Why do Christians hate the theory of evolution?

[standingtall]

Not TE.

Not arguing whether TE is correct or not. Was pointing out that belief in TE is not against the Baptist Statement of Faith as posted.

 

[Hentenza]

Not arguing whether TE is correct or not. Was pointing out that belief in TE is not against the Baptist Statement of Faith as posted.

Ah, ok. Yes, it is not against the SoF.

 

[Bluelion]

Moses didn't write Genesis. The earth is old. Evolution is a fact. The bible contains errors and was written by mankind. And Jesus rose from the dead.

Kindly don't infer that people who don't believe Moses don't believe in the resurrection. That renders them non Christian and that's against the rules

she said the bibles has errors to try to prove her evolution theory, Like i said saying the Bible has errors is directly against are SoF

 

[Bluelion]

Yeah it goes against are statement that the Bible is the word of God and is with out errors. As people have been suggesting the Bible has errors that is against are view here.

This is what I said i never said TE was against the statement of faith, but it is wrong. So what are you arguing against standing tall? because no one said TE was against the SoF.

 

[standingtall]

Thing is you like to start trouble and Lead people in to sin so then you can point the figure and say look you sin.

It sure would be wonderful if some Christians would take personal responsibility for their actions instead of blaming their sin(s) on others.

because no one said TE was against the SoF.

Chiwawa (a baptist) was posting in support of theistic evolution, and you posted this to him:

Read are <sic> statement of faith.

...thus implying he was going against the statement of faith. He posted nothing about errors in the bible.

Or maybe you don't know what TE is?

 

[Bluelion]

It sure would be wonderful if some Christians would take personal responsibility for their actions instead of blaming their sin(s) on others.



Chiwawa (a baptist) was posting in support of theistic evolution, and you posted this to him:



...thus implying he was going against the statement of faith. He posted nothing about errors in the bible.

Or maybe you don't know what TE is?

Yeah I guess the Bible was just blaming people for sins when God said woe to the person who leads the righteous man a stray. and again woe to those who cast stumbling blocks before Gods children.

And that is simple untrue you take my words out of context I was responding to what he said that I was not acting Christian and felt he would better understand us if he read are SoF. It Had nothing to do with TE.

You know I can take bits and parts from the Bible and make it say anything I want but then it is no longer the Bible is it. Your a snake plain and simple.

 

[standingtall]

Yeah I guess the Bible was just blaming people for sins when God said woe to the person who leads the righteous man a stray. and again woe to those who cast stumbling blocks before Gods children.

So are ALL of your sins someone else's fault or just some of them? Are we allowed to pick and choose which sins we confess to the Lord based upon culpability?

 

[Bluelion]

So are ALL of your sins someone else's fault or just some of them? Are we allowed to pick and choose which sins we confess to the Lord based upon culpability?

What does the fact you put stumbling blocks before people have to with who is responsible for my sins. I have no sins Jesus has paid my debt I am forgiven.

Is that your righteousness, because I don't see it as being better than the Pharisee.

It is also interesting how you read those Bible verse as point some one else as to blame for a persons sin because that is not what they say, so you are projecting your own thoughts and feelings on to me. Sad

 

[standingtall]

I have no sins Jesus has paid my debt I am forgiven.<sic>

So you don't sin anymore then? You can just walk around, say what you want, do what you want and claim "I have no sins"?

1 John 1

8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

Forgiveness of sin and "having no sin" are two different things.

 

[JGiddings]

You guys are fun! Like sharks at a feeding frenzy towards those who disagree with the creationist viewpoint, this thread is definitely hostile.
People insinuating (without the guts to say things at face value) that others are not Christian, and should be with the atheists, makeing Christians look like idiots to non-believers reading this thread.
A good showing of the love of God; Christians attacking their own.
This has gone well beyond healthy debate.

Well done chaps.

 

[Bluelion]

So you don't sin anymore then? You can just walk around, say what you want, do what you want and claim "I have no sins"?

1 John 1

8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us.

Forgiveness of sin and "having no sin" are two different things.

You must think i have to answer or justify my self to you. I don't. Yay you quoted the bible. However you bared false witness against me. which is a sin. I never said i don't sin. I said i have no sin Jesus paid my debt I am forgiven. Are you suggesting we are not forgiven for our sins, that even though we ask for forgiveness we are still left in sin because that is just not Biblical.

