Why are some Christians anti Evolution?

[TLK Valentine]

Would you know the difference if you saw one?

I've never had a problem with doing so before. Too many Christians, OTOH...

John went out of his way to warn people against it in his gospel... unfortunately, the people who needed the message are usually the ones who missed it.

 

[AV1611VET]

I've never had a problem with doing so before.

Then why did you make such an egregious error here:

Ex nihilo - from nothing God creating animals in Genesis 1 and 2.
ex materia - from existing parts - God creating Earth in Gen 1, and Eve in Gen 2.

Could it be that your attitude towards Genesis 1 being mythical, coupled with your attitude that certain terms are "pseudoscience," that it has clouded your thinking?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Including imbedded fossils which look like they are part of a series prodced by evolution.

No they are the result of the flood

 

[BNR32FAN]

Do you have an infallible detector for when
to take the words exactly literally?
I dont think so, seeing how you dealt with
the Pi question.

Yes I do actually it’s called common sense. Let’s say your going to measure the circumference of a cup that has a lip or brim on it with a string, do you realize how difficult it would be to measure the circumference of the brim compared to the edge right below the brim? You’d have to hold that string in about 50 different points to measure the brim, why not just measure right below the brim it’s much easier to do? That solves the math problem you presented in 1 Kings 7 perfectly and makes perfect logical sense at the same time.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes I do actually it’s called common sense. Let’s say your going to measure the circumference of a cup that has a lip or brim on it with a string, do you realize how difficult it would be to measure the circumference of the brim compared to the edge right below the brim? You’d have to hold that string in about 50 different points to measure the brim, why not just measure right below the brim it’s much easier to do? That solves the math problem you presented in 1 Kings 7 perfectly and makes perfect logical sense at the same time.

I really don't think their problem is with the math.

It's a much deeper one.

Much deeper.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You said its impossible to form a rock in a day.
I gave an example to show you were mistaken.
Its no Christian sin to graciously accept that you
were mistaken.
Rocks dont tend to form at the surface either, though
volcanic ash may form " welded tuff", and of course,
there's basalt.
Theres nothing to gain from snarking at me with
tries at knowing more geology. You've your skill
set at work or elswhere: I've mine.
No put down at all was intended when i said geology
isnt yours.
Nor in suggesting you might learn some.
It is way interesting! A start might be a roadside geology
book for your state.
It would identify specific roadcuts where you can stop,
read about and look at what is there.

Theres certainly nothing ungodly in understanding
and appreciating the world around you.

I apologize I took your comments to be condescending so please forgive my response in the same manner.

 

[Astrid]

No they are the result of the flood

So 99.9 percent of all pre flood species became extinct in the flood?

And if there is abundant proof that all strata / fossils
were not deposited at the same time, do you figure God
faked that up too?

 

[Astrid]

I apologize I took your comments to be condescending so please forgive my response in the same manner.

No prob!
What about the rest of what I said?

 

[ottawak]

Fair enough.

I'll stick to the terms creatio ex nihilo and creatio ex materia then.

Probably just as well, since you don't even know that the loaves and fishes were created ex materia. They might have been ordinary loaves and fishes brought from elsewhere in some way. Exactly where and how the food originated is not material to the story.

 

[Astrid]

Yes I do actually it’s called common sense. Let’s say your going to measure the circumference of a cup that has a lip or brim on it with a string, do you realize how difficult it would be to measure the circumference of the brim compared to the edge right below the brim? You’d have to hold that string in about 50 different points to measure the brim, why not just measure right below the brim it’s much easier to do? That solves the math problem you presented in 1 Kings 7 perfectly and makes perfect logical sense at the same time.

It is a possible answer, but far from perfect, for lo:
There is simply no way the measurements are very accurate.

Common sense tells you that.

So, the q. Is still- are you going to take the numbers as literally true?

 

[AV1611VET]

Probably just as well, since you don't even know that the loaves and fishes were created ex materia. They might have been ordinary loaves and fishes brought from elsewhere in some way. Exactly where and how the food originated is not material to the story.

What's this then?

Matthew 16:7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?

 

[AV1611VET]

So, the q. Is still- are you going to take the numbers as literally true?

Yes, the numbers are literally true?

It's the SHAPE you can't understand.

Too much education getting in your way.

 

[ottawak]

Yes I do actually it’s called common sense. Let’s say your going to measure the circumference of a cup that has a lip or brim on it with a string, do you realize how difficult it would be to measure the circumference of the brim compared to the edge right below the brim? You’d have to hold that string in about 50 different points to measure the brim, why not just measure right below the brim it’s much easier to do? That solves the math problem you presented in 1 Kings 7 perfectly and makes perfect logical sense at the same time.

But still, it is nothing but a rationalization and not something found in the text. It neglects the most obvious explanation--that the author(s) simply didn't care about presenting an exact ratio of the circumference of a perfect circle to its diameter expressed in a unit of measure which was always only approximate anyway. You are reading into the text a precision--and a need for precision--which simply isn't there and is not material to the meaning of the narrative.

 

[AV1611VET]

But still, it is nothing but a rationalization and not something found in the text. It neglects the most obvious explanation--that the author(s) simply didn't care about presenting an exact ratio of the circumference of a perfect circle to its diameter expressed in a unit of measure which was always only approximate anyway. You are reading into the text a precision--and a need for precision--which simply isn't there and is not material to the meaning of the narrative.

Solid aurum.

 

[ottawak]

What's this then?

Matthew 16:7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.
8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?
9 Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?
10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?

Right. The bread was provided--that's the point. Trying to rationalize exactly how the bread was provided misses the point altogether.

 

[AV1611VET]

Right. The bread was provided--that's the point. Trying to rationalize exactly how the bread was provided misses the point altogether.

No it doesn't.

Not if the point is whether the bread was created ex nihilo or ex materia.

According to Valentine, it was created ex nihilo.

According to me, it was created ex materia.

Break the tie.

 

[ottawak]

No it doesn't.

Not if the point is whether the bread was created ex nihilo or ex materia.

According to Valentine, it was created ex nihilo.

According to me, it was created ex materia.

Break the tie.

I really don't care, and I don't think that is the point of Matt 16:7

 

[AV1611VET]

I really don't care,

It shows.

 

[ottawak]

It shows.

Perhaps you could explain why you think it's important.

 

[Astrid]

But still, it is nothing but a rationalization and not something found in the text. It neglects the most obvious explanation--that the author(s) simply didn't care about presenting an exact ratio of the circumference of a perfect circle to its diameter expressed in a unit of measure which was always only approximate anyway. You are reading into the text a precision--and a need for precision--which simply isn't there and is not material to the meaning of the narrative.

Of course its not the point of the account.

Mine of course is just that the story is in some
measure inaccurate, and what that so- obvious fact
means for literalists.