Why do Christians have trouble with accepting Evolution?

[DeepWater]

The reason that the wise dont "buy" the "theory of evolution" regarding "humans", is because God didnt make Ape's "after His image", He made "Man" after his "Image"..... and this would be Adam as the 1st and Jesus as the "2nd"......LINKED...... so that you understand that there is no evolution between them.
Science would con you to have you believe otherwise.
And what the "theory" of evolution tries to fake, is,.... to misrepresent the Reality of God directly making a human..... by replacing and misplacing this truth with the "theory" that Apes or Chips or "Lucy" (as a type of human).... eventually evolved into you.
However, Adam and Jesus are the same, and no Apes were needed to join them and no Apes were needed to start them, thus, no evolution regarding "Man".
And THAT, my reader, exposes the "lie" of evolution.
Dont be fooled any longer.

 

[GodB4S]

I think i know some key ideas. Its because it undermines the creation story and that people will become irreligious?

Well wouldnt that be an issue about the idea of the earth is flat if the bible is literal on that part i mean?

What i mean is that science explains our physicial world. The main point i am making is that Creation Story had two interpretations in medieval ages. Allegory" basically a deeper meaning than it is. Or "Literally" like just like it is written.

So basically allegory seems to be the key point then. Since that can be used. Since God is outside our understanding. Science is a method just to understand the world we live in more or less.

So i dont see the problem with evolution, because it doesnt undermine the scripture in the sense of it not being true?

Although i do believe its a shame that more people who lack understanding go away because of ignorance and just dont bother trying to understand why Christianity is a religion to help your life.

But i am curious to what you think?

I do not believe in evolution because it is false. The bible said in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth...four days later he created the sun, moon and stars...evolution says that it started with a big bang and it all evolved to what we have today.

The earth is here first, thus I believe the sun goes around with the solar system around the earth to make our year...the north star and the southern cross is why I believe this. If we went around the sun then at our angle and traveling over 190 million miles around the sun, one thing that does not change of the north star and southern cross would have to be changed...I believe God created the earth first and the sun, moon and stars four days later was for the earth and the earth did not move...

the stars are for light at night and a third of them are going to fall to the earth, if evolution scientist was right then one star landing on the earth would burn us all up, but God uses the little things to confine the wise. We look up into the heavens with a telescope and 200/20 vision, vision like going into your bedroom at night without the lights on. You may see a shadow of things and the led lights on your alarm clock but you can not tell me the color of the walls, bed sheets, or if a bug is there. We will never go to a star to see if the scientist is right for they have sent Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 to the outer limits just to find that they are still in our solar system and there is another planet out there...as these space ships head to the nearest stars in 2025 their nuclear power will run out thus if they ever was to make it to a star thousand of years from now it would not be working...

also for the time the scientist ram down our throats about how old things are...the carbon machine that does the dating can take a baby clam and date it 10,000 years old even tho it was not here yesterday. The earth was not here 10,000 years ago!

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Evolution, by definition, does not acknowledge the existence or dependancy upon God for anything that exists - true or false statement? The ToE says everything came to be by purely random, naturalistic causes, so it is intellectually dishonest to sneak God in as an after thought and say God used evolution to create! It's all or nothing - evolution or creationism. Either God spoke and created Everything out of nothing or evolution (no God involvement) did the creating (which is ludicrous). If you believe in TOE, you must address life coming from non-life - it's an essential starting point. Science needn't be divorced from Creationism, in fact it supports it.

The ToE does not deal with the origins of life, your thinking about abiogenesis.

Your right the ToE does not depend upon God when talked about in scientific circles because science doesn't deal with the supernatural.

You are also mistaken when you say its "all or nothing". I take the third path. God created the universe and used the process of evolution on earth to not only create the many animals but eventually us.

 

[Sonclad]

Well, you're wrong.

If it's not Satan's view you're agreeing with, kindly point out chapter and verse where God used some gradual evolutionary-like process to make everything that we see around us. If you're tempted to resort to stretching out the 6 day creation story to millions of years, then kindly explain how death entered the picture prior to sin.

 

[Calminian]

I don't know who Bishop Spong is, but please stop generalizing all evolutionary creationists with the same brush.

Most Christians in the world accept evolution (though in the USA creationism is strong), and they just like me can belief in the miracle of the resurrection while using ones reason to accept the scientific world.

