How many creationists practise what they preach?

[AV1611VET]

O.K., but how can you or anybody else be sure of that? In fact, you would need to demonstrate the plausibility for the existence of any 'creator', let alone your particular version of him/her/it, before you can even make such a grandiose claim. That's a massive leap in faith there.

Thaumaturge - a problem for atheists!

 

[AV1611VET]

Why are you not teaching your children the truth of 1 Peter 3:15 (ESV), 'but in your hearts honour Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defence to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect'?

How is saying GOD DID IT not honoring Christ the Lord as holy?

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

 

[KWCrazy]

I can also make a petty solid case that Genesis really is two contradictory creation accounts written at different times.

Why do people continue to peddle this lie? Genesis 2 is NOT a creation account!

 

[AV1611VET]

Well no, that's a problem for theists!

I thought theodicy was.

According to your user title, anyway.

 

[KWCrazy]

Evolution has nothing to do with how life began.

So the Origin of Species had nothing whatever to do with the origins of species? I said "origins," not "origination. Everyone knows origination is impossible, though many lie about it and pretend otherwise. Origins has to do with, "where did the ducks come from," "how did dandelions become people" etc. Biology studies what we can observe. Nothing we observe in biology would be any different if species grew out of what was in the ark. Cats can change in size, coat and some details, but cats are always cats.

We don't know how life began.

We do. God said, "Let there be..."

Scientists use the scientific method.

Christians talk to the Creator directly.

Creationists start at an assumed conclusion and then work backwards, twisting data to support their conclusion.

That's EXACTLY how evolutionists work. Whenever a new species is found they twist the tree of life around to find a place they can stick it that looks good to them, then they teach that it's placement is absolute fact. This is pseudoscience and that's why they are mocked.

eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable evidence there is.

And yet there are 80,000 convictions per year based on eyewitness testimony. When your neighbor tells you he saw an angel at a crash scene, you call him a liar. When multiple people report seeing the same thing you call them all liars. It doesn't matter that they have no motive to lie about what they've seen and it doesn't matter that they may not have believed in angels any more than you do. It doesn't matter that the encounter radically impacted their lives. You believe what you've chosen to believe.

Care to answer to the question instead of dodging and hurling insults?

Your question was foolish. It deserved questioning your motives. Care to answer MY question? Was it your goal to ask a foolish question? You certainly didn't make yourself look good with that interrogatory.

Hm, yes, biology does deal with evolution.

Nothing in observed biology would be any different whatever with a created world. Biology is the study of life, not history. Evolution may be related to biology in that it deals with living and once living things, but it is not foundational. One can study biology without denying the Scriptures. It may get progressively harder when they are surrounded with people like you who are trying to push your religion off as proven science.

Did you even bother to read the definition you provided?

Yep, but I didn't write it. Evolution is used erroneously in the same context as observable adaptation. The difference is that adaptation works with existing genetic information and evolution requires a process of increasing complexity that does not exist. One can study biology and learn about the wonders of God's creation, or he can completely reject the Lord and pretend that live somehow created itself. Neither world view impacts what is under the microscope.

Saying that species are individually created is demonstrably false.

Your statement is an unequivocal lie. Your world view would only be correct if God did not exist. However, since God DOES exist; as do angels, demons and spirits which exist long after the body has returned to dust, then we know that God's word is true. Not only did God create the world in six days, He could do it again tomorrow if He so chose. The words of the Lord are clear and distinct. The presence of the Lord is all around us. The evidence is clear. No matter how much you want to reject it, it's not going away.

Christians who accept evolution are just as much a Christian as you are.

Which did Jesus teach; that the Scriptures were the breathed word of God, or that man evolved?
Christians can believe many things, but Christ taught us to trust the Scriptures; that they were accurate and profitable for instruction. Interestingly, when those same Christians are asked to validate their beliefs with Scripture, none of them can. That's because evolution is contrary to God's word. Those who believe in evolution are deceived. Fortunately, belief in creation is not the requirement to salvation; faith in Jesus Christ is that key.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Why do people continue to peddle this lie? Genesis 2 is NOT a creation account!

It doesn't tell a story about creation?

 

[Loudmouth]

That's a sad story, but it is dealing with the issue I'm raising. To promote a view of the Bible and young-earth creationism, without examining the opposition, is faulty reasoning in my view.

