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.
Yes it is. But you should say SCIENTISTS, not "evolutionists".
Refusing to believe it is not evidence. And actually, evolution at this point is much better understood that gravity. (So it is rather comical that you compare it with gravity, one of the most mysterious forces in the universe! But it DOES point out why the criticisms of science-deniers simply do not count. Science doesn't care what slogans and deniers have to say. EVIDENCE and attempts at falsification are what counts.)
I was a young earth creationist speaker/debater long ago so don't assume that I don't know the facts. I know the scriptural evidence and the scientific evidence. Young Earth Creationism is about ignoring evidence. Period. It is poor biblical scholarship and non-existent science competence.
To me teaching evolution in grade school is very Hitler-like...one of those "believe this or get a bad grade" brain-washing techniques.
Because it's a basic concept about the world. Most of us aren't going to be astronomers; does this mean that geocentrism should be taught as a valid theory? Few of us are going to be geologists or meteorologists; does this mean that we should teach the controversy about the flat Earth?take it out of public schools...people who do not want to biologists (for the sake of argument) do not need it, so why teach it to the masses?
Believing or not believing has zero bearing on my worldly life and really the majority of people in general...just like rocket science has no bearing...so why the push for evolution to young kids?
No, it's pushing an idea and calling those who disregard the evidence as ignorant. That's science, not politics.again, that's just pushing an idea by calling those who question ignorant...that's politics not science.
it is a worldview and should be taught in Philosophy or Religion in college.
verysincere said:'
Nothing to reconcile. All of the PRESUMED contradictions are based on English Bible translation TRADITIONS, not the Hebrew text.
For example, it is not at all clear that Genesis 1 is a chronological account. And NOTHING in the text denies evolution. Christians regularly confuse ULTIMATE causation (GOD) with PROXIMATE causation (evolution). Christians once claimed the planets were pushed around by angels. Newton explained it with gravity. Christians abandoned that "angel propulsion" tradition and adopted gravity. Evolution is similar.
Genesis 2:7 where God made Adam from the dust of the ground (i.e. the chemical elements of the earth's crust) doesn't say whether it took a nanosecond or millions of years. Indeed, abiogenesis is simply a way to refer to the natural processes: biological life from non-living ingredients. The idea of God being involved is THEOLOGY, not science. The science is life from non-life: abiogenesis.
I've written copiously on this topic. So don't assume that some trivial English Bible tradition is going to impress me over what the Hebrew text clearly states. I am not impressed by the cherished traditions of arm-chair devotees of the Schofield Study Bible, etc.
The following is why evolution is not compatible with scripture:
Trogool said:Irrelevant. Had nothing to do with science
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
Your response is irrelevant as the question was about how one reconciles evolution with the creation account in genesis.
Trogool said:Yeah, which has nothing to do with science. Go to Origins Theology if you want to talk theology.
Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner
Go to an atheist website if you want to Argue against scripture.
take it out of public schools...people who do not want to biologists (for the sake of argument) do not need it, so why teach it to the masses?
Believing or not believing has zero bearing on my worldly life and really the majority of people in general...just like rocket science has no bearing...so why the push for evolution to young kids?
Ah, such sweet hyperbole. Don't kid yourself - no legitimate objections are taught because there are no legitimate objections. At least, none which haven't been resoundingly debunked since the first publication of Origins.I agree. When they treat it as an established fact with a monopoly, no allowance being made for legitimate objections to the theory, it is no longer science, but indoctrination.
take it out of public schools...people who do not want to biologists (for the sake of argument) do not need it, so why teach it to the masses?
Believing or not believing has zero bearing on my worldly life and really the majority of people in general...just like rocket science has no bearing...so why the push for evolution to young kids?
False. I can do it too.
Your response is irrelevant as the question was about how one reconciles evolution with the creation account in genesis.
The following is why evolution is not compatible with scripture:
1) Evolution would imply that the account of Adam & Eve was merely allegory and that they were not historical figures. If this were the case, it would not make sense to include Adam in Jesus' geneology.
2) If the first Adam was not a historical figure, how can you say the last Adam was.
3) Biblical creation says death followed the creation of man and resulted from original sin. Evolution says that death preceded the creation of man and was in fact the vehicle for his creation. In this case, sin would have had no consequences. This undermines the gospel.
4) Evolution says that the birds evolved from the reptiles. Creationism says that the birds were created before the reptiles.
5) The genesis account of creation brackets each day of the six days of creation with a morning and and evening, making it clear that they were literal days.
6) God set aside the sabbath every 7th literal day to commemorate the day He rested from creation.
7) Jesus spoke of Adam as a literal historical figure.
8) Creation was finished after the 6th day.
Loudmouth said:Eight great reasons for why creationism is not taken seriously by scientists.
I'll direct you to my post if you're interested in more detailed responses.False. I can do it too.
Eight great reasons why evolution should not be taken seriously by Christians.
Nice try. Anyone can try to discredit sources. How about refuting the claims of the article.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?