Evolution is Not Atheistic

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑

Some christians consider the entire bible to be the literal truth. Most christians read some of the bible as allegory. Those that read genesis as allegory, have no problem with evolution.
Where one draws the line between a literal interpretation and allegory, affects the degree to which science "makes sense".
​

Well further I'll say:
I'm sure the Bible has rules of interpretation that are logically coherent to the intelligent mind. I think that allegorizing certain things like the creation account breaks these rules, and is a free-for-all with Scripture.

If there are indeed "rules of interpretation that are logically coherent", then how do you explain:

1. that there are so many different versions of the bible
2. that some people read genesis allegorically and accept evolution

Since many people do "allegorize", it is a free-for-all. Besides, who makes the rules?

I also do not believe "science" makes sense logically and scientifically even removing the Bible from the equation. I actually recently wanted to leave the Bible and its God and its religion. But I just couldn't deny the clear truth from logic and reason and reality around me that it was the truth, it makes the most sense than any other view. Therefore I decided not to kick against the goads and gird up my loins like a man. My certainty in my religion is now much more firmly established than it has ever been.

I'll take it from your posts that you read genesis literally. If one reads genesis literally, one cannot believe in evolution. If one reads genesis literally, science cannot make sense logically.

Just as a mind game, if you truly "remove the Bible from the equation" and disbelieve evolution, then what is left to explain the origins of humans? Perhaps it would be the Cree creation story...

http://totemtalk.ning.com/group/ani...orum/topics/grandmother-s-creation-story-cree

Grandmother's Creation Story~ (Cree)
By Sharron John, Cree

"Long ago the Creator looked out over the perfect world he had made, at the oceans, mountains, plains, deserts, lakes and rivers and he was pleased. He looked upon the plants and trees and was happy at what he saw. Still he felt there was something missing.

There was no movement, nothing to enjoy the beauty he had created. So he created the

animals, birds, creepers, and fish. He made them in all sizes, forms, colors and shapes. As he watched them roam over Mother Earth, enjoying the beauty of his creations he was pleased with all that he had done. Life continued on Mother Earth in perfect balance and harmony.

Many moons passed and one day the animals, birds, creepers, and fish called out to their Creator: "We thank you for all that you have given us, for all the beauty that surrounds us; however, everything is so plentiful that we have nothing to do but wander here and there, with no purpose to our lives.

The Creator gave great thought to their request. After a while he showed himself again to his creations. He told them he would give them a weaker creature to take care of, to look after and teach. This creature would not be so perfect as his other creations. It would come upon Mother Earth weak, small, and knowing nothing.

So the Creator made man and woman and all his other creations were happy. Now they truly had a purpose in life: to care for these helpless humans; to teach them how to find food and shelter, and to show them the healing herbs.​

 

[ecco]

I also believe - according to the bible - that God created -The Earth - some millions of years before - where the Sons of God reigned (giants) until God destroyed them with the dinosaurs

On which parts of biblical scripture do you base this belief?

 

[ecco]

Of course. And IF AND WHEN it becomes known, fine. My major belief stemming from my monotheism is that I look at the universe and I see that it is designed out of the infinite possible universes to bring forth sentient moral life. Whether this happens with the direct intervention of God, or whether God simply creates the laws of nature and lets them rock and roll, either way it is His doing.

Fair enough.

 

[malvina]

Just because someone appears trustworthy and friendly does not make them incapable of deceit. Plus, he could fully believe in his findings, and simply be wrong about them. One source does not an argument make, but it would be nice if perhaps you kept a link to yours in your signature.

Well we have to decide who we believe and you're an atheist so no use talking about the bible to you

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑

Some christians consider the entire bible to be the literal truth. Most christians read some of the bible as allegory. Those that read genesis as allegory, have no problem with evolution.
Where one draws the line between a literal interpretation and allegory, affects the degree to which science "makes sense".​

To question creation in Genesis also means questioning the story of Noah and hence the whole Bible. Every word of the Bible is true whether we get it or not.