Now, I'm writing this as an evangelical Christian who accepts Scripture as authoritative, not because my parents told me or presented it as the only view. I've reasoned through the issues myself.

I know what I'm talking about from personal experience. I was a university doctoral student whose creationist views were exposed and my background had provided me with no answers. I'm not a dilbo on this issue. I'm talking from personal experience of what one-eyed creationism (without examining the opposition) can lead to.

About a month ago here in Brisbane I attended a creationist presentation (I drove 40 mins each way to attend it) and at Q&A time I stood to ask a question about the days of Genesis 1, citing from Augustine's City of God (he said we can't know the length of these days) and mentioning Norm Geisler's failure to support 24-hour days. I was talked over by the presenter and told it was his seminar (inferring I had no right to ask a controversial question) and to not question any further. I was in an audience of hard-nosed, young earth creationists.

That's my last visit to anything to deal with that organisation.

What I'm writing here is to help Christian parents realise that they can't protect their kids from the onslaught of hostile forces, particularly as they relate to evolution, in the university and workplace setting. They had better prepare their kids with a ready defense long before launching them out of the protective orbit of Christian schooling.

Oz

When you teach children that they need to hold on to religious beliefs that are contradicted by mountains of facts, you are setting them up to fail, IMHO.

 

[Loudmouth]

So the Origin of Species had nothing whatever to do with the origins of species?

It had everything to do with the origin of species. What it didn't deal with is the origin of life. The origin of species refers to the origin of biodiversity, how life changed so that there were different species.

Everyone knows origination is impossible, though many lie about it and pretend otherwise. Origins has to do with, "where did the ducks come from," "how did dandelions become people" etc. Biology studies what we can observe. Nothing we observe in biology would be any different if species grew out of what was in the ark. Cats can change in size, coat and some details, but cats are always cats.

All of those species are part of a nested hierarchy which evidences common ancestry. Until you can deal with this overarching observation in biology, you are simply avoiding the evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why? Whats the point?

What's the point of getting on an internet forum and making wild allegations about science you don't understand?

 

[Loudmouth]

Hmmm. You have a bit of a stunted view of religion.

Hmm, you seem to be suffering from psychological projection. This is where you project your own beliefs and biases on to others. The word religion refers to sets of beliefs and practices as they relate to a deity. That's what the word means.

Good call. Galileo was a devout Catholic.

Throughout history, the Christian church has tried to stop scientific discoveries in one form or another. We see it again in the present day where some Christians are trying to get evolution removed from the classroom.

 

[Loudmouth]

Sure, scientific theory is never wrong. We are just stupid and dont understand that theory actually means fact. Fact that is never, ever wrong.

I am guessing that when you go to the doctor with what appears to be an infection, you are hoping that your doctor will apply the germ theory of disease. Am I wrong?

 

[Loudmouth]

Nor the manipulation. We dont really need to discuss how sad it is that people leave the church because everyone doesnt bow to ToE. lol, get real

You are projecting again. No one is asking for fealty to a scientific theory like you do with your religious beliefs.

I can't think of a better way to destroy a religion than requiring people to ignore facts and ignore reason. That is what creationism requires people to do, to ignore mountains of facts and 150 years of science.

 

[Loudmouth]

One major difference. God was there as he created.
What better witness can you have than the creator?

When you have evidence to back these claims, let us know.

 

[lasthero]

,

 

[lasthero]

And yet there are 80,000 convictions per year based on eyewitness testimony.

I'd really like to know where you got that number. The closest I could find was a number that stated 80,000 identifications are made each year, but that's a bit different than a conviction. Surely, you don't think every identification leads to a conviction, so you must be citing some other number.

I'd also like you to peruse this:

http://www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction/eyewitness-misidentification

This is a website listing numerous people who've been wrongfully jailed over eyewitness testimony.

You might also find this interesting:

http://apps.americanbar.org/litigat...012-0512-eyewitness-testimony-unreliable.html

It's an article about the unreliability of eyewitness testimony.

Thanks.[/QUOTE]

 

[dad]

If God planned for life to evolve, why couldn't some fish NOT develop terrestrial habits?

The plan was to create. Evolving came after the kinds like man were here already. Intact. Created. Whole.

 

[Cimorene]

You are wrong about the internet!

