Some YECs just don't get it.

[philadiddle]

This post does not apply to all YECs.

Fact: Evolution does NOT equal atheism!

There i said it. Now maybe we can get past some of the rediculous comments made on this forum. I notice some ppl like to call theistic evolution a "compromise" or a "new belief" (knowledge3 says that a lot).

Evolution does not equal atheism any more then meteorology, physics, medicine, or any other science. Just because we can understand what causes the weather doesn't mean God doesn't have a hand in it. Just because scientists believe we evolved doesn't mean God didn't have a hand in it. Theistic evolution is not a spawn of atheistic evolution. Most founders of modern science, including the big bang, were Christian. Evolution is science and the person who accepts it as science is either theistic, or atheistic, the theory of evolution is neither theistic or atheistic.

 

[depthdeception]

This post does not apply to all YECs.

Fact: Evolution does NOT equal atheism!

There i said it. Now maybe we can get past some of the rediculous comments made on this forum. I notice some ppl like to call theistic evolution a "compromise" or a "new belief" (knowledge3 says that a lot).

Evolution does not equal atheism any more then meteorology, physics, medicine, or any other science. Just because we can understand what causes the weather doesn't mean God doesn't have a hand in it. Just because scientists believe we evolved doesn't mean God didn't have a hand in it. Theistic evolution is not a spawn of atheistic evolution. Most founders of modern science, including the big bang, were Christian. Evolution is science and the person who accepts it as science is either theistic, or atheistic, the theory of evolution is neither theistic or atheistic.

Incoming!!!

 

[Saucy]

I'm not saying you don't believe in God. I'm saying you're a bit misguided and you pretty much slap God and His creation in the face.

 

[depthdeception]

I'm not saying you don't believe in God. I'm saying you're a bit misguided and you pretty much slap God and His creation in the face.

How is seeing God's hand in the beauty of the orchestration of billions of years of natural history a "slap" in God's face?

 

[Saucy]

I believe God created everything as it is. Life begat similar life. If you look around and see all the beautiful, interesting and unique animals...it's so beautiful...all created by God's hand. Evolution comes along and says it just happened. Evolution is indeed an atheistic hypothesis, requiring no Creator. TEs now come in and say, "Well, the bible is wrong in the aspect of creation. There's just too much scientific evidence of evolution, but God just provided the beginning spark that got everything going." In essence, He didn't create anything. It's all still natural selection. All throughout the bible, it speaks loudly of creation...not just in Genesis. In Job, God talked to Job about His creation. A lot of the New Testament says Jesus was indeed the Creator.

 

[Brownsy]

Evolution is indeed an atheistic hypothesis, requiring no Creator.

The fact that something can be explanied atheistically in no way means that there is no creator. Please read the OP again - people can say what they whant about atheistic evolution etc. but we, as TE's, believe in God and evolution. End of story.

Secondly, I don't believe that God just gave things a push along (provided the spark, as you put it) and sat back and said "Well lets see what happens here". I believe thats God set the events in motion deliberately, with full forknowledge of what would occur and with a deliberate end result in mind. I don't know how others feel about this idea, but I'd be pretty sure that I'm not alone in this belief.

Blessings to you all

 

[Saucy]

Sorry, but I'm a literalist. If God said it, that settles it. There is little point in saying, "Well, most of the bible is true, except that little part in Genesis." I think it's wrong. Either you believe and accept the bible as a whole, or you don't. You can't pick and choose what you want to accept and what you don't.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Sorry, but I'm a literalist. If God said it, that settles it. There is little point in saying, "Well, most of the bible is true, except that little part in Genesis." I think it's wrong. Either you believe and accept the bible as a whole, or you don't. You can't pick and choose what you want to accept and what you don't.

So your faith is basically an ultimatum... what would you do if a single part of the Bible was not literally true?

 

[Brownsy]

Sorry, but I'm a literalist. If God said it, that settles it. There is little point in saying, "Well, most of the bible is true, except that little part in Genesis." I think it's wrong. Either you believe and accept the bible as a whole, or you don't. You can't pick and choose what you want to accept and what you don't.

Sorry, but this is an all too common mistake. Just because I don't believe that the creation story is a literal scientific and hsitorical account, doesn't mean I believe it is wrong. I don't believe it was ever written to be a factual account of actual events, but rather a sotry, if you will, to illustrate creation. To that end I don't blieve it to be WRONG, but I dont belive it to be literal either. To say that if I don't believe that something is literally true then i belive it to be a lie, is a false dichotomy.

Blessings to you all

 

[jasperbound]

I believe God created everything as it is. Life begat similar life. If you look around and see all the beautiful, interesting and unique animals...it's so beautiful...all created by God's hand. Evolution comes along and says it just happened. Evolution is indeed an atheistic hypothesis, requiring no Creator. TEs now come in and say, "Well, the bible is wrong in the aspect of creation. There's just too much scientific evidence of evolution, but God just provided the beginning spark that got everything going." In essence, He didn't create anything. It's all still natural selection. All throughout the bible, it speaks loudly of creation...not just in Genesis. In Job, God talked to Job about His creation. A lot of the New Testament says Jesus was indeed the Creator.

