• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How were you taught Evolution?

How were you taught evolution?

  • With an explicit denial of God's involvement

  • With an explicit affirmation of God's involvement

  • Without either an affirmation or denial of God's involvement


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Kylie

Defeater of Illogic
Nov 23, 2013
15,069
5,309
✟327,545.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Female
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Do you accept the view that humanity was created only, solely, totally, completely by naturalistic means?

There you go sticking that ONLY in there again...

It is inherently atheistic. You have to modify it, change it, for it to include creation impetuses other than solely, completely, totally, only naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago.

If something does not mention X but leaves space where X can be, then the thing is not denying X. You need to learn this.
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟28,767.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
I am a Christian and I accept that evolution is God's chosen means of creating the varieties of life.

I accepted Christ at the age of nine before I learned about evolution.

There is just one problem. God never said he used evolution nor long ages to create life. He said he created all the varieties, fully grown and mature, in six, 24 hour days. Humans and plants as well. Jesus confirms that part of the bible in the NT as true history.
 
Upvote 0

Atheos canadensis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,383
132
✟29,901.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private

Nope.
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟28,767.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican

Have you not read?

Matt. 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?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.


John 5:45 Do not think that I shall accuse you to the Father; uthere is one who accuses you—Moses, in whom you trust. 46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; vfor he wrote about Me. 47 But if you wdo not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”
 
Upvote 0

Atheos canadensis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,383
132
✟29,901.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private

Oh, you should have said in the first place that the Bible said you were right. Now I'm convinced...said no atheist ever.
 
Upvote 0

Atheos canadensis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,383
132
✟29,901.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I've questioned Quatona for further clarification on what was taught in the Catholic school. Let's find out if the Catholic school actually does teach a Godless creation. Personally, I doubt it does.

Desperate. You don't like the answer he gave because it proves you wrong, so you're going to keep asking him if he was taught that humans were created solely by natural processes for the billionth time. He'll say no and you'll ask him exactly the same thing again because you can't accept that you're wrong.

I asked him point blank if the posted definition was what he was taught and he said yes. You're so blinded by your utter certainty that the definition you posted is inherently atheistic that you can't accept the obvious conclusion: if Catholics are teaching that definition, it must not be inherently atheistic. Plus numerous Christians here have told you explicitly that the posted definition is in line with what they believe and still you insist that it's atheistic. What's wrong with you?
 
Upvote 0

Dizredux

Newbie
Dec 20, 2013
2,465
69
✟18,021.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
KTS

Just
That's no longer the definition for Darwinism. You've added something to it that wasn't there.
Oh the irony. You add the words "only, totally, completely, solely" to a perfectly good but limited definition of evolution offered by Wiki and then insist that definition and yours agree.

Then you have the chutzpah to complain because KTS added the words "as used by God" when you add your magic words "only, totally, completely, solely " to the Wiki statement and expect people to buy it.

Just, a lot of people on the forum are trying to tell you something. Do try to listen, listening is a productive part of achieving good mental health.

Dizredux
 
Upvote 0

EternalDragon

Counselor
Jul 31, 2013
5,757
26
✟28,767.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Oh, you should have said in the first place that the Bible said you were right. Now I'm convinced...said no atheist ever.

Um...the person I was responding to said they were a Christian. Christian's follow God's word. So your response is sort of redundant and out of place.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Do you accept the view that humanity was created only, solely, totally, completely by naturalistic means?

I consider that as one possibility, and it may be that it is necessary for mankind to be created that way in order to finally wrest control of earth away from Satan.

How could it be a possibility and in agreement with this scripture...

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

If that scripture is true, then humanity wasn't created only, solely, totally, completely by naturalistic mechanisms, but was created by naturalistic mechanisms plus something else, in this instance, Jesus Christ. That's theistic evolution, isn't it? A view of theistic creationism?


The naturally evolved spiritual beings would still be a creation of Jesus Christ and not by a completely naturalistic process.


Interesting viewpoint.

But it is enough to show you your ideas that evolution has to be evil are misplaced, you haven't considered all the possibilities.

Nope, I've never suggested that evolution is evil or misplaced. I do believe that a Godless creation, a creation of only, totally, completely, solely naturalistic mechanisms creating humanity is evil though. It's Godless. Godlessness is evil.

