Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[partinobodycular]

New article at Physics.org:

https://phys.org/news/2022-04-disbelief-human-evolution-linked-greater.html

 

[sjastro]

What happened to Shem?

He joined Moe and Larry after Curly had a stroke in 1946.

 

[stevil]

Oh yeah, you're right! Dawkins is a solid biologist, but he's not much of a philosopher or an expert handler of religious study, let alone an authority on Christianity. We have to take some of his gripes with a grain of salt.

Yes, his expertise is evolutionary biology, he's not a religious scholar as far as I know. In that field he just has opinions, most of them aren't enlightening, mostly just basic staff, sometimes a controversial one here and there.

Thanks for letting me know your position and your brand of investment in these issues. That way I can scratch you off of my Christian Forums troll list and place you on my "Legitimate Skeptic" list.

Yeah, thanks. I'm not an American, I don't fall into the American boxes, and don't live within the American society. I'm not interested in disproving Christianity, while it's not for me, I respect that others revere and identify with it. That's their choice.

 

[Astrid]

I know of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens.

I don't seek them out, don't look upto them. They are just people with opinions.
Perhaps they are very useful for people trying to break out of religion. But I've never been in religion.

Although I do like Dawkins books on science, biology etc. And his appearance in Nightwish, very majestic and poetic.

After seeing fundys ranting about my " leader" i read a page
or so of dawkins. Boring.

 

[Astrid]

New article at Physics.org:

https://phys.org/news/2022-04-disbelief-human-evolution-linked-greater.html

We didnt all need a study to figure it out.

 

[Bradskii]

Yes so let’s compare those examples with the Bible. A talking donkey is that possible? Lot’s wife turned into a pillar of salt is that possible? Turning a wooden staff into a snake then back into a wooden staff, is that possible? I mean there’s over 150 examples in the Bible of impossible events that took place.

You'll notice that I included the term 'cannot be true for mere mortals'. So if you want to suggest that a length of wood turning into a snake is a divine miracle then go ahead. If someone else wants to suggest that it's a just story meant to illustrate God's power then either is acceptable.

 

[Bradskii]

I wasn’t aware that there was any burying...

As if that makes the slightest bit of difference. I guess tying her to a post or pinning her to the ground makes it all much more acceptable. Maybe you'd have an objection if the rocks were too large or had sharp edges. We wouldn't want you to pull a muscle or cut yourself.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I hope you realize that all these pieces of garbage they're finding are because they didn't rot away completely.

And why didn't they?

It's because the common people wouldn't touch them.

Instead they would either LOL or just shake their heads and forget about them.

Vaticanus was found hidden away in the Vatican, and Sinaiticus was found in a trash can.

You need a reliable source to back your claim about Sinaiticus being found in a trash can. And of course both of those do not have that story it it. They are older versions of the Bible and yet your story was missing. How do you explain that? The KJV was just another translation, far from perfect, written by men. How are you going to prove your incredible claims about that version that is not the best translation of the older works that it is based upon?

 

[stevil]

After seeing fundys ranting about my " leader" i read a page
or so of dawkins. Boring.

Here's the bit from Nightwish. This is just a clip from a slow part of a very long song. It has Dawkins reciting from one of his books. It's about accepting death, realising that we were lucky to be born and that death is an inevitable part of life. We could moan about death or feel lucky that we got our chance to live. Quite poetic.

Anyway, if you are interested skip to 1m:15.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok. You're familiar, then, with a few of the more illustrious New Atheists who, along with Daniel Dennett, have had some popular following over the past few decades or so.

That's interesting to know since so many here in the U.S. have looked up to them.

Oh yeah, you're right! Dawkins is a solid biologist, but he's not much of a philosopher or an expert handler of religious study, let alone an authority on Christianity. We have to take some of his gripes with a grain of salt.

Thanks for letting me know your position and your brand of investment in these issues. That way I can scratch you off of my Christian Forums troll list and place you on my "Legitimate Skeptic" list.

I don't think that any atheist worships any other atheist. We know that they are all too human. Dawkins is admired more for his work in biology than anything else. He is merely vocal about his atheistic beliefs and how his understanding of biology showed that a God was not necessary for life, though many other atheists came to atheism through different routes. Hitchens is admired for his quick wit and ability to skewer others in debates. Harris for his clam reasoning. But none of them write an "inerrant word of atheism". We are still learning and one has to be willing to admit that there are areas in which we are wrong today. That is how one learns and corrects one's past bad behavior.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I wasn’t aware that there was any burying but if it’s justice you really want then every single one of us would burn in the lake of fire. That’s justice. Jesus didn’t have to suffer and die on the cross for us, but He did it because it was The Father’s will. That was God’s way of showing mercy to all despite the fact that we didn’t deserve it.

How is eternal suffering justice? I do not think that you understand the concept when you write something like that. We do not kill a toddler for putting cat food into his or her mouth. What harm was done that requires such an extreme punishment? Who was harmed?

 

[Astrid]

As if that makes the slightest bit of difference. I guess tying her to a post or pinning her to the ground makes it all much more acceptable. Maybe you'd have an objection if the rocks were too large or had sharp edges. We wouldn't want you to pull a muscle or cut yourself.

Somehow i dont want to know what you are answering.

 

[sjastro]

Somehow i dont want to know what you are answering.

What's your problem?
If the Bible states it's OK it must be acceptable.
Since Shem (Anglicized version Shemp) has been mentioned in a previous post, Noah was 500 years old when he fathered Shem.
Amazing feat of fertility for such an old guy yet this is blindly accepted as factual by various creationists here.

 

[AV1611VET]

You need a reliable source to back your claim about Sinaiticus being found in a trash can.

And how would you determine its reliability?

Especially since it was being reported as coming from a trash can by the person who retrieved it from the trash can.

 

[AV1611VET]

Since Shem (Anglicized version Shemp) has been mentioned in a previous post, Noah was 500 years old when he fathered Shem.
Amazing feat of fertility for such an old guy yet this is blindly accepted as factual by various creationists here.

What's more amazing to you? that Noah was alive at the age of 500, or that he fathered a son at 500?

And as far as "Shemp" is concerned, can you give me an example of what you're talking about?

 

[Astrid]

What's your problem?
If the Bible states it's OK it must be acceptable.
Since Shem (Anglicized version Shemp) has been mentioned in a previous post, Noah was 500 years old when he fathered Shem.
Amazing feat of fertility for such an old guy yet this is blindly accepted as factual by various creationists here.

Thats not it but never mind there seemed to
be some justification for mistreating women
which for whatever reason is distasteful for me.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What happened to Shem?

He was funny, but I preferred Moe.

 

[sjastro]

Thats not it but never mind there seemed to
be some justification for mistreating women
which for whatever reason is distasteful for me.

That's the point.
Accepting the Bible lock stock and barrel which includes the mistreatment of women is highly offensive yet has been justified in this thread.

 

[AV1611VET]

He was funny, but I preferred Moe.

This is one reason I don't take you seriously.

 

[Hans Blaster]

"The earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of John show no trace of the story. It’s simply not included in the text. The two earliest manuscripts of John (known as P66 and P75), which were written in the second and early third centuries, do not include it. Nor do the mid-fourth century books Codex Sinaiaticus and Codex Vaticanus, the earliest complete collections of the New Testament."

Many modern Bibles even acknowledge this openly.

This is the advantage of only using an antiquated, pre-modern translation -- you don't have to acknowledge such things.