Why do creationists insist that the theory of evolution is inherently atheistic?

[Mr Strawberry]

I don't believe man is smart enough to come up with a theory that good, unless he has assistance from a very intelligent source.

And once again, it is silly to assume that one's own limited mental abilities are shared by everyone else. Could you compose music like Mozart? No. But Mozart said "I write as a sow piddles". What is impossible for you or me was as natural and easy as breathing for Mozart. We are not all the same. Don't make silly judgements about what other human beings are capable of based on your own limitations and prejudices.

Darwin was an extraordinary man, and if you ever bothered to investigate his life you would find a man and a story that would surprise you, but remarkable as he was, other people were independently coming to the same conclusions about evolution that he had. When there is as much evidence for a theory as there is for evolution, it would poor reflection on the human intellect if no one had noticed what the evidence was showing.

 

[JustMeSee]

What creationists do that?

In our church, the adjective we would use is "satanic," not "atheistic."

I don't believe man is smart enough to come up with a theory that good, unless he has assistance from a very intelligent source.

It must be a joy for you to converse with a bunch off satanists. Very telling. Too bad there are no CF rules against calling people agents of satan.

 

[AV1611VET]

And what do you base that belief on?

A belief in a very intelligent source ... in this case, Satan.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

A belief in a very intelligent source ... in this case, Satan.

Any objective empirical evidence that "Satan" exists, let alone intelligent?

Have you ever met "Satan?"

 

[AV1611VET]

It must be a joy for you to converse with a bunch off satanists. Very telling. Too bad there are no CF rules against calling people agents of satan.

This isn't even worthy of a denial.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

This isn't even worthy of a denial.

Do you consider me to be a "Satanist?"

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you consider me to be a "Satanist?"

No more than I consider Eve, who spoke directly to ... and listened to ... Satan.

I don't consider you a Satanist, and I don't consider Eve a Satanist.

 

[CabVet]

I don't believe man is smart enough to come up with a theory that good, unless he has assistance from a very intelligent source.

I'm not used to making a game out of this, but I would say it depends on what they are.

So, man is smart enough to come up with relativity (which to me requires much more brain power than evolution), and that is ok because it does not conflict with your interpretation of the Bible. But if it's something that conflicts with your interpretation of the Bible, then man are not smart enough? I don't follow.

 

[FrenchyBearpaw]

Do you have any evidence that Eve existed, and spoke with Satan?

 

[CabVet]

Do you have any evidence that Eve existed, and spoke with Satan?

Incoming: evidence can take a hike.

 

[verysincere]

Incoming: evidence can take a hike.

And "Internet scientists" take hikes while using Thalidomide.


.

 

[CabVet]

And "Internet scientists" take hikes while using Thalidomide.

And during the hike they e-mail false information to NASA so they can cause another Challenger accident. In the mean time, their colleagues are meeting under closed doors trying to promote Jupiter to "star".

 

[verysincere]

And during the hike they e-mail false information to NASA so they can cause another Challenger accident. In the mean time, their colleagues are meeting under closed doors trying to promote Jupiter to "star".

My brain hurts.


.

 

[KWCrazy]

It must be a joy for you to converse with a bunch off satanists. Very telling. Too bad there are no CF rules against calling people agents of satan.

As I read it, his church considers evolution to be a Satanic theory. That does not constitute calling anyone agents of Satan. That said, believing in a Satanic theory and being an advocate of a Statanic theory are different notions. Regardless of whether evolution is or is not Satanic in origin, it IS a lie. It stands in contradiction of the Scriptures, so Christians should recognize it as false teaching.

 

[CabVet]

Regardless of whether evolution is or is not Satanic in origin, it IS a lie. It stands in contradiction of the Scriptures, so Christians should recognize it as false teaching.

Evidence for evolution being a lie? Anybody? Evidence? No? Thought so.

Another correction, as many theistic evolutionists will tell you, evolution stands in contradiction to your interpretation of the scriptures. Many believers have no problem with evolution and don't think it interferes with their belief, much like a spheric earth and a heliocentric solar system don't.