And since we know evolution is true . . . as certainly as the sky is blue and the galaxies are beyond our reach . . . you should be striving to reconcile evolution with your religion instead of making your religion proveably in error.

This isn't about evolution, this is about what/who created humanity...and all life. From no humanity to humanity. From a single life form of long long ago to the complex and varied life we observe today. How?
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,792
✟254,941.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Um...the person I was responding to said they were a Christian. Christian's follow God's word. So your response is sort of redundant and out of place.

Do all Christians believe the bible is inerrant?

Do all Christians interpret scripture as you do?
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
There you go sticking that ONLY in there again...

You betcha. No other impetus is allowed for the creation of humanity from non-humanity but...only....completely, totally, solely naturalistic mechanisms acting on a single life form from long long ago.

If something does not mention X but leaves space where X can be, then the thing is not denying X. You need to learn this.

There is no space for X...or Y....or Z. There is only space for A (Atheistic creationism).
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

This is what's wrong with the viewpoint that only, totally, completely, solely naturalistic mechanisms created humanity from non-humanity.....

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
 
Upvote 0

Dizredux

Newbie
Dec 20, 2013
2,465
69
✟18,021.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Do any Christians deny this scripture.....

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
What is the problem? Any Christian probably would agree with this passage but I can see no way it conflicts with the view that natural processes were put in place by God. That includes evolution.

Can you point out the problem without using the words only, totally, completely or solely?

An interesting challenge. I bet you can come up with a way but we shall see in your response if you are able to address the issue or will you pull up another non sequitur. Hope springs eternal.

Inquiring minds and all of that.

Dizredux
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
What is the problem? Any Christian probably would agree with this passage but I can see no way it conflicts with the view that natural processes were put in place by God. That includes evolution.

It conflicts with the view that humanity was created from non-humanity by only, totally, solely, completely naturalistic processes.

Can you point out the problem without using the words only, totally, completely or solely?

That is the problem. Creationism by only, solely, completely, totally naturalistic process acting on a single life form from long long ago.

An interesting challenge. I bet you can come up with a way but we shall see in your response if you are able to address the issue or will you pull up another non sequitur. Hope springs eternal.

Yes, an interesting challenge, especially from the viewpoint of atheistic creationism. You, as well as the atheistic creationists on the forum, are upset with the exposure that Darwinism, as defined many time, is inherently Godless creationism.

Why is it Godless? It's Godless because all of life, including humanity, is the product of solely, completely, totally, only naturalistic processes acting on a single life form from long long ago.

Do you understand what that means?

Inquiring minds and all of that.

Dizredux

Yes, and I'm enjoying the inquiry.
 
Upvote 0

Atheos canadensis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,383
132
✟29,901.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Um...the person I was responding to said they were a Christian. Christian's follow God's word. So your response is sort of redundant and out of place.

I guess I was confused by the way your post was addressed to me. You sprayed your literalist nonsense, I said "nope",then you responded with scripture and I mocked the absurdity.
 
Upvote 0

justlookinla

Regular Member
Mar 31, 2014
11,767
199
✟35,675.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Guess what: The ToE doesn't deny that either!

This form of atheistic creationism does......

"Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by Charles Darwin and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual's ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. "​
 
Upvote 0

Atheos canadensis

Well-Known Member
Dec 17, 2013
1,383
132
✟29,901.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
This is what's wrong with the viewpoint that only, totally, completely, solely naturalistic mechanisms created humanity from non-humanity.....

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Let's try that again, only this time try addressing the content of my post instead of just redundantly stating that you don't believe in an atheistic view of origins:

Desperate. You don't like the answer he gave because it proves you wrong, so you're going to keep asking him if he was taught that humans were created solely by natural processes for the billionth time. He'll say no and you'll ask him exactly the same thing again because you can't accept that you're wrong.

I asked him point blank if the posted definition was what he was taught and he said yes. You're so blinded by your utter certainty that the definition you posted is inherently atheistic that you can't accept the obvious conclusion: if Catholics are teaching that definition, it must not be inherently atheistic. Plus numerous Christians here have told you explicitly that the posted definition is in line with what they believe and still you insist that it's atheistic. What's wrong with you?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.