 

[godenver1]

Edited/deleted

 

[Alithis]

You guys are fun! Like sharks at a feeding frenzy towards those who disagree with the creationist viewpoint, this thread is definitely hostile.
People insinuating (without the guts to say things at face value) that others are not Christian, and should be with the atheists, makeing Christians look like idiots to non-believers reading this thread.
A good showing of the love of God; Christians attacking their own.
This has gone well beyond healthy debate.

Well done chaps.

yeh .. even i did that .. didn't intend to but by something i said that was what got implied.

wonder if we can take another tact ..

What is theistic evolution
and why should it even be considered
and how do those consideration align with the ability of God to whom "nothing is impossible"

 

[chiwawa]

yeh .. even i did that .. didn't intend to but by something i said that was what got implied.

wonder if we can take another tact ..

1) What is theistic evolution
2) and why should it even be considered
3) and how do those consideration align with the ability of God to whom "nothing is impossible"

I like this tactic.

1) Theistic evolution is the belief that life has evolved over time, where God is the creator and driving force.

2) It should be considered because:

A)It is not incompatible with Christianity, though it contradicts some people's interpretations of the bible. Most importantly, believing in it does not compromise your belief in Christ or your salvation.

B)There is a lot of scientific evidence for it. Like I said before, its importance to biology is akin to the Theory of Gravity is to physics. Our knowledge in genetics, viruses, infections, disease, medicine etc would not be the same without it.

3) Of course nothing is impossible for God, he is omnipotent. But that does not mean that everything that happens in life is a miracle! When I throw a ball up, it doesnt come down because God made it come down, but because he made a law (gravity) to make it come down. Evolution is the same in that sense. So in fact, these laws shows his omnipotence; he his able to create and control nature. And shows his intelligence, as these laws are perfect for the creation of life. And shows his benevolence, as he layed out these laws for us unworthy beings to discover, to know Him more.




I hope discourse in this thread can become more civilised

 

[Alithis]

I like this tactic.

1) Theistic evolution is the belief that life has evolved over time, where God is the creator and driving force.

2) It should be considered because:

A)It is not incompatible with Christianity, though it contradicts some people's interpretations of the bible. Most importantly, believing in it does not compromise your belief in Christ or your salvation.

B)There is a lot of scientific evidence for it. Like I said before, its importance to biology is akin to the Theory of Gravity is to physics. Our knowledge in genetics, viruses, infections, disease, medicine etc would not be the same without it.

3) Of course nothing is impossible for God, he is omnipotent. But that does not mean that everything that happens in life is a miracle! When I throw a ball up, it doesnt come down because God made it come down, but because he made a law (gravity) to make it come down. Evolution is the same in that sense. So in fact, these laws shows his omnipotence; he his able to create and control nature. And shows his intelligence, as these laws are perfect for the creation of life. And shows his benevolence, as he layed out these laws for us unworthy beings to discover, to know Him more.




I hope discourse in this thread can become more civilised

lets go with the simple stuff ..for obvious uneducated reasons on my part haha .

i consider the fact that the ball comes down .. a miracle! -in this sense-
do you realize that the ball falls down because God has decreed that law and if he so chose to decree that it fell up , it would be so ?he said "let the seas be gathered together into one place and let dry land appear " so we see there was no "law of gravity " on the earth until "GOD SAID " -that alone brings into questions all mans understanding of why and how gravity works .ie man says its planets rotation and magnetic this and that (sorry i being a bit duh) and yet here we see a planet existing without any gravity or day or night ..-until .. GOD says.!
physics ,like all science is only man trying to comprehend the incomprehensible at its core .

i mean everything is the way it is because God had so decreed it be that way

we can study and surmise how it got to be that way but we already know and it is beyond our comprehension .
it is that way because God said so .. that is not something any of us can even begin to understand .

so it really does come down to a mater of "belief "..

but i think we have all covered that .

how about this question ..Why would God tell (moses?) to write down what he wrote down and then write it in such a way as to make it ambiguous to the point of open interpretation without any surety of certainty ?
why would he say he did what he did in six days and on the seventh he rested ? is the account true - or is it not ?
for me - i have to choose what i will believe . don't we all ?
i mean neither argument can be established in or out of the extreme limitations of science (mans knowledge) -

so we are left with an age old choice .