So we are in controversy about whether there's always controversy on the internet?

 

[Papias]

Papias wrote:

Is that why most of the support for evolution comes from Christians?​

Most of the ones i talk to think its an absurd theory. My sister is a pagan and even she thinks its absurd.
​

Who cares what the few people you talked to said? Anyone who understands polls understands that asking a few people you know will give you a non-representative sample, and hence a wrong answer. For instance, everyone I know calls a sweet carbonated beverage a "pop". So based on that, everyone calls it "pop", right? Wrong.

It turns out that only about 40% know that the correct name is "pop". Others call it incorrect names like "soda" or "coke". Since I'm asking people in Michigan, it's expected that I'd not notice all those people using the wrong term.

Luckily, there is plenty of data on Christians and evolution. It turns out that about 60% , or (31/50) who support evolution say that "God guided it". Plus, many Christians say that it happened on its own, after God started it. So that's over 60% of those who support evolution who are Christians.

Though Atheism is increasing rapidly, it's still only 3% (based on Pew data). So that means that only 6%, or (3/50) of those who support evolution are Christians. So among those who support evolution, Christians outnumber Atheists 10 to 1! Evolution is much more a Christian thing than an Atheist thing.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

So the Origin of Species had nothing whatever to do with the origins of species? I said "origins," not "origination.

You're confusing origin of species with origins of life. They are different. You keep trying to put them in the same category.
Now that you know this, you shouldn't have to repeat it. Unless you are dishonest.

Origins has to do with, "where did the ducks come from," "how did dandelions become people" etc.

And this is the perfect example that demonstrates you have no clue what evolution says and does not say. The Dunning Kruger is strong in you.

We do. God said, "Let there be..."

This is a circular argument. "It's true because it say's it's true" is a fallacy. What evidence do you have?

Christians talk to the Creator directly.

Hindus talk to Krishna directly. Their story seems to contradict yours. I wonder who could be right? You both could be wrong.

That's EXACTLY how evolutionists work. Whenever a new species is found they twist the tree of life around to find a place they can stick it that looks good to them, then they teach that it's placement is absolute fact.

Just because you don't know how a nested hierarchy works, doesn't mean it's false. Perhaps you should open a biology textbook. Unless of course you think you're smarter than scientists who dedicate their entire life to studying biology.

Your question was foolish. It deserved questioning your motives. Care to answer MY question? Was it your goal to ask a foolish question? You certainly didn't make yourself look good with that interrogatory.

The question was to demonstrate why believing unfalsifiable claims is not reasonable. I think you recognized that and felt the need to shout an insult in my direction.

Biology is the study of life, not history. Evolution may be related to biology in that it deals with living and once living things, but it is not foundational.

Tell that to someone who works with vaccinations. They'll laugh in your face.

One can study biology without denying the Scriptures. It may get progressively harder when they are surrounded with people like you who are trying to push your religion off as proven science.

It doesn't seem to be difficult for Francis Collins and Kenneth Miller. But they're intellectually honest scientists who have worked on experiments that demonstrate evolution to be a fact. Are you smarter than them?

The difference is that adaptation works with existing genetic information and evolution requires a process of increasing complexity that does not exist.

Does it? Because there have been experiments done that show your claim to be false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luria–Delbrück_experiment

Your statement is an unequivocal lie. Your world view would only be correct if God did not exist. However, since God DOES exist; as do angels, demons and spirits which exist long after the body has returned to dust, then we know that God's word is true.

You're making me dizzy with your circular arguments. How about some evidence? The only argument you seem to be able to muster up against evolution is hand waving it away while hurling insults.

Which did Jesus teach; that the Scriptures were the breathed word of God, or that man evolved?

Well considering that the origin of species was not published until 1859 and has been expanded on and shown to be a fact for 150 years, it doesn't surprise me that someone would be preaching about the supernatural 2000 years ago. It's exactly what I would expect from people who had no idea what kind of world they were living in. Thanks to the scientific method, we've figured out a lot about how the world works. Every discovery made for things we didn't understand turned out to be not magic. You'll believe that a snake could speak words but you call my teapot example foolish? Yikes.

 

[OzSpen]

How is saying GOD DID IT not honoring Christ the Lord as holy?

Colossians 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

That's a red herring answer as you did not answer my question.