Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[Hieronymus]

Politics and Evolution theory, they both work the same way. They are truth mixed with error, and even lies. Thats why there will never be peace for the Christian in such things, at least not with their own brethren anyway. IT wil always be contentious. THis is why Christ says that he is the way truth and life. THis is why we are commanded to be separate from the world, and to have one mind. THe world will lead us astray from faithfulness to Christ. WE cant love both the world and Christ, and we must choose one or the other. We cant serve two masters.

I agree, but separation from the world does not mean letting all unbelievers rot in worldly lies.

Also, my community is 99 % unbelievers, but i love them (well, not all t.b.h.).

 

[Extraneous]

Im glad that some Christians understand science and question ToE, i however dont need to argue any of it because i have Pauls words which teach that we are to be holy, separate from the world, and to put away division. Anything worldly that divides us is our enemy .That alone makes ToE an enemy of the cross.

 

[Extraneous]

I agree, but separation from the world does not mean letting all unbelievers rot in worldly lies.

Also, my community is 99 % unbelievers, but i love them (well, not all t.b.h.).

IM only saying that judgment starts with the house of God first. We ourselves must put away division and have one mind, undivided by anything worldly. Im glad that Christian scientists question ToE. I believe its probably a good thing.

 

[Extraneous]

When i speak of separation, i dont mean that we dont love unbelievers, i just mean that we separate ourselves from things that divide us believers.

 

[Extraneous]

Creationists should come together and figure out the best way to question ToE, without getting too involved with creationism itself. Its not worth arguing aver the 7 day creation with ToE scientists. Its better to argue instead over the flaws in the theory itself. THe world only sees crazy christian scientists who are deluded by biblical fantasy. Its better to just question ToE without getting the bible involved. This however is just my opinion, i cant say whether its right or wrong.

 

[Hieronymus]

Creationists should come together and figure out the best way to question ToE, without getting too involved with creationism itself. Its not worth arguing aver the 7 day creation with ToE scientists. Its better to argue instead over the flaws in the theory itself. THe world only sees crazy christian scientists who are deluded by biblical fantasy. Its better to just question ToE without getting the bible involved. This however is just my opinion, i cant say whether its right or wrong.

I sure understand what you mean.

 

[SteveB28]

Again, the theory of evolution says nothing about the origins of life, nor about the Big Bang.

It does have to do with the origins of man,

Correct.

and life.

Wrong. The theory explains what has happened AFTER life arose.

It says life evolved from one form into another, over millions of years.

Correct.

ToE posters play with words, their arguments are framed only to argue.

On the contrary. We are obliged to use very precise language, as the naysayers hang on every word, looking for something they can twist.

They use a lot of nonsense to argue nonsense.

Why would I expect you to say otherwise?

 

[Extraneous]

.

With respect, you're arguing nonsense. YOu would make a good politician.

 

[SteveB28]

Creationists should come together and figure out the best way to question ToE, without getting too involved with creationism itself. Its not worth arguing aver the 7 day creation with ToE scientists. Its better to argue instead over the flaws in the theory itself. THe world only sees crazy christian scientists who are deluded by biblical fantasy. Its better to just question ToE without getting the bible involved. This however is just my opinion, i cant say whether its right or wrong.

Excellent idea. Question and challenge.

Now you sound like a skeptic and a scientist!

 

[ViaCrucis]

The Bible is the Bible, it contains the same books everywhere, it always has.

The Wycliffe Bible:
http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/wycliffe/

Codex Sinaiticus:
http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx

1611 KJV:
http://www.bibles-online.net/1611/

Narrow Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church:
http://www.ethiopianorthodox.org/english/canonical/books.html

This statement of yours is simply not factually accurate.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Extraneous]

Excellent idea. Question and challenge.

Now you sound like a skeptic and a scientist!

A pure scientist is hard to find. You give scientists far too much credit for being open minded. Scientists build their own false doctrines, which tickle their own ears, just as some Christians do. You exalt science as if its above mans folly, but its not.

 

[Hieronymus]

The Wycliffe Bible:
http://wesley.nnu.edu/fileadmin/imported_site/wycliffe/

Codex Sinaiticus:
http://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx

1611 KJV:
http://www.bibles-online.net/1611/

Narrow Canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church:
http://www.ethiopianorthodox.org/english/canonical/books.html

This statement of yours is simply not factually accurate.

-CryptoLutheran

I acknowledge your point.
Still, the 'common' Bible is the same everywhere, albeit in various translations.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I acknowledge your point.
Still, the 'common' Bible is the same everywhere, albeit in various translations.

What's a "common Bible"?

There are Protestant Bibles, both with and without "Apocrypha".
There are Roman Catholic Bibles.
There are Orthodox Bibles.

The reality is that there are, and always have been, points of disagreement when it comes to the Canon of Scripture. Since God has never given us a divinely inspired table of contents, we have relied on the historic consensus, tradition, and confession of the Christian Church--which has not everywhere and always been perfectly uniform.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Extraneous]

What's a "common Bible"?

There are Protestant Bibles, both with and without "Apocrypha".
There are Roman Catholic Bibles.
There are Orthodox Bibles.

The reality is that there are, and always have been, points of disagreement when it comes to the Canon of Scripture. Since God has never given us a divinely inspired table of contents, we have relied on the historic consensus, tradition, and confession of the Christian Church--which has not everywhere and always been perfectly uniform.

-CryptoLutheran

For all we know those Churches destroyed good doctrine. Im not ready to say they preserved anything.

 

[ViaCrucis]

For all we know those Churches destroyed good doctrine. Im not ready to say they preserved anything.

So you got rid of your Bible?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Extraneous]

So you got rid of your Bible?

-CryptoLutheran

No, i just get rid of teachers instead. You glorify denominations instead of the word. I cant abide in that.

 

[SteveB28]

A pure scientist is hard to find. You give scientists far too much credit for being open minded. Scientists build their own false doctrines, which tickle their own ears, just as some Christians do. You exalt science as if its above mans folly, but its not.

He said, as he typed away on a modern computer, connected to the Internet!

 

[Extraneous]

To glorify a church rather than the word, this is the same mistake the pharisees made. They glorified the scriptures yes, but Not God who gave them. They didn't exalt God and His word alone, but rather their own authority

 

[Extraneous]

I follow scriptures, even the OT, but i sure dont follow scribes, even though they preserved the OT.

 

[Extraneous]

He said, as he typed away on a modern computer, connected to the Internet!

Said the guy who sits in an envoronment of toxic waste and pollution, created by science, as he types away on his computer