Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[Hieronymus]

No science, not even evolution, denies the existence of G-d.

That highly depends on what you consider to be "science".

That is because science does not study the question. The problem is with those who believe that Genesis is an accurate history and science book.

I see no problem there.

 

[Extraneous]

I see the 3 kinds of posters in this debate.

1)Those who think Genesis is a literal 7 day creation (they may or may not also see that its also symbolic as well) They see that rejecting Genesis as fact would mean rejecting the genealogy of the Prophets, which would make Abraham, Noah, David and Moses all fictional Characters. They reject this notion and believe the prophets were real men

2)Those who see Genesis as only being symbolic. They accept evolution and have no problem rejecting the Genealogy of the Prophets, and seeing it as nothing more than symbolism, and the prophets as fictional characters. Either that or they refuse to admit that ToE does in fact undermine the genealogy of Genesis, which undermines the prophets, and all scripture as a result. THey either believe the prophets were fictional characters, or are instead blind to how ToE undermines the prophets. They are trying to believe truth and a lie at the same time.

3) Those who dont care if its literal 7 day creation or not, they see it as symbolic but dont reject the 7 day creation necessarily. They dont reject the genealogy of the Prophets either, and so they cant accept ToE. THey would rather believe in a 7 day creation than in evolution. They would rather look toward heaven rather than earthly things. They would rather mind things of the spirit rather than flesh. They would rather be separate from the world, and reject mans wisdom, and put on the mind of Christ. They dont care if Atheist and Anti Christ scientists laugh at them. They dont care what the Pope thinks, or Atheists scientist either. Their goal is to be separate from the world, not to be unequally yoked to it.

 

[Armoured]

That highly depends on what you consider to be "science".

What possible thing can be considered "science" that questions the existence of God? You make these claims, but substantiating them seems to slip by...

 

[ScottA]

Let me ask the anti-evolution posters a question.

What if....you were proven without a doubt that evolution is true....and this earth is really really......old. How would that affect your christian faith? Would you retain it? Or would evolution being true destroy the belief in the Christian God in your mind?

It cannot be proven true (without seeing the end from the beginning). The best that can be proven, is that it is [relevant] to the present understanding of what is not true in the first place.

 

[Hieronymus]

What possible thing can be considered "science" that questions the existence of God?

Naturalistic science, i guess.
"Science" as the institute that presents itself as such, propagates naturalism.

 

[Armoured]

It cannot be proven true (without seeing the end from the beginning). The best that can be proven, is that it is [relevant] to the present understanding of what is not true in the first place.

Jaden Smith..? Is that you?

 

[Armoured]

Naturalistic science, i guess.
"Science" as the institute that presents itself as such, propagates naturalism.

It doesn't discuss God at all. It deals in the objectively detectable, i.e. "nature".

 

[Hieronymus]

It doesn't discuss God at all.

Duh.. Because they deny and / or ignore God's existence.

 

[Extraneous]

What possible thing can be considered "science" that questions the existence of God? You make these claims, but substantiating them seems to slip by...

Its about the genealogy of the prophets. If you undermine that genealogy you undermine all scripture. A house divided cannot stand. Lets mind spiritual things instead of earthly things. If the Pope said the Easter bunny was real, you would believe that, im guessing.

 

[Armoured]

Duh.. Because they deny and / or ignore God's existence.

Come up with some objectively detectable evidence of God's existence, and it will be scientifically relevant. Until that time, you might as well complain that the rules of soccer are wrong, because they don't address the existence of cupcakes. It's not a matter of denying/ignoring, it's a matter of being completely unrelated fields.

 

[ScottA]

Jaden Smith..? Is that you?

Who is Jaden Smith? ...Nevermind.

 

[Extraneous]

It deals in the objectively detectable, i.e. "nature".

Yes, those who walk in the flesh mind things of the flesh. The natural man cannot accept the things of God, because they are spiritually discerned. We reap what we sow.

 

[Extraneous]

Come up with some objectively detectable evidence of God's existence, and it will be scientifically relevant. Until that time, you might as well complain that the rules of soccer are wrong, because they don't address the existence of cupcakes. It's not a matter of denying/ignoring, it's a matter of being completely unrelated fields.