 

[verysincere]

As I read it, his church considers evolution to be a Satanic theory. That does not constitute calling anyone agents of Satan. That said, believing in a Satanic theory and being an advocate of a Statanic theory are different notions. Regardless of whether evolution is or is not Satanic in origin, it IS a lie. It stands in contradiction of the Scriptures, so Christians should recognize it as false teaching.

1) The Theory of Evolution is not a lie.

2) The Theory of Evolution does not contradict the scriptures. It only defies some popular TRADITIONS about the scriptures. Big difference.

3) Christians should recognize evolutionary processes as one of God's greatest creations.

4) To deny evolutionary processes and to attribute such works of God to Satan repeats the error of first century Pharisees who opposed Jesus: they blasphemed against God's works.

5) Accordingly, young earth creationism is a man-based tradition which is exaggerated by some "creation science" advocates into a cult that denies the evidence which God has placed in his creation. The God of the Bible is not a liar nor deceiver yet young earth creationists would have us believe that he tries to fool us with deceptive evidence.

 

[TheReasoner]

As I read it, his church considers evolution to be a Satanic theory. That does not constitute calling anyone agents of Satan. That said, believing in a Satanic theory and being an advocate of a Statanic theory are different notions. Regardless of whether evolution is or is not Satanic in origin, it IS a lie. It stands in contradiction of the Scriptures, so Christians should recognize it as false teaching.

Quite a few of the church fathers disagree. The universe disagrees, the theory you claim is false is in fact extremely sound and very thoroughly tested. So you thinking that your little group have the entire infallible answer when your answer is contradicted by everything in creation, causes inconsistencies in the bible, is not shared and has not been shared by the majority of christianity since it's conception common sense, and the rubbing together of two neurons would dictate that the soundest conclusion here is that you're wrong. About reality, about the bible and about christianity. The only thing you have supporting your position is after all your own statements. Everything else contradicts you. So to me it seems what you worship is not god, it is yourself. Because what you're saying is not that the bible is right, you're saying that you cannot possibly have read it wrong. That reality itself takes second place to your own personal interpretation of the bible (one that is about 200 years old, by the way.) and of course that your own interpretation - being infallible - is God's word.
In other words, what you're saying is that you are god. Because what you laud and praise as absolutes are your own words. Your own interpretation. Your own opinion. It is not an objective and humble reading of the bible. It does not open even slightly for the possibility that you are even slightly wrong. It does not consider what you claim God made in the least - it only respects and lauds your own disproven opinion.
So tell me, are you so sure you really have faith? Because from where I stand this seems more like a conspiracy theory where reality itself, the whole of christianity's history and everyone who disagrees with your position - most christians and as good as all who know anything about the mechanics of this universe - are fooled by the devil.

Is it not more likely you're fooling yourself?

 

[Loudmouth]

As I read it, his church considers evolution to be a Satanic theory. That does not constitute calling anyone agents of Satan. That said, believing in a Satanic theory and being an advocate of a Statanic theory are different notions. Regardless of whether evolution is or is not Satanic in origin, it IS a lie. It stands in contradiction of the Scriptures, so Christians should recognize it as false teaching.

Then Heliocentrism is a lie as well:

"First, . . . to want to affirm that in reality the sun is at the center of the world and only turns on itself without moving from east to west, and the earth . . . revolves with great speed about the sun . . . is a very dangerous thing, likely not only to irritate all scholastic philosophers and theologians, but also to harm the Holy Faith by rendering Holy Scripture false."--Roberto Bellarmine, 1615

We've been hearing about these lies science tells to rebel against God for about 400 years now. I would say that in a century or so the anti-evolutionists will look as silly as the anti-heliocentrists, but I think they have already hit that low water mark.

 

[CabVet]

So to me it seems what you worship is not god, it is yourself. Because what you're saying is not that the bible is right, you're saying that you cannot possibly have read it wrong. That reality itself takes second place to your own personal interpretation of the bible (one that is about 200 years old, by the way) and of course that your own interpretation - being infallible - is God's word.

Exactly what I think about every other creationist that posts here.

 

[Split Rock]

I don't believe man is smart enough to come up with a theory that good, unless he has assistance from a very intelligent source.

So.... Satan also invented the radio, light bulb, telegraph, computer chip, etc.?