My statement was not that all christians deny the resurrection. My statement was that, by your own reasoning, Biship Spong's rejection of the resurrection, based on science, is perfectly valid. If you disagree, tell me why.

 

[Sonclad]

The ToE does not deal with the origins of life, your thinking about abiogenesis.

Your right the ToE does not depend upon God when talked about in scientific circles because science doesn't deal with the supernatural.

You are also mistaken when you say its "all or nothing". I take the third path. God created the universe and used the process of evolution on earth to not only create the many animals but eventually us.

Call it what you want; divide the topic into separate compartments so that you (theoretically) don't have to address them; you do! Without the beginning of life, the rest is a non-sequitur. You MUST begin with abiogenesis and SCIENCE proved life cannot come from non-life with Pasteur's experiement. Even if you were to believe it's possible, think about the ramifications of such proposterous thinking - you'd be suggesting that anything could just pop into existence spontaneously and without cause! Sound suspiciously like a fairy tale.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

The reason that the wise dont "buy" the "theory of evolution" regarding "humans", is because God didnt make Ape's "after His image", He made "Man" after his "Image"..... and this would be Adam as the 1st and Jesus as the "2nd"......LINKED...... so that you understand that there is no evolution between them.
Science would con you to have you believe otherwise.
And what the "theory" of evolution tries to fake, is,.... to misrepresent the Reality of God directly making a human..... by replacing and misplacing this truth with the "theory" that Apes or Chips or "Lucy" (as a type of human).... eventually evolved into you.
However, Adam and Jesus are the same, and no Apes needed to join them, and no Apes needed to start them.
And THAT, my reader, is the "lie" of evolution.
Dont be fooled any longer.

Sorry but where in Genesis does it infer that the Earth is flat? God said in Isaiah that the Earth is a sphere. 21Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

That does not reference a spherical earth. Those who wrote the books of the bible lacked the knowledge of a spherical earth. You should look up the ancient cosmology in the bible or go to this thread

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/the-flat-earth-fallacy.7870298/

Where some posters make the point about the ancient world view.

 

[Sonclad]

The ToE does not deal with the origins of life, your thinking about abiogenesis.

Your right the ToE does not depend upon God when talked about in scientific circles because science doesn't deal with the supernatural.

You are also mistaken when you say its "all or nothing". I take the third path. God created the universe and used the process of evolution on earth to not only create the many animals but eventually us.

You can't have evolution (in theory) without the beginning of life can you?

By taking that 3rd path (which I disagree is a viable path at all), you need to explain how death entered the picture thousands or millions of years before sin.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

If it's not Satan's view you're agreeing with, kindly point out chapter and verse where God used some gradual evolutionary-like process to make everything that we see around us. If you're tempted to resort to stretching out the 6 day creation story to millions of years, then kindly explain how death entered the picture prior to sin.

I think that you're speaking to someone else. I don't believe in evolution.

 

[Extraneous]

The ToE does not deal with the origins of life, your thinking about abiogenesis.

Your right the ToE does not depend upon God when talked about in scientific circles because science doesn't deal with the supernatural.

You are also mistaken when you say its "all or nothing". I take the third path. God created the universe and used the process of evolution on earth to not only create the many animals but eventually us.

ToE does deal with Mans origin. I noticed that about ToE proponents, they play with words and skirt around the facts. Mans origin comes from ToE.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

If you disagree, tell me why.

Because God decided as apart of his plan for the salvation of humanity that is Son needed to die and also be reborn. I can take that into account while accepting scientific knowledge Yes I know science would not say a human could come back from the dead after dying and being buried for a few days, but science doesn't deal with the realm of the supernatural nor does it deal with the belief that Jesus was more then just a man.

One can still believe in miracles even while.....*gasp* accepting scientific theories and being a scientist. Plenty of Christians (even scientists) like me believe in the miracle of the resurrection while knowing that evolution is correct. I know you have a problem with accepting the supernatural while also believing in evolution, but others don't have that interpretation on life.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

ToE does deal with Mans origin. I noticed that about ToE proponents, they play with words and skirt around the facts. Mans origin comes from ToE.

I mean ToE does not deal with how life first got on earth. It deals with already existing life and how it developed. Yes ToE deals with Man's origins.

 

[Extraneous]

Because God decided as apart of his plan for the salvation of humanity that is Son needed to die and also be reborn. I can take that into account while accepting scientific knowledge Yes I know science would not say a human could come back from the dead after dying and being buried for a few days, but science doesn't deal with the realm of the supernatural nor does it deal with the belief that Jesus was more then just a man.

