Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[Extraneous]

The religions of authority divide men. In their failure to live up to the ideals of Jesus embodied in the "gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven" they created a religion about Jesus and in so doing reestablished the Sanhedrin and all it's negative consequences.

Its because they dont want to be separate from the world, just as ToE proponents also do as well. Dont you you see that anything that divides us against each other instead of uniting us in Christ alone (even ToE) is fighting against God?

 

[Colter]

That's no argument for it being true or not.

We were supposed to be unified in our personal faith in God the Father and his Son, but instead it's become all messed up again, warring fragments, sect divided etc. Jesus set us free from religion....somehow we made that into a religion.

 

[Extraneous]

We were supposed to be unified in our personal faith in God the Father and his Son, but instead it's become all messed up again, warring fragments, sect divided etc. Jesus set us free from religion....somehow we made that into a religion.

ToE is not doing the same?

 

[Colter]

Its because they dont want to be separate from the world, just as ToE proponents also do as well. Dont you you see that anything that divides us against each other instead of uniting us in Christ alone (even ToE) is fighting against God?

No, I don't see ToE as fighting against God and here is why. The Holy men who wrote the creation story were just as much men as the men of the church today. Later generations of the same church government made those stories into the writings of God. The Bible then became an idol, a fetish. Those who resist reform think they are defending God when in fact they are protecting the opinions of the holy men. So our growth in Christianity became stunted. We have become a laughing stock of the world all because we are to proud to change, to update.

 

[Colter]

ToE is not doing the same?

Evolution is evolution, for me it was Gods way of creation, for Atheist it's proof that the creation story of Genesis is wrong.

 

[Hieronymus]

Evolution is evolution, for me it was Gods way of creation, for Atheist it's proof that the creation story of Genesis is wrong.

When evolution is real, Genesis 1 and 2 are wrong.
If itś just an outdated idea, Genesis 1 and 2 could be correct.

 

[Colter]

When evolution is real, Genesis 1 and 2 are wrong.
If itś just an outdated idea, Genesis 1 and 2 could be correct.

For me I respect the motivation of the religious leaders who presented a faith story for the people based on the beliefs and oral tradition of ancient times. We can say for certain that those faith stories held the faith of the people for thousands of years. It worked.

Considering all the evidence of the long history of the continents, Pangea, Rodina before that and apparently a number of other super-continental land masses, the layers of life forms laid down over millions of years that we can clearly see, radiometric dating, physics, light etc, the YEC story of Genesis is just untenable. But lets just agree to disagree.

Thanks.

 

[Extraneous]

Evolution is evolution, for me it was Gods way of creation, for Atheist it's proof that the creation story of Genesis is wrong.

ToE just a fallible theory, its not Gods way of creating anything. Its just a fallible theory. Science is not holy, and will never be able to determine such things as mans origin. Mankind is only deceiving himself.

 

[Hieronymus]

For me I respect the motivation of the religious leaders who presented a faith story for the people based on the beliefs and oral tradition of ancient times. We can say for certain that those faith stories held the faith of the people for thousands of years. It worked.

Irrelevant.
The question at hand is if evolution is worth believing.
If it's true, it is, if not, it isn't.
We can asses this by looking at the evidence for both evolution and creation, see what's plausible, probable, possible.

Considering all the evidence of the long history of the continents, Pangea, Rodina before that and apparently a number of other super-continental land masses, the layers of life forms laid down over millions of years that we can clearly see, radiometric dating, physics, light etc, the YEC story of Genesis is just untenable. But lets just agree to disagree.

Thanks.

These 'truths' are all naturalistic ideas, i.e. no God or just a powerless or weak or vague God.
Also it means Jesus Christ lied a lot.

Why would you as a Christian subscribe to naturalistic theories and ideas concerning our origins?
That just doesn't make sense.

 

[Hieronymus]

ToE just a fallible theory, its not Gods way of creating anything. Its just a fallible theory. Science is not holy, and will never be able to determine such things as mans origin. Mankind is only deceiving himself.