People in the NT even mention some of the people who are "fables" to many TEs as real (i.e. some of the people in the genealogy of Jesus that goes all the way back to Adam).

 

[Brownsy]

People in the NT even mention some of the people who are "fables" to many TEs as real (i.e. some of the people in the genealogy of Jesus that goes all the way back to Adam).

The number of time someone is mentioned has no bearing on how real their existence was. Look at how much Santa or the Easter Bunny are mentioned in modern day society, or how many times the Greeks and Romans mentioned important people in their culture (and yes, i know some of them were real), yet these characters are no more real because of it.

And by the way, which biblical characters are you referring to, just out of interest.

Blessings to you all

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

I believe God created everything as it is. Life begat similar life. If you look around and see all the beautiful, interesting and unique animals...it's so beautiful...all created by God's hand. Evolution comes along and says it just happened. Evolution is indeed an atheistic hypothesis, requiring no Creator. TEs now come in and say, "Well, the bible is wrong in the aspect of creation. There's just too much scientific evidence of evolution, but God just provided the beginning spark that got everything going." In essence, He didn't create anything. It's all still natural selection. All throughout the bible, it speaks loudly of creation...not just in Genesis. In Job, God talked to Job about His creation. A lot of the New Testament says Jesus was indeed the Creator.

Saying God uses evolution to create species is no more atheistic than saying God uses biology and chemistry to create a person from a sperm and an egg.

 

[jasperbound]

The number of time someone is mentioned has no bearing on how real their existence was. Look at how much Santa or the Easter Bunny are mentioned in modern day society, or how many times the Greeks and Romans mentioned important people in their culture (and yes, i know some of them were real), yet these characters are no more real because of it.

And by the way, which biblical characters are you referring to, just out of interest.

Blessings to you all

Oh please. Who mentions Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny as being real? If it was God who did, then I'd doubt his divinity (unless they turned out to be real). As for who? Adam, Cain, Abel, Noah, etc.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

Oh please. Who mentions Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny as being real? If it was God who did, then I'd doubt his divinity (unless they turned out to be real). As for who? Adam, Cain, Abel, Noah, etc.

Lots of people. Otherwise, children wouldn't believe in them.

 

[Brownsy]

Oh please. Who mentions Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny as being real? If it was God who did, then I'd doubt his divinity (unless they turned out to be real). As for who? Adam, Cain, Abel, Noah, etc.

If someone were to look at a record of our culture in say,2000 years time, could they honestly say with certainity that at least certain people didnt think Santa was real? I mean especially around this time of year he is involved in nearly every part of society (OK, I admit that the easter bunny analogy wasa bit off).

And by the way, you are not speaking of all TE's when you say we consider such people that you mentioned a myth. I see no contradiction between a belief in TE and a belief that these people actually existed as historical figures.

Blessings to you all

 

[jasperbound]

Lots of people. Otherwise, children wouldn't believe in them.

So, what you're saying is that these people actually believe in the existence of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?

 

[Brownsy]

So, what you're saying is that these people actually believe in the existence of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?

In the context of the arguement, whether or not they actually believe in them is irrelevant, as long as they give the outward impression of believing in them.

Blessings to you all

 

[jasperbound]

If someone were to look at a record of our culture in say,2000 years time, could they honestly say with certainity that at least certain people didnt think Santa was real? I mean especially around this time of year he is involved in nearly every part of society (OK, I admit that the easter bunny analogy wasa bit off).

Yes, unless people are so stupid in the future that they do not see how impossible it would be for a man in the North Pole to give presents to billions of children in a single night. Do you honestly believe people are this stupid?

And by the way, you are not speaking of all TE's when you say we consider such people that you mentioned a myth. I see no contradiction between a belief in TE and a belief that these people actually existed as historical figures.

It isn't, but it seems to come with the territory. I don't understand why.

 

[jasperbound]

In the context of the arguement, whether or not they actually believe in them is irrelevant, as long as they give the outward impression of believing in them.

Blessings to you all

It does, because you know as well as I do that nobody except children actually believe they exist, and you know as well as I do that adults only pretend that they exist to give their children something fun to believe in.

Now, if the point is that somebody who nobody but children who don't know any better actually believes in has as much validity as somebody else who everybody believed in, then I'm afraid I can't understand such "airtight" logic.

 

[fragmentsofdreams]

So, what you're saying is that these people actually believe in the existence of Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny?

No, but they often speak as if they do. Someone who didn't know who Santa was could mistake many statements about Santa to be refering to him as real even if both the speaker and the listener do not believe Santa to be real.