the other guy, mine is long gone But thanks anyway

 

[Tomk80]

I just can't understand evolution it makes no sense to me, I have a lot to digest from this thread and I will. But I am going to leave you know as I am shattered.

Have a good evening. I hope you did enjoy it at least a little, despite the heaviness of the last part of the thread.

 

[random_guy]

No, it isn't.

Just because a christian excepts something that may be wrong or bad fruit, does not make them a terrible or evil christian as you are clearly trying to claim I am saying.

Again, you ignored the most important part, the part I bolded.

.... In all such cases, these are merely different varieties of the fundamental evolutionist world view, the essential feature of which is the denial that there is one true God and Creator of all things.

Now, if evolution denies God is the one true Creator of things, what does that say about Christian evolutionists?

I find it funny that you think you're not divisive, but you can't even admit that you wrote this, and that this statement is divisive.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

No I don't.

Can you show me proof of evolution i.e.: Fossils of one specie evolving from its initial form to another through the years with no gaps?

Minor point, but it bugs me. Biology knows no such word as "specie". The singular of "species" is "species".

 

[MartinM]

Tents go right to the ground and some of them meet at the bottom and join at all sides.

 

[Jet Black]

Can you show me proof of evolution i.e.: Fossils of one species* evolving from its initial form to another through the years with no gaps?

Is there any fossils that have been found that link to a species that is living now?

(*corrected species)

what exactly do you mean by "no gaps"`?

It is worth remembering that the organisms we find will be representatives of their particular species, and their species might not be on the direct ancestral line between the modern species and more ancient ancestors, but might be sister species/genera/families and so on which have no descendents in the modern world. anyway, here is a list of hominid skulls. the top left one is a chimp skull, put there principally since the common ancestor between us and chimps was probably more like a modern day chimp than anything else (this is not suprising because these common ancestors lived in the forest)

those are all ordered in nothing more than the age of the fossil. incidentally, if you think there are missing links in human evolution, could you point out where they are, or might be on that list?

there are of course, lots more between major groups, since we see more transitionals between major groups than between smaller groups like genera and so on (unsuprising, since the major groups are represented by many more species)

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1a.html

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

(*corrected species)

Ta. It's like a monitor on 47Hz, interlaced....

 

[futzman]

I've seen some people who proclaimed they are Christians but believe in Evolution...how is this possible??? Can a Christian believe in God yet contradict His creation method from Genesis by believing in Evolution????

Which scripture in the Bible implies you aren't a Christian if you don't take every other scripture in the Bible literally? Until someone can point you to that scripture I'd say don't worry about it. Believe what you want.

Futz (still worrying about those 4400 genera of brachiopods...)

 

[Andrea77]

First of all I thought this thread was for Christian Evolutionist and their opinions, the Athiests keep coming in playing mind games.

Secondly (note this question is for christian evolutionists) If Genesis states that Adam was created from dust. How can this support evolution which believes that the first life cell was formed from proteins and other organic compounds that evolved from non-living matter.
Is it because you support the belief in the two creations? or is it that Adam was the only one created this way (from dust)?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

First of all I thought this thread was for Christian Evolutionist and their opinions, the Athiests keep coming in playing mind games.

Secondly (note this question is for christian evolutionists) If Genesis states that Adam was created from dust. How can this support evolution which believes that the first life cell was formed from proteins and other organic compounds that evolved from non-living matter.
Is it because you support the belief in the two creations? or is it that Adam was the only one created this way (from dust)?

for a conservative TE, God was looking at an evolved pre-Adamite when He created Adam(using him as a model), or some would have God modify such a creature. Either way it is an unique event that science can not detect. The big point is that we are physically continuous with the greater apes.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

First of all I thought this thread was for Christian Evolutionist and their opinions, the Athiests keep coming in playing mind games.

Secondly (note this question is for christian evolutionists) If Genesis states that Adam was created from dust. How can this support evolution which believes that the first life cell was formed from proteins and other organic compounds that evolved from non-living matter.
Is it because you support the belief in the two creations? or is it that Adam was the only one created this way (from dust)?

Chemically, life is all dust - or better soil, which is what Adam sounds like in a Hebrew pun, I'm told.

So, God made Adam from the ordinary material of the universe - dust, or soil, or what have you - via a natural process of abiogenesis and evolution.

"dust" -> pre-biotic chemicals -> first replicators -----very long process of evolution-----> Humans

Thus humans are indeed made from the dust of the earth. There is no conflict here.