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

[AV1611VET]

Your obsessions with my husband's posts are of no interest to me.

Obviously your husband's wonderment at what makes YECs tick is of no interest to you, either.

Unless, of course, you did convey your vast knowledge of YECism to him, and he doesn't believe you, either.

Why not put some energy into finding Biblical and material evidence (i.e., scientific evidence) which might suggest that your opinions have merit?

Because, newbie, I claim there was no evidence generated by the creation events.

I'm not going to go looking for something I say isn't there.

That's why, years ago, I used to make the point that if I sponsored a search for the Loch Ness Monster and overheard someone in the search party saying he didn't believe in Nessie, I would demand he be removed from the party.

(Oh, I just remembered. You are the guy whose slogan is "evidence can take a hike." That explains a lot . Never mind.)

Your memory is misguided. My slogan is well-known around here. In fact, it's my signature.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

It only seems that way to those who demand more.

How dare they. Inquisitive bounders.

I'm well-familiar with the phrase 'too much information,' having had a TOP SECRET clearance in Naval communications.

Limited Distribution (LIMDIS), For Your Eyes Only (FYEO), and Special Category (SPECAT) routings are examples of making sure one has a need to know; and I can assure you, there's nothing 'vulgar' about them.

So the author was treating Genesis as a military communication?

Genesis 1 wasn't written so "scientists" could scratch themselves blind wondering what happened.

If that's the case, the author has pitched his manuscript rather poorly (which is rotten luck for you Bible addicts) as most scientists don't pay the Genesis any attention at all. They are too busy getting on with their science.

 

[AV1611VET]

----but not all Christians are creationists in the popular reference to young earth creationists (who believe in a 6,000 year old earth, special creation of all life "kinds", and a global Noahic flood.)

What does the creation week have to do with the Flood?

 

[AV1611VET]

If that's the case, the author has pitched his manuscript rather poorly (which is rotten luck for you Bible addicts) as most scientists don't pay the Genesis any attention at all. They are too busy getting on with their science.

I rather like how Genesis 1 was written. It keeps the white coats out.

 

[KWCrazy]

However, there are NO supernaturalist claims that have been proven to be what the supernaturalists claim.

That does not, of course, include documented predictions which came true.

First off: We don't know how the universe started so we aren't saying it started this way or that. Your accusation here is what we call bearing false witness - breaking the ninth commandment.

I realize that comprehension may not be your long suit, but what I said was, " Any scientist who claims to know how the universe originated is a liar. "

Second: You also claim evolution is a lie, yet it is extremely well supported.

And absolutely contradicted by the Scriptures. Secondly, nothing observed in evolution differes from normal speciation that happened after creation and again after the flood. There is no proof of anything else. The fossil record shows life forms that existed and died. They do not show transition, nor has upward complexity been demonstrated.

And it is used quite actively in a plethora of industries and scientific fields. None of that would be possible if the theory was "a lie".

What we know about the world around us serves us well. False assumptions about some magical original progenitor do nothing but make fools of people who should know better.

And you know what? I will believe what I can test

Like erradiating fruit flies was supposed to make them evolve into more complex life forms?

The question is not whether I put my faith in the rocks or their maker. But, if I were a believer, whether I would believe YOU or God's creation itself as well as the majority of theologians throughout the ages.

Actually READING the Bible is not an option? I would think that if I were to explore any religion that I would try to find out from its basis what it said, not from the interpretations of flawed men.

So why does your belief insist he is, one way or another?

Misinterpreting scriptures and making statements contrary to what was clearly revealed makes YOU a liar, not God. Sorry.

Some people have spoken on length on this.

True. One of them was called Jesus. He affirmed the veracity of the Scriptures, mentioned Noah by name and confirmed the events of the Great Flood. NOT A SINGLE ONE of the so-called authorities who claim that the Scriptures support evolution can support their distortions. How amazing is that?

If you are right in your characterization of christianity then the faith is a lie. It's that simple.

The faith isn't a lie, but liars misrepresent it. When in doubt, refer top what is written. Jesus did constantly.

Question is if you're man enough to realize you've read the bible wrong or even reject god altogether.

Amazingly, it's your side that can't seem to come up with any validation in Scriptures.

But your belief, given that it rests on the existence of a global scientific conspiracy which I would be a part of, is false.

Actually, my faith is based on the Scriptures, despite the constant falsehoods posted by those of you who do not seem to be able to comprehend the clear verbiage represented.

Oh sure. I've fallen over. Spoken in toungues, prophesied, the whole sehebang.

No ofense, but I don't believe a word of it. People who have encountered God don;t later claim that he doesn't exist, and don't make light of religiously profound experiences.

 

[RickG]

I'm not sure what you're asking. It doesn't look like a proper sentence to me.

If you're asking me when it was done, the Bible says when it was done.

Genesis 1:1a In the beginning...

Anything more is too much information.

In the beginning of what? Up until a few hundred years ago people thought that the sun, stars and planets were in a canopy around the earth which entirely changes biblical perspective. You are taking a perspective based on old world ignorance and applying it to modern science. Suppose the book of Genesis was written in say 1950, would it give the same out of order description?

 

[AV1611VET]

In the beginning of what?

Time.

Up until a few hundred years ago people thought that the sun, stars and planets were in a canopy around the earth which entirely changes biblical perspective. You are taking a perspective based on old world ignorance and applying it to modern science. Suppose the book of Genesis was written in say 1950, would it give the same out of order description?