Yet many christians do read parts of scripture as allegory.

On the other hand, because of your strict literal interpretation of scripture, I'm sure that you can believe in the story of the Great Flood, despite the fact that there are many branches of science that disprove it including, but not limited to, archaeology and geology.

 

[ecco]

I have heard of rumors that certain scientists have apparently said they are "demonic" because they are pretending to be something they are not, visitors from other places in space, when they are trans or hyper (don't remember which one, maybe it's both) dimensional beings.

You took the handle "True Science" and yet you base some of your beliefs on rumors that you have heard.

 

[ecco]

I'm pretty sure the Bible mentions "dinosaurs" being alive even in this creation.

Why just be pretty sure? Why not actually research the bible and become absolutely sure one way or the other?

 

[True Science]

[deleted]

 

[ecco]

ecco said: ↑

You took the handle "True Science" and yet you base some of your beliefs on rumors that you have heard.​

Well I have yet no reason to say it is false. That said, from our observation of these things we can see for ourselves their characteristics and make our judgments. [Edit: Basically what those rumors say makes sense, and I think that is what is happening, and it is fullfilling and confirming Bible prophecy.]

• You heard a rumor.
• The rumors make sense.
• You found nothing to say the rumor is false.
• You think that is what is happening.

Critical thinking at its finest.

 

[patrick jane]

ecco said: ↑

Some christians consider the entire bible to be the literal truth. Most christians read some of the bible as allegory. Those that read genesis as allegory, have no problem with evolution.
Where one draws the line between a literal interpretation and allegory, affects the degree to which science "makes sense".​

Yet many christians do read parts of scripture as allegory.

On the other hand, because of your strict literal interpretation of scripture, I'm sure that you can believe in the story of the Great Flood, despite the fact that there are many branches of science that disprove it including, but not limited to, archaeology and geology.

Just the opposite, evidence for a global flood is strong and irrefutable. Look it up

 

[lasthero]

Just the opposite, evidence for a global flood is strong and irrefutable.

No, it's not.

 

[Crowns&Laurels]

The real reason professed atheists were all about some evolution in the first place is because it moves against an elementary, literal reading of the scriptures. Like someone is going to say that all these audio book listening, World of Warcraft playing, instant coffee drinking bearded twenty year olds are all in it for a base fascination for evolution.

This might be a bit of a rant, but 16 year olds go and complain about churches being everywhere and how they are 'educating' people on 'God not existing'. That's the kind of influence on evolutionist super-atheists. They aren't making people smarter, they are just grooming others to be against Christianity, based on nothing- the Christian world has long been considering evidences all the way to when Darwin was around and have decided that Genesis is open to interpretation.

 

[Goonie]

Just the opposite, evidence for a global flood is strong and irrefutable. Look it up

Sorry, but whilst the evidence that flood plains, such as the Nile, Mesopotamia, and the Yangtzee flood on a regular basis throughout history, the evidence of a biblical global flood is next to zero. The biblical Noah flood story appears to be a version of that of Gilgamesh.

 

[patrick jane]

Sorry, but whilst the evidence that flood plains, such as the Nile, Mesopotamia, and the Yangtzee flood on a regular basis throughout history, the evidence of a biblical global flood is next to zero. The biblical Noah flood story appears to be a version of that of Gilgamesh.

Then you have no interest in researching it because you think you already know. Even though they have sea creatures and ocean based evidence on mountains and high elevations around the world. Have fun in your fantasy world

 

[patrick jane]

http://www.icr.org/geological-strata

 

[Goonie]

Then you have no interest in researching it because you think you already know. Even though they have sea creatures and ocean based evidence on mountains and high elevations around the world. Have fun in your fantasy world

One word plate tectonics, make that two words.

 

[fat wee robin]

Right. Evolution is like drinking coffee. God is not relevant to it. You can go either direction personally and still accept it.

Drinking coffee is 'relevant to God, in that when He withdraws life from you, or the coffee maker or grower, they don't exist, and it can be instantly .
As for evolution well it is not as it seems .