Yes, those who walk in the flesh mind things of the flesh. The natural man cannot accept the things of God, because they are spiritually discerned. We reap what we sow.

Why would you rather argue about a fallible scientific theory, than to instead meditate on spiritual things, and to have one mind, together, as brothers?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

The only reason I reject universal common descent hypothesis is all of the scientific objections TO it (nucleotide replacements to thymine, intergenic regulatory sequences and gene regulation hierarchies determining complexity, the deleterious nature of mutations and the mechanics of mutation, the inability for synergistic epistasis or soft selection to account for the contamination in the genome, the number of mutations needed to evolve from land animals to whales and the time frame allowed, the misalignment of nucleotide sequences for telomeric fusion in human chromosome 2, the class of sequences first expressed from the zygote to the 2 celled embryo being endogenous retroviruses and if you block their expression you stop embryogenesis at the 4 cell stage (functional "junk" DNA), retroviral like sequences 181,000 gene switches/promoters and expressions taking place in "non-coding" DNA, etc. etc.)

Christians, if they are able, really should learn the specific scientific controversies.

But it is unfortunate that scientific infrastructures censor the controversy from you

and wrongfully tell you that "there IS NO controversy."

Peer review can bury its head in the sand... but they can not hide from God on judgment day for their CENSORSHIP!

Thanks for the attempt at providing scientific objections to evolution. Seems to me, the main problem you cite is the complexity of the genome. As a believer in God, why would you disbelieve in common descent merely because it happened to fast for your taste? After all, without evolution, you have to accept the guiding hand of God ANYWAY. So why not via evolution and common descent? You do have, after all, those vestigial ear wiggling muscles, a sign there was a previous species in our physical heritage that could actually move its ears to good effect.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

And of course that thread started by our pleading T.E. friend - is ultimately swamped by atheist and agnostic posts of the form "all-praise-evolution".

I think you are confusing the mere recognition of reality with praise of that reality. However, it is good to give God honor for what He actually did, which was to use evolution to create the various species including ourselves.

But what is more surprising is that some of the same T.E. posters here also contribute to that thread once the atheists take over - and they too merely have the same "all-praise-evolution" focus.

Darwin, Dawkins, Provine, P.Z. Meyers et al. -- freely confess that they too were driven from Christianity by their belief in evolutionism.

Is this something to be "swept under a rug"? Of no consequence ? Let the cries for help fall on more deaf T.E. ears?

I suggest we stop driving away the Dawkins' the Provines, the P.Z. Meyers by suggesting they can accept reality of evolution AND continue to believe in God.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Yes, those who walk in the flesh mind things of the flesh. The natural man cannot accept the things of God, because they are spiritually discerned. We reap what we sow.

Those exact words could easily, sincerely, and wrongly have been used by those who crucified Jesus. Never forget the pharisees believed in spiritual things, said they were very spiritual, persuaded others they were very spiritual, and missed the working of the Spirit.

Therefore, claiming you have the Spiritual advantage over your opponents is a hollow, useless claim.

Use evidence.

 

[Hieronymus]

I think you are confusing the mere recognition of reality with praise of that reality. However, it is good to give God honor for what He actually did, which was to use evolution to create the various species including ourselves.

Popular force fed assumption without any proof.

 

[Extraneous]

Those exact words could easily, sincerely, and wrongly have been used by those who crucified Jesus. Never forget the pharisees believed in spiritual things, said they were very spiritual, persuaded others they were very spiritual, and missed the working of the Spirit.

Therefore, claiming you have the Spiritual advantage over your opponents is a hollow, useless claim.

Use evidence.

You don't seem to understand the pharisees. The ones that the Lord rebuked were not spiritual but carnal. They minded earthly things. They wanted to see signs instead of hear truth. They also looked for earthy kings and kingdoms rather than heavenly ones. Its not a hollow claim, but you actually prove my point, that spiritual things are spiritually discerned, and that we reap what we sow.

 

[Extraneous]

Use evidence? Pharisees were always looking for signs to proves things. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word. I know you will say this is irrelevant but its not. Those who follow the spirit mind things of the spirit. We reap what we sow.

 

[Extraneous]

1 Corinthians 1:22-25New King James Version (NKJV)

22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks[a] foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.