One can still believe in miracles even while.....*gasp* accepting scientific theories and being a scientist. Plenty of Christians (even scientists) like me believe in the miracle of the resurrection while knowing that evolution is correct. I know you have a problem with accepting the supernatural while also believing in evolution, but others don't have that interpretation on life.

*Gasp* please stop using condescending remarks. No one here rejects science, we just reject ToE

 

[Extraneous]

I mean ToE does not deal with how life first got on earth. It deals with already existing life and how it developed. Yes ToE deals with Man's origins.

Oh boy. First you said it didn't, but now you say it does. You also now assert that it doesnt deal with how life got on earth?Please stop contradicting yourself. and misrepresenting ToE, misrepresenting Creationists, and misrepresenting your own contradictions.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

No one here rejects science, we just reject ToE

ToE is apart of science. Why do you reject the ToE?

 

[Sonclad]

I mean ToE does not deal with how life first got on earth. It deals with already existing life and how it developed. Yes ToE deals with Man's origins.

You can't start a football game without the initial kick; or a basketball game without the starting jump ball - likewise, even ToE depends on life getting started. To relegate it to some other area of study (I.e., abiogenesis) and claim ToE doesn't deal with it, all the while carrying on as though the answer for it has been provided, is disingenuous at best. DEAL with it! Life got started on this planet somehow - explain it. Stop passing it off to some other group of "scientists" to explain. Without an adequate answer for abiogenesis, you ain't going nowhere with ToE.

 

[Calminian]

Because God decided as apart of his plan for the salvation of humanity that is Son needed to die and also be reborn. I can take that into account while accepting scientific knowledge Yes I know science would not say a human could come back from the dead after dying and being buried for a few days, but science doesn't deal with the realm of the supernatural nor does it deal with the belief that Jesus was more then just a man.

Yet, you are at peace denying the supernatural creation account, because it contradicts science. And Bishop Spong is at peace denying the Resurrection account because of science. Tell me why he's wrong, but you're right.

One can still believe in miracles even while.....*gasp* accepting scientific theories and being a scientist....

Exactly! Yet you deny the 1st miracle listed in the Bible—the 6 day creation. Why is that okay, logically speaking, but denying the Resurrection not okay?

Quick note: this is not personal, nor an attack. It's an honest question. Why should Bishop Spong accept the miracle of the Resurrection, when you reject the miracle of the Creation? How is his logic different from yours, apart from being more consistent?

I don't necessarily need a great answer now, it's just something to think about. There does seem to be an inconsistency there.

 

[AmericanChristian91]

Oh boy. First you said it didn't, but now you say it does.

Let me clarify. I NEVER contradicted myself.

I said earlier to your response,

"The ToE does not deal with the origins of life, your thinking about abiogenesis."

And I further said....

"I mean ToE does not deal with how life first got on earth. It deals with already existing life and how it developed. Yes ToE deals with Man's origins."

Im not contradicting myself.


The ToE does not deal with how life first appears on earth, but it does deal with the development of Man.

 

[Sonclad]

ToE is apart of science. Why do you reject the ToE?

ToE is NOT scientific. It's a humanistic worldview - a religion in the world of some like Dawkins. Proponents of ToE have hijacked science to lend support to their worldview and then when empiracle evidence points a different direction, those like Dawkins resort to pseudo-science to defend their religious beliefs against all common sense.

 

[Extraneous]

ToE is apart of science. Why do you reject the ToE?

Because its a notion invented in the minds of Atheist scientists. It has no actual scientific basis but is more speculation than scientific discovery. They cant even read 80% of Human DNA but they want us to believe they can use it to track mans origin millions of years ago, beginning in prehistoric apes that were less evolved than chimps? I have seen their fossil evidence as well, and its not even close to being conclusive. IT actually only shows that ToE is based on faulty scientific analysis rather than good sound science.

A few blind men got this ToE ball rolling, and its taught as fact in schools, and so people believe it without question, although they should question it because that's true science. ToE is no different than any other false man made doctrine, which is always based on mans desire to see what he wants to see instead of the truth. ToE ts taught in school just like any other false man made doctrine as well, and that's how it keeps on going unchecked. It really doesn't take a Rocket scientist to see that ToE is very flawed theory.