- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,851,179
- 51,516
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Science thrives on honest questioning.
Upvote
0
Science thrives on honest questioning.
Faith in Christ, not the spurious creationist doctrines of right-wing Evangelical fundamentalism, is what is going to "cut it."They must think that God, if He exists, is going to buy into their mindset and make an exception.
Standing before almighty God on Judgement Day, having gotten there because of their "disgust" for creationism as espoused by a minority of creationists isn't going to cut it.
Do you think God is going to accept that as a viable excuse?Many do, but it is difficult if they have been indoctrinated with the notion that Christian denominations which tolerate theistic evolution are works of the devil.
Then should God give up on them?Speedwell said:It's easier for some to give up on the idea of Christianity altogether.
Care to answer my question as I wrote it? or did I hit a nerve?Speedwell said:It certainly is a mistake to believe the lie that evolution denies the existence of God.
So you're saying atheists are making an eternal mistake?Faith in Christ, not the spurious creationist doctrines of right-wing Evangelical fundamentalism, is what is going to "cut it."
Because as a "Bible-hating, Christ-denying commie" (an Anglican) I have some sympathy for those who have been driven to atheism by self-righteous Fundamentalists. Perhaps God will, too.Do you think God is going to accept that as a viable excuse?Then should God give up on them?Care to answer my question as I wrote it? or did I hit a nerve?
And why are you making excuses for atheists, when you know God isn't going to accept those excuses?
Although my OP mentions science and scientific influence, science as a whole, was not the intended focus. The focus here is the ‘science of macroevolution.’ And, we can see from these types of discussion alone that not all macro evolutionists, nor their speculations, are supportive of the existence of God. So, in that context I can't see a dishonest statement.It isn't. Science thrives on honest questioning. Dishonest statements to the effect that science denies the existence of God are another thing altogether.,
These "speculations," as you call them, are entirely neutral with respect to the existence of God, neither affirming nor denying it. Consequently, your statement is indeed dishonest.Although my OP mentions science and scientific influence, science as a whole, was not the intended focus. The focus here is the ‘science of macroevolution.’ And, we can see from these types of discussion alone that not all macro evolutionists, nor their speculations, are supportive of the existence of God. So, in that context I can't see a dishonest statement.
Okay, you can drop that part then.These "speculations," as you call them, are entirely neutral with respect to the existence of God, neither affirming nor denying it. Consequently, your statement is indeed dishonest.
Arguing for the existence of God is pretty much obvious when the other person identifies themselves as an atheist; your interpretation of Genesis is a bit more difficult to understand, especially when you haven’t really defined it.Right. Just make sure that you know whether you are arguing for the existence of God, or just for your interpretation of Genesis.
But hardly seems appropriate or useful in a forum devoted to discussion of the theory of evolution.Arguing for the existence of God is pretty much obvious when the other person identifies themselves as an atheist...
Do you need to understand it? Or do you just want to condemn it?...your interpretation of Genesis is a bit more difficult to understand, especially when you haven’t really defined it.
Do you really expect me to believe that?
So in atheist-think, it's either a literal Genesis 1 or atheism ... right?
You're ignoring the other half... Creation.But hardly seems appropriate or useful in a forum devoted to discussion of the theory of evolution.
I'll ask you the same question???Do you need to understand it? Or do you just want to condemn it?
How so? I believe that God is the author of our being whether the theory of evolution is true or not. An Atheist does not believe that God is author of our being whether the theory of evolution is true or not. The existence of God is not relevant to a discussion about whether the theory of evolution is true or not. The theory of evolution is the same for both theists and atheists.You're ignoring the other half... Creation.
I don't care very much about it unless it is used as a basis for denying the faith of other Christians, as creationists frequently do. You can interpret Genesis any way you want, so long as you understand that you don't own the book and that your interpretation is not normative for other Christians.I'll ask you the same question???
I did hit a nerve, didn't I?Because as a "Bible-hating, Christ-denying commie" (an Anglican) I have some sympathy for those who have been driven to atheism by self-righteous Fundamentalists. Perhaps God will, too.
It seems the correct caption to me, since so many creationists deny the Christian faith of Anglicans anyway, and regard it as "other religion."So you believe atheism is a religion then, since your caption reads: "Other Religion"?
You're avoiding my questions on purpose, and it's getting more difficult to discuss this with you.Because as a "Bible-hating, Christ-denying commie" (an Anglican) I have some sympathy for those who have been driven to atheism by self-righteous Fundamentalists.
Follow the conversation please.Wrong. Or are you saying that Brightmoon is an atheist?
Sorry ... I misread your post.It seems the correct caption to me, since so many creationists deny the Christian faith of Anglicans anyway, and regard it as "other religion."
Indeed, we've known each other long enough and I have enough respect for you that I think you deserve an honest answer. Given the present political situation in this country vis-a-vis the Evangelical Fundamentalist "Christian Right" and their Anointed One, President Trump, I have actually become ashamed of being known as a Christian. I am disgusted with this and I am trying to work it out as best I can through prayer and spiritual guidance, hoping that my faith in Christ will carry me through, but in the meantime I have changed my profile to "other religion."You're avoiding my questions on purpose, and it's getting more difficult to discuss this with you.
Why would you have sympathy for someone "driven to atheism," when that same person would refuse to be driven to Theistic Evolution?
You're feeling sorry for those who won't accept a literal Genesis 1 ... okay, I can understand that.
But then you're feeling sorry for those who, after not accepting a literal Genesis 1, won't accept a figurative Genesis 1 either.
And saying they were "driven to atheism by self-righteous Fundamentalists" is over the top.