Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[BNR32FAN]

It's still a false dichotomy.

Its much more productive to give examples or an explanation to support a claim rather than just making a claim with nothing to support it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Its much more productive to give examples or an explanation to support a claim rather than just making a claim with nothing to support it.

I have found both the MISSING LINK and ABIOGENESIS!

 

[BNR32FAN]

The absolutism of the Bible displayed in this thread that anything stated in the Bible must be true ignores the fact the current Jewish and Christian Bibles were subject to alterations and omissions throughout history.
For example there is barely a mention in the New Testament of Jesus from the time after his birth up to the commencement of his ministry around the age of thirty.
None of the infancy gospels written in the 2nd century survived the final cut when the New Testament was settled on 27 books by the 5th century.

There is perhaps a good reason why infancy gospels never made the final cut as in the Infancy Gospel of St Thomas, the child Jesus is not exactly portrayed in a benevolent light.


The development of the Jewish and Christian Bibles is given in the following video.
What you read today in the Bible is the result of human intervention over the centuries.

The authorship of the infancy gospels could not be verified or validated and the gospel of Thomas was certainly a forgery because it claimed that Christ killed on several occasions, three if I’m not mistaken when he was a child and none of them were lawful killings. They would’ve been considered as murder and therefore a sin so we know that one was definitely not an inspired writing of truth. And to my knowledge there’s never actually been an official canonization of the scriptures because not all of the apostolic churches contain the same books. There were no ecumenical councils that decided which books were to be regarded as scripture but there were some that deemed certain books as heretical.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I have found both the MISSING LINK and ABIOGENESIS!

That’s not it everyone knows the missing link was a wrestler back in the 80s scientist discovered him 40 years ago. He wasn’t really that good of a wrestler tho.

 

[Astrid]

I don't think most people are that concerned about the Theory of Evolution. As to Christians, certainly there is an understandable reaction when people misuse the theory by claiming it shows God had no hand in creating humans. Then there is a core minority group of Christians that takes the number of years in the Bible literally and doesn't believe the carbon dating techniques. In fact there is no way to prove carbon dating, although there is a strong scientific argument to made.

How would you say reliability / verifiability of C14
dating compares with the same for biblical accounts

 

[Bradskii]

My point is that those who don’t believe in Christ’s miracles because they defy the laws of science are not being consistent when they say they believe in His incarnation and resurrection.

As the belief in the resurrection is integral to being a Christian then, obviously, all Christains believe in it. I would suggest that as to whether He fed thousands with a few loaves and fishes they either believe it to be factually true or think it to be a story that illustrates that people at that time thought He was capable of miracles. I doubt very much if they would say 'That's impossible because it defies the laws of science!' If they did, then yes, there would be some inconsistency.

Let me know if you find any Christian who holds to that position regarding any of Jesus' miracles. If they're on this forum then it would be an interesting position to discuss.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I would suggest that as to whether He fed thousands with a few loaves and fishes they either believe it to be factually true or think it to be a story that illustrates that people at that time thought He was capable of miracles.

Well that’s a bit of speculation as to what other people might think but I assure you it falls into one of three categories, either they believe it, they aren’t sure, or they don’t believe it.

 

[SelfSim]

Well that’s a bit of speculation as to what other people might think but I assure you it falls into one of three categories, either they believe it, they aren’t sure, or they don’t believe it.

Notice how the focus of the speculative position portrayed there is all about whether or not one believes. Why are beliefs so important as to always turn conversations to focus on them .. (on any particular subject in general, what's more)?

I'd much rather understand the intracacies of why something is demonstrably real, than to be so driven about what someone believes (for whatever reason .. after all, it'll still only be their belief ..)

 

[AV1611VET]

There were no ecumenical councils that decided which books were to be regarded as scripture but there were some that deemed certain books as heretical.

As I understand it, the authenticity of the books of the Bible were established by the Apostles themselves.

These councils that came later, whose job it was to create a Biblical cannon, had only to separate the "legal tender" from the "non-legal tender."

If you were put in a room with a table that had a pile of dollar bills on it from ones to tens, and told to separate them into two piles: LEGAL TENDER and NON-LEGAL TENDER, could you do it?

Sure you could:

1. one dollar bills here
2. two dollar bills here
3. three dollar bills there
4. four dollar bills there
5. five dollar bills here
6. six dollar bills there
7. seven dollar bills there
8. eight dollar bills there
9. nine dollar bills there
10. ten dollar bills here

It was a simple matter of separating the tares from the wheat.

 

[Bradskii]

Well that’s a bit of speculation as to what other people might think but I assure you it falls into one of three categories, either they believe it, they aren’t sure, or they don’t believe it.

Jesus is divine. So if He wanted to perform a miracle then He could. So it would be nonsensical to suggest that 'It can't have happened because it denies natural science'. That wouldn't be inconsistent. That would be nonsensical. No Christian would ever say that. Because it would literally deny His divinity.

So again, I doubt that you will find a Christian who will outright deny that it happened. But you may well find quite a few who might suggest that it's a nice story exhibiting that people at the time considered Him divine and capabable of performing miracles. And let's face it, combine a belief like that and stories at the time will tend to become exagerated for effect.

