Starlight and a Young Earth.

[wblastyn]

Your evidence is our evidence, we just see that your methods are as biased toward your ''faith'' as ours is to our faith.
The difference is that we are men enough to admit our view is biased and evolutionists are not.

No, you see you equate evolution with atheism, so if evolution is proven true then atheism is true, and that terrifies you.  You desperately WANT creationism to be true, so you twist or ignore any evidence so that it fits your view of the Bible.

On the other hand, "evolutionists" do not WANT evolution to be true (or don't not want), it's just that the evidence seems to suggest that it is, but we don't desperately twist the facts to fit evolution, we have no reason to, we do not equate evolution with atheism or creationism with being a Christian.


Science isn't about what we want or don't want, it's about what is.

 

[Follower of Christ]

You mistake my meaning.
I do not think that evolution = atheism.
When I refer to your faith, I mean your faith in the evolution theory.

My best friend believes in God and evolution.
He calls himself a Christian from time to time (although right now he seems to be on a partying binge).

"You believe that there is one God, you do well; even the demons believe and tremble. "
(James 2:19 MKJV)

Belief in God is not enough. Faith in His word regardless of mans fallible understandings is acceptable to Him.

I know full well how convincing the ''facts'' of evolution are. It took quite a while to deprogram myself from it.
I am very sure that in the time since I dropped my belief in Evolution, that there has been a lot more ''evidence'' presented.
This is going to make it even harder to keep from buying into.

I am not an enemy of those believing evolution, my enemy is the founder of all lies presented to man to keep him from finding Gods truth.

 

[wblastyn]

I am not an enemy of those believing evolution, my enemy is the founder of all lies presented to man to keep him from finding Gods truth.

Evolution only stops people from finding your interpretation of Genesis, not God.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 03:36 AM wblastyn said this in Post #23


Evolution only stops people from finding your interpretation of Genesis, not God.

wblastyn
I truly hope that you are right and that the connection I have seen so far of Christian-evolutionists and compromise of foundational truth has just been sheer coincidence.

It may be no big deal to believe in evolution. I dont know He feels.
God said He created man in His image, and yet for millions of years His image would have been represented in creatures not quite man.

It may not offend God that we look to the created things and not to the Creator as in Romans 1.
It may not offend Him that the usual step after accepting evolution seems to be buying into a local flood, thereby perpetuating doubt in the athority and reliability of scripture.
It may not even offend Him when his some of His followers claim that His Christ (who supposedly was divine)was personally involved with a group that did not even believe the truth.

It does seem to be rooted well into church theology anymore.
Enough so that believers have changed their beliefs to feel accepted.

I wonder how far one can go in reinterpreting scripture before it would obviously not be the same religion anymore?
Is there a limit, or can we just decide that we can believe whatever we want and believe its okay with God.
I wonder why He even inspired men to write anyway if its okay to pick and choose ours beliefs.

I have dozens more questions that I ask my self.
Do they matter to you?

 

[Jon]

Read what Dr. Dino says about starlight:
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=faq&specific=8

 

[ksen]

29th March 2003 at 07:58 AM wblastyn said this in Post #21

On the other hand, "evolutionists" do not WANT evolution to be true (or don't not want), it's just that the evidence seems to suggest that it is, but we don't desperately twist the facts to fit evolution....

Are you sure about that?

What about:

1) Nebraska Man
2) Piltdown Man
3) Peppered Moths
4) Haeckel's Embryos?

http://www.alexfound.org/creation/dewitt/hoaxes.htm

Science isn't about what we want or don't want, it's about what is.

Looks good on paper anyway......

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 12:52 PM ksen said this in Post #26



Are you sure about that?

What about:

1) Nebraska Man
2) Piltdown Man
3) Peppered Moths
4) Haeckel's Embryos?

http://www.alexfound.org/creation/dewitt/hoaxes.htm




Looks good on paper anyway......

And theres more that could easily go onto that list.

Its remarkable that in researching evolution, I could not find a single piece of evidence FOR it that did not have some MAJOR shadow of doubt hanging over it.
Yet so many just eat it up. And they would have us believe that WE are gullible

 

[ksen]

Today at 01:33 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #27

And theres more that could easily go onto that list.

Its remarkable that in researching evolution, I could not find a single piece of evidence FOR it that did not have some MAJOR shadow of doubt hanging over it.
Yet so many just eat it up. And they would have us believe that WE are gullible

I don't think you can read a single pro-evolutionary article in one of the vaunted journals that isn't filled with smoke-and-mirror words like: "It could have happened this way....", "May have occured....", "Theorized to have.....", etc.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 01:46 PM ksen said this in Post #28



I don't think you can read a single pro-evolutionary article in one of the vaunted journals that isn't filled with smoke-and-mirror words like: "It could have happened this way....", "May have occured....", "Theorized to have.....", etc.

Thats kind of funny cause its that very type of comment that is used against us when we hypothesize.

 

[troodon]

Today at 10:46 AM ksen said this in Post #28



I don't think you can read a single pro-evolutionary article in one of the vaunted journals that isn't filled with smoke-and-mirror words like: "It could have happened this way....", "May have occured....", "Theorized to have.....", etc.

Science is never certain about anything.  Evolution as we understand it could be disproven tomarrow, although I'm not holding my breath .  All that science can do in regards to this type of topic is discard wrong theories (like young earth creationism), it can never prove which theory is right.

 

[ksen]

Today at 03:27 PM troodon said this in Post #30

Science is never certain about anything. 

Unless it's that those rascally Creationists are wrong, wrong, wrong.

 

[troodon]

Today at 12:35 PM ksen said this in Post #31



Unless it's that those rascally Creationists are wrong, wrong, wrong.

Exactly, all science can do is disprove; it can't prove. Hence, while evolution has not been proven in a strict sense, young earth creationism has been disproven.

 

[ksen]

Science will never "prove" or "disprove" any origins theory. They are beyond its scope.

 

[Follower of Christ]

Today at 05:39 PM chickenman said this in Post #34

its fair to say that the creationist account has been disproven beyond reasonable doubt

thats why its dead science, and resurrected politics

You keep right on repeating that. I am sure you'll convince yourself one day

 

[troodon]

31st March 2003 at 01:00 PM ksen said this in Post #33

Science will never "prove" or "disprove" any origins theory. They are beyond its scope.

Very incorrect. If I hypothesize that the universe was created last Thursday, all someone would have to do is show sufficient evidence that the universe existed prior to last Thursday and *poof*, my theory is disproven. Of course, this doesn't mean that people won't make rediculous and unfounded attacks against the method with which this person disproved it.

 

[Follower of Christ]

31st March 2003 at 03:27 PM troodon said this in Post #30



Science is never certain about anything.  Evolution as we understand it could be disproven tomarrow, although I'm not holding my breath .  All that science can do in regards to this type of topic is discard wrong theories (like young earth creationism), it can never prove which theory is right.

And that possibility of being disproven tomorrow is why I chose to not keep believing it.
Its like playing russian roulette (literally)

 

[troodon]

1st April 2003 at 09:58 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #36



And that possibility of being disproven tomorrow is why I chose to not keep believing it.
Its like playing russian roulette (literally)

It's a far better alternative than accepting an already disproven theory (young earth creationism namely).