 

[least]

Here are some reasons I don't buy into evolution...

1. Jesus was content to build his doctrine on the Book of Genesis. For example, in Matthew 19:4-5, Jesus referenced Genesis 2:24 in order to support his teaching on marriage. He also believed in the flood account (Luke 17:27). In fact, just about everything Jesus taught about he made reference to the Scriptures, and sometimes he showed frustrations over the religious people who didn't seem to value the Scriptures (see Matthew 12:3, 19:4, Mark 12:10, etc).

2. Evolution [macro/micro] suggests that changes took place over millions of years and this is [supposedly] illustrated in the fossil records. But the Bible says that death entered the world only after man first sinned. This would be a contradiction to reason, for if death entered the world only after sin, why was there so much death before man came along? This thought is only rational for those who are believers in God.

3. Science is an observation of any object of study. Gravity is a scientific fact because it has been proven. Evolution is not a scientific fact; it is only a theory [in my personal opinion it is a terrible theory]. I believe that while the Bible is not book on Science and shouldn't be approached for that purpose, I also believe that it does not contradict science in any way other than when God obviously intervened in the natural laws, such as when Jesus walked on the water.

One last comment on this area...the study of mathematics (also a science) tells me that 0+0=0. The only conceivable exception, in my mind is an eternal God. If there was a big bang, where did the matter come from? If there is no God, then all that would exist would be nothing.

Those are my simple observations. Isn't it great that one day God is going to reveal the truth of the matter? I hope we will all be found faithful to his Word!

 

[chiwawa]

physics ,like all science is only man trying to comprehend the incomprehensible at its core .

i mean everything is the way it is because God had so decreed it be that way

I really don't think nature is such a mysterious, incomprehensible thing. It clearly is not; we understand much about it, which is why were/are able to manipulate it, creating wheels, cars, houses, skyscrapers, medicine, ipods, pizza etc. We made these things because we study nature, and learn from it.

how about this question ..Why would God tell (moses?) to write down what he wrote down and then write it in such a way as to make it ambiguous to the point of open interpretation without any surety of certainty ?

We have to remember the original audience of the scripture. It was written in the context of ancient Palestine. If the biblical writers wrote "and then God invented the Gravitational Constant, which allowed matter to attract eventually leading to the creation of the earth", do you think the average bronze age man would take that in? of course not! It was written so these people could make sense of their world (without science at the time), and how to live their lives. But the bible is open enough to still make sense today, even with our refined science knowledge.

 

[chiwawa]

Some good points brought up, Least.

Here are some reasons I don't buy into evolution...

1. Jesus was content to build his doctrine on the Book of Genesis. For example, in Matthew 19:4-5, Jesus referenced Genesis 2:24 in order to support his teaching on marriage. He also believed in the flood account (Luke 17:27). In fact, just about everything Jesus taught about he made reference to the Scriptures, and sometimes he showed frustrations over the religious people who didn't seem to value the Scriptures (see Matthew 12:3, 19:4, Mark 12:10, etc).

True, but I don't think this is enough to take evolution off the table. It is not directly addressed. You're right, Jesus does show his frustration in those passages you mentioned, but he focuses on the morality in the scripture, and not their literal interpretation.

2. Evolution [macro/micro] suggests that changes took place over millions of years and this is [supposedly] illustrated in the fossil records. But the Bible says that death entered the world only after man first sinned. This would be a contradiction to reason, for if death entered the world only after sin, why was there so much death before man came along? This thought is only rational for those who are believers in God.

Death is evident in the fossil record (the fact that there are fossils means that these animals died in the first place).

3. Science is an observation of any object of study. Gravity is a scientific fact because it has been proven. Evolution is not a scientific fact; it is only a theory [in my personal opinion it is a terrible theory]. I believe that while the Bible is not book on Science and shouldn't be approached for that purpose, I also believe that it does not contradict science in any way other than when God obviously intervened in the natural laws, such as when Jesus walked on the water.

There is a big misconception in the word "theory" in a scientific context. It is not the same as the word "theory" in everyday speech. Essentially, a scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of scientific facts. For example, the fact that bodies of mass fall to the earth is explained by the theory of gravitation. Or, the fact that species change over time is explained by the theory of evolution. Before a scientific theory is elevated to a theory, it is a hypothesis. When the hypothesis is tested, and has a substantial amount of evidence (as evolution does) it becomes a theory.