I disagree.
We observe a fine tuned universe and living nature.
There's no naturalistic theory that explains these phenomena.
Dead unconscious things are incapable of bringing this forth.
The naturalistic scientific paradigm does not cover it.

 

[Hieronymus]

Considering all the evidence of the long history of the continents, Pangea, Rodina before that and apparently a number of other super-continental land masses, the layers of life forms laid down over millions of years that we can clearly see, radiometric dating, physics, light etc, the YEC story of Genesis is just untenable. But lets just agree to disagree.

Sorry, I reacted too soon in previous post.
I can appreciate you saying "the YEC story of Genesis is just untenable".
It's the universe that indeed does seem old, considering the speed of light and the humongous distances.
None the less, there are things that challenge the old age idea, phenomenon that simply don't fit an old age.
But that's why i suggest to browse my playlist, because mankind is still gathering relevant data and knowledge.

Iḿ sorry iḿ not able to make a case here myself, i leave that to those who can, and i share what they have to say about it.

Both sides have to work with the same scientific data, both sides try to make a case.
It can be hard to assess where the evidence itself actually leads to sometimes.
But we live in a fine tuned universe, and life is a miraculous phenomenon.
Dead unconscious things have no explanatory power, but God does.
This is obvious. (once you think about it).

If popular science is right, Jesus lied a lot.

 

[Extraneous]

I disagree.
We observe a fine tuned universe and living nature.
There's no naturalistic theory that explains these phenomena.
Dead unconscious things are incapable of bringing this forth.
The naturalistic scientific paradigm does not cover it.

Im referring to secular science

 

[Extraneous]

Christ alone. Anything else, and you follow the blind.

 

[Hieronymus]

Im referring to secular science

But it is secular science that discovered the universe is fine tuned.
It is also secular science that discovered DNA, and still gathers data and insights.

 

[Hieronymus]

Christ alone. Anything else, and you follow the blind.

Should we then follow Christ blindly?
Or should we seek truth and test everything?
And shed light on things, exposing both truth and lies for what they are?

Don't get me wrong, i don't disagree with you.

 

[Extraneous]

But it is secular science that discovered the universe is fine tuned.
It is also secular science that discovered DNA, and still gathers data and insights.

Yes and its secular science that stumbles over it as well. lol, do you honestly delude yourself to think that science is anything more than a rabbit trail? look, as much as science creates it also destroys. They boast about having lengthened mans life span but its a lie. Man lived well over 100 years old before medicine. Sure, medicine saves lives but it also destroys lives in all its scientific research. Its a circle of madness. Politics is much the same, yet another circle of madness.

 

[Extraneous]

Should we then follow Christ blindly?
Or should we seek truth and test everything?
And shed light on things, exposing both truth and lies for what they are?

Don't get me wrong, i don't disagree with you.

I dont know that following Christ is to be blind at all. However, if we try to follow the world and Christ at the same time then we blind ourselves. Im beginning to see that although it will make you an enemy of just about everyone, that Christ alone is the only answer to all this madness.

 

[Hieronymus]

Yes and its secular science that stumbles over it as well. lol, do you honestly delude yourself to think that science is anything more than a rabbit trail?

Iḿ not sure what you mean by that.
"Science" means knowledge.
We obtain it by studying reality.
Both evolutionists and creationists (or ID-ists etc..) have the same data to work with.

 

[Extraneous]

Iḿ not sure what you mean by that.
"Science" means knowledge.
We obtain it by studying reality.
Both evolutionists and creationists (or ID-ists etc..) have the same data to work with.

God has made mans wisdom foolishness. Thats the reality we should be studying. Science is not knowledge of Christ. Christ is to die to this world. Thats Christ.

 

[Hieronymus]

I dont know that following Christ is to be blind at all. However, if we try to follow the world and Christ at the same time then we blind ourselves. Im beginning to see that although it will make you an enemy of just about everyone, that Christ alone is the only answer to all this madness.

I get the feeling youŕe just tired of this particular topic.
I can relate...
But it's what this topic is about, so we discuss it here.