So let's be clear. Suggesting that one of Jesus' miracles didn't happen and denying that it happened are two completely different positions. As I said, the latter is nonsensical and can certainly be described as inconsistent. See if you can find anyone who holds to that.

 

[AV1611VET]

So let's be clear. Suggesting that one of Jesus' miracles didn't happen and denying that it happened are two completely different positions. As I said, the latter is nonsensical and can certainly be described as inconsistent. See if you can find anyone who holds to that.

John 2:11 This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him.

 

[ottawak]

Its much more productive to give examples or an explanation to support a claim rather than just making a claim with nothing to support it.

It's not a claim, it's an observation. You offered me two options:

...a fictional story or a historical one.

(emphasis added)
As if a story must be one or the other. In reality, the relationship between fact and narrative offers a wide range of possibilities.

 

[sjastro]

The authorship of the infancy gospels could not be verified or validated and the gospel of Thomas was certainly a forgery because it claimed that Christ killed on several occasions, three if I’m not mistaken when he was a child and none of them were lawful killings. They would’ve been considered as murder and therefore a sin so we know that one was definitely not an inspired writing of truth. And to my knowledge there’s never actually been an official canonization of the scriptures because not all of the apostolic churches contain the same books. There were no ecumenical councils that decided which books were to be regarded as scripture but there were some that deemed certain books as heretical.

Firstly the Gospel of Thomas is not the same as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.
Secondly the 27-book New Testament was first formally canonized during the councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) in North Africa. Pope Innocent I ratified the same canon in 405, but it is probable that a Council in Rome in 382 under Pope Damasus I gave the same list first. These councils also provided the canon of the Old Testament, which included the apocryphal books.
It was the councils (=people) that validated the New Testament.

The problem with a blind adherence of the Bible as representing absolute truth is the requirement of its acceptance as a complete package including other aspects such as Biblical law.
Do you believe the Bible is correct in handling the issue of rape or the status of women as described in this post?
On top of this your faith based arguments are not relevant in a science forum as the Bible is not a source of evidence.
In fact creationism in all its forms can be described as.

​

 

[ottawak]

As I understand it, the authenticity of the books of the Bible were established by the Apostles themselves.

These councils that came later, whose job it was to create a Biblical cannon, had only to separate the "legal tender" from the "non-legal tender."

If you were put in a room with a table that had a pile of dollar bills on it from ones to tens, and told to separate them into two piles: LEGAL TENDER and NON-LEGAL TENDER, could you do it?

Sure you could:

1. one dollar bills here
2. two dollar bills here
3. three dollar bills there
4. four dollar bills there
5. five dollar bills here
6. six dollar bills there
7. seven dollar bills there
8. eight dollar bills there
9. nine dollar bills there
10. ten dollar bills here

It was a simple matter of separating the tares from the wheat.

That sure makes it sound easy, but it was a long process not without controversy and the Canon is not entirely uniform throughout Christendom even now.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Jesus is divine. So if He wanted to perform a miracle then He could. So it would be nonsensical to suggest that 'It can't have happened because it denies natural science'. That wouldn't be inconsistent. That would be nonsensical. No Christian would ever say that. Because it would literally deny His divinity.

Christians do it everyday, that’s what this whole discussion has been about. Some don’t consider the passages containing miracles as being literal because they aren’t within the realm of possibility. The realm of possibility being defined by science.

 

[AV1611VET]

In fact creationism in all its forms can be described as.

​

Here's the conclusion: 18.

What facts can we find to support it?

1. 2⁴
2. 9x2
3. 17+1
4. 18/1
5. etc

 

[TLK Valentine]

As I understand it, the authenticity of the books of the Bible were established by the Apostles themselves.

These councils that came later, whose job it was to create a Biblical cannon, had only to separate the "legal tender" from the "non-legal tender."

If you were put in a room with a table that had a pile of dollar bills on it from ones to tens, and told to separate them into two piles: LEGAL TENDER and NON-LEGAL TENDER, could you do it?

Sure you could:

1. one dollar bills here
2. two dollar bills here
3. three dollar bills there
4. four dollar bills there
5. five dollar bills here
6. six dollar bills there
7. seven dollar bills there
8. eight dollar bills there
9. nine dollar bills there
10. ten dollar bills here

It was a simple matter of separating the tares from the wheat.

You could always write a check.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It's not a claim, it's an observation. You offered me two options:
(emphasis added)
As if a story must be one or the other. In reality, the relationship between fact and narrative offers a wide range of possibilities.

If someone asked me a question and posed two possible answers and neither one of them fit the situation then I would say the answer is neither of those two it is this. That’s just common sense. This is a public forum not a formal multiple choice exam where your limited to only answer from the choices given.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Firstly the Gospel of Thomas is not the same as the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.

Yes you are correct I forgot to add the word infancy by mistake.

 

[AV1611VET]

You could always write a check.

And do what with it?

Give it to someone who can't tell the difference between a legitimate check and a fake one?