One last comment on this area...the study of mathematics (also a science) tells me that 0+0=0. The only conceivable exception, in my mind is an eternal God. If there was a big bang, where did the matter come from? If there is no God, then all that would exist would be nothing.

Just to note: math is not a science. Though science sometimes uses math. Not sure what you are arguing here...the big bang is not incompatible with the bible...of course the matter came from somewhere (God).

 

[Alithis]

I really don't think nature is such a mysterious, incomprehensible thing. It clearly is not; we understand much about it, which is why were/are able to manipulate it, creating wheels, cars, houses, skyscrapers, medicine, ipods, pizza etc. We made these things because we study nature, and learn from it.
yes buts that's my whole point ..we understand (in part )what is already there but we do not understand why it is that way ,we observe certain-laws in action and we perceive over time that they are non changeable?and that is why we use the term laws to describe them .but God himself is not governed by those laws . so in the case of gravity even though all the mechanisms that we understand work together to "cause" gravity were there .those causes did not make gravity work ... that's where our understanding of physics ends . because with all the proponents present ..gravity did not swing into action until GOD told it to.which means everything depends not upon everything else ..but upon Gods word declared out .. everything obeys him .that is what is beyond our comprehension.


We have to remember the original audience of the scripture. It was written in the context of ancient Palestine. If the biblical writers wrote "and then God invented the Gravitational Constant, which allowed matter to attract eventually leading to the creation of the earth", do you think the average bronze age man would take that in? of course not! It was written so these people could make sense of their world (without science at the time), and how to live their lives. But the bible is open enough to still make sense today, even with our refined science knowledge.

With this part of the post you raise a whole other issue ..and im not sure where your coming from . knowledge has increased but wisdom which comes from God is on the decline .Man is not smarter now then Adam .Adam walked and talked with God one on one .he walked and conversed with the creator of the universe he was unhindered by sin names all the animals and knew their names (retained the info)
it is written in the last days knowledge will abound .. but not wisdom .. man knows more then ever before yet is displaying signs of becoming more foolish by the day .it is difficult for me to put much ..if any trust in science

 

[least]

Some good points brought up, Least.

True, but I don't think this is enough to take evolution off the table. It is not directly addressed. You're right, Jesus does show his frustration in those passages you mentioned, but he focuses on the morality in the scripture, and not their literal interpretation.

Death is evident in the fossil record (the fact that there are fossils means that these animals died in the first place).

There is a big misconception in the word "theory" in a scientific context. It is not the same as the word "theory" in everyday speech. Essentially, a scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of scientific facts. For example, the fact that bodies of mass fall to the earth is explained by the theory of gravitation. Or, the fact that species change over time is explained by the theory of evolution. Before a scientific theory is elevated to a theory, it is a hypothesis. When the hypothesis is tested, and has a substantial amount of evidence (as evolution does) it becomes a theory.

Just to note: math is not a science. Though science sometimes uses math. Not sure what you are arguing here...the big bang is not incompatible with the bible...of course the matter came from somewhere (God).

We do agree (I think) that Scripture is not a book on Science. I will concede that Jesus' references to Genesis taught of a moral issue. But in my mind, this shows the value of Genesis in all that it says. God commanded all things to come into existence and it was so. I think we agree at this point. The question is now how did he do it? The Bible only reveals that he spoke it and it happened.

Could he have used the process of evolution? He could have, but we do not have substantial evidence to say that he did. Yes, we know that there have been mutations and adaptions within species, but there is absolutely no substantial evidence that supports evolution. Thus, it is a weak theory at best. Is that to say new evidence will ever appear? Absolutely not, some day real substantiated evidence may be found; I am saying it has not happened yet. Yes, there are some things that are hard to explain, but they neither prove or disprove evolution.

My point with the fossil record is to say that the Bible teaches death came into the world because of the sin of man. Again, this is supported by the Lord's acknowledgement of the Genesis account, as stated above. If man is at the tail end of the evolution process, then why did the world experienced so much death before man entered the picture? The Biblical answer must be that man was created at the same time as everything else--or at least, in the same week.

Whether math is a science or not, we do know that 0+0=0. As you stated, God may very well have spoken and caused the Big Bang Theory, but that does not fit into the biblical account of creation.