You just couldn't let it go after the first sentence, could you?

Hiding behind question marks to ridicule is ... well ... your prerogative, I guess.

 

[RickG]

I rather like how Genesis 1 was written. It keeps the white coats out.

When are you going to understand that modern science (the white coats) does not say anything about Genesis or the bible. It describes what is known about the physical world and universe.

I suggest you either cite an accessible article in the peer review scientific literature that says something about the Genesis creation or stop stop demeaning scientists for doing their work.

In reality, it is what science has discovered that bothers you, isn't it. Recognizing Genesis as a story about how people of the time perceived God's creation, rather than taking it literally solves a lot of problems, especially when we know it didn't happen that way.

 

[RickG]

Time.

Time goes back further than 6,000 years.

You just couldn't let it go after the first sentence, could you?

Hiding behind question marks to ridicule is ... well ... your prerogative, I guess.

Nope, just expressing myself openly and honestly. Sorry if you can't deal with that.

 

[AV1611VET]

Time goes back further than 6,000 years.

I don't care if it goes back 70 billion years.

Are you following the thread?

AV: Genesis 1 says when God created the universe.
SE: Where?
AV: "In the beginning..."

 

[MrsLurking]

I don't care if it goes back 70 billion years.

Are you following the thread?

AV: Genesis 1 says when God created the universe.
SE: Where?
AV: "In the beginning..."

Yet another example of AV1611VET's non-answers.

Only he could claim that "In the beginning" was a sensible answer.

AS a Christian, I don't like to see this kind of behavior associated with my Savior.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet another example of AV1611VET's non-answers.

Only he could claim that "In the beginning" was a sensible answer.

"In the beginning" isn't a prepositional phrase that tells "when"?

AS a Christian, I don't like to see this kind of behavior associated with my Savior.

Then put me on IGNORE, if you don't like.

And while your at it, quit blaming CF on your gender -- just fix it.

 

[RickG]

I don't care if it goes back 70 billion years.

Are you following the thread?

AV: Genesis 1 says when God created the universe.
SE: Where?
AV: "In the beginning..."

No AV, you are the one ignoring the question. In the beginning of what? The beginning of our solar system, the beginning of our galaxy, in the beginning of the universe, in the beginning of the singularity, etc.. Those are all different periods of time.

 

[AV1611VET]

In the beginning of what?

Once again ... time.

 

[MrsLurking]

"In the beginning" isn't a prepositional phrase that tells "when"?

BARASHIT is a single word. And no, it doesn't provide any information about when the beginning occurred.

Then put me on IGNORE, if you don't like.

Good idea. I should investigate that feature. However, even though it would shield ME from your behaviors, it wouldn't end the possible confusion where readers in general might wrongly presume your more bizarre comments are based in any way upon the Holy scriptures. That is the greater danger. You are free to think whatever you wish but I don't want the Bible blamed for them.

And while your at it, quit blaming CF on your gender -- just fix it.

I would gladly fix it if I could find an editing feature that would do so. I paged through many screens looking for it, such as Edit Profile. I defer to your greater wisdom on how to do that. I will gladly take the blame if it is my fault---since fault appears to be very important to you. I AWAIT YOUR INSTRUCTIONS, seeing how you know how to fix it. [The most I could do was turn the gender feature OFF. It won't let me correct the gender. Satisfied now, are we??]

 

[RickG]

Once again ... time.

So, at least 13.7 billion years ago.

 

[AV1611VET]

I would gladly fix it if I could find an editing feature that would do so.

Interesting ... I don't see it either.

Then do this:

Select Edit Options under Settings & Options, scroll down to Profile Privacy and uncheck Gender.

 

[MrsLurking]

No AV, you are the one ignoring the question. In the beginning of what? The beginning of our solar system, the beginning of our galaxy, in the beginning of the universe, in the beginning of the singularity, etc.. Those are all different periods of time.

Very true indeed. (And I've noticed that AV ignores a LOT of questions.)

Of course, in the context of the Bible itself, BARASHIT ("In the beginning") it is talking about the beginning of the history of the Children of Israel. The Torah, the Book of the Law (aka Books of Moses) covers the history of God's relationship with the Children of Israel.

When Jesus said, "Have ye not heard? In the beginning of creation God made them male and female..." Jesus was referring to the book of Genesis and the beginnings of mankind. (Jesus COULDN'T be saying that male and female were made in the beginning of "all creation" as we use the term because DAY #6 is at the END of creation!) You see, in the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh, each book is "entitled" based upon the FIRST WORD of its text. So, what we call the book of Genesis was known as the book called BARASHIT, "In the beginning."

 

[MrsLurking]

Interesting ... I don't see it either.

Then do this:

Select Edit Options under Settings & Options, scroll down to Profile Privacy and uncheck Gender.

I just checked it a minute ago so that the wrong gender would disappear from the screen. That appears to be the only solution. So now readers can determine my gender from my username alone.

And by the way, some of you readers have assumed that "minister's wife" means that I"m a pastor's wife. Not all ministers are pastors---although the majority of pastors are ordained ministers or headed there for ordination.

 

[AV1611VET]

I just checked it a minute ago so that the wrong gender would disappear from the screen. That appears to be the only solution. So now readers can determine my gender from my username alone.

You're welcome.