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

[Frenchfrye]

If they sincerely believe that The Theory of Evolution contradicts the Genesis account [despite what Genesis actually states], I can understand why they would insist that The Theory of Evolution is contra-scriptural. But how could that be considered inherently ATHEISTIC?

After all, just because some hypothesis allegedly contradicts the Bible does NOT logically require that that hypothesis denies the existence of God.

Is it simply rhetorical shock value? After all, "The Theory of Evolution contradicts a young earth creationist 6,000-years-old-earth interpretation of the Bible" is not nearly as inflammatory as saying, "The Theory of Evolution denies the existence of God!"

So is the claim simply rhetorical hyperbole for the sake of motivation---as the creationist rabble-rouser preaches to the choir (and the visiting "creation science" speaker passes the hat for donations?) Politicians on all sides of the political spectra learned this fund-raising trick long ago: Rant against the evils of the much-to-be-feared villain and exaggerate the danger as much as possible. The donations will pour in.

it argues with the bible

 

[CabVet]

it argues with the bible

No, it argues with your interpretation of the bible. Big difference.

 

[Frenchfrye]

Genesis 1?

 

[Frenchfrye]

Genesis 1?

Genesis 1

 

[verysincere]

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?

As a Bible-affirming Christ-followers, I loudly applaud your most excellent post!

Yes, the limited and irrational deity of such types of young earth creationist cults bears little resemblance to the God of the Bible. You and I may not agree on all things theological but we certainly agree in our assessments of such cover-the-ears and sing-la-la-la arguments by the science-deniers/scripture-deniers.

 

[Frenchfrye]

No, it argues with your interpretation of the bible. Big difference.

Genesis 1 is pretty clear

 

[CabVet]

Genesis 1 is pretty clear

Correction, your interpretation of Genesis 1 is pretty clear to you.

 

[Frenchfrye]

Correction, your interpretation of Genesis 1 is pretty clear to you.

Ok what is your interpretation sir

 

[CabVet]

Ok what is your interpretation sir

Simple. Genesis was written 3,000 years ago. It was written under the cultural, social and technological contexts of 3,000 years ago. It does not apply today, much like prohibitions of certain types of food, or certain types of fabrics, or certain types of punishment don't either.

 

[Loudmouth]

Ok what is your interpretation sir

What I have been always curious about is why creationists insist on an interpretation of Genesis that is contradicted by the facts found in the Creation itself. Surely the correct interpretation of the Creation story is one that is consistent with the evidence found in the Creation itself, right?

 

[KWCrazy]

Quite a few of the church fathers disagree.

So what? It was the religious leaders who had Christ executed.

The universe disagrees,

I missed that interview. Do you have a link?

the theory you claim is false is in fact extremely sound and very thoroughly tested.

God was tested also. He performed miracles. The fact is that no animal has ever been observed to evolve, and the miracles of God had witnesses.

So you thinking that your little group have the entire infallible answer

So long as my little group includes the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, I'm abundantly comfortable in their presence.

when your answer is contradicted by everything in creation,

By your interpretation

causes inconsistencies in the bible,

False. The Bible does not teach evolution. It very clearly states that all living things were created in their mature state.

is not shared and has not been shared by the majority of christianity

Truth is not subject to concensus.

the rubbing together of two neurons would dictate that the soundest conclusion here is that you're wrong.

Neurons don't rub. They have gaps between them which are filled with neurotransmitters. I took psychopathology too.

About reality, about the bible and about christianity.

Amazingly, nobody ever cites chapter and verse to prove this, while I can list verses to support my contention that the Bible is, in fact, the word of God.

The only thing you have supporting your position is after all your own statements.

Your statement is a blatant lie. I always cite verses to suport my ositions, since my positions are determined by the knowledge that the vesrse are correct.

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.

Obcviously, you haven't read either my posts or the Bible, because you don't have a clue about which you speak.

In other words, what you're saying is that you are god.

You DO realize that you're lying profusely, right? Remember what was said about the Father of all lies? Whom are you serving?

Exodus 20:
9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work:
10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

Now explain to me in specific terms how this verse which is so crucial to Christianity, indicates that all of life evolved. Either God is lying or you are. Personally, given that way you've misrepresented what I've posted, I tend to believe God.

When someone talks about the Bible, they should provide evidence to back their assertions. You accuse me of not doing so while engaging in a rant about how evolution is Biblically sound. Unless you can cite chapter and verse to support your assertion, I must conclude that you are INTENTIONALLY giving false testimony. We've already established that you lie about what I post.

So now I ask you. When Jesus specifically spoke of Noah and the great flood, was He lying? Was He lying about Sodom and Gomorrah?

Luke 17:
26 “Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27 People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all.
28 “It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29 But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all.

Evolution believers always talk about how the Bible supports their beliefs, but the only time they ever offer verses to support it they are tiny portions or phrases ripped out of context and intentionally misrepresented.

 

[Adaephon]

Neurons don't rub. They have gaps between them which are filled with neurotransmitters. I took psychopathologytoo.

That's the closest you ever got to a real neuroscience course?

In any event, I can't believe you took that literally.

 

[verysincere]

Evolution believers always talk about how the Bible supports their beliefs, but the only time they ever offer verses to support it they are tiny portions or phrases ripped out of context and intentionally misrepresented.

You mean, like you do?

1) Despite your claim, NO SCRIPTURE claims that living things were originally created in "mature states". I've been asking creationists to cite such a scripture for years now.

2) The Hebrew text of Genesis refers to YOM, not "day".

 

[AV1611VET]

1) Despite your claim, NO SCRIPTURE claims that living things were originally created in "mature states". I've been asking creationists to cite such a scripture for years now.

Genesis 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
Genesis 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

From Adam Clarke's Commentary:

It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.

2) The Hebrew text of Genesis refers to YOM, not "day".

Yom = day = 24 hour period, as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1.

SOURCE

 

[delaola]

Simple. Genesis was written 3,000 years ago. It was written under the cultural, social and technological contexts of 3,000 years ago.

Actually, it was about 3,500 years ago.

It does not apply today, much like prohibitions of certain types of food

I'm pretty sure all prohibitions of food given to Moses are still prohibited today.

or certain types of fabrics,

What fabrics are prohibited? Never heard anything about that...please, enlighten me.

or certain types of punishment don't either.

I'm pretty sure the punishment is still going to happen...

 

[Adaephon]

I'm pretty sure all prohibitions of food given to Moses are still prohibited today.

For Jews maybe, lol.

 

[delaola]

For Jews maybe, lol.

And not for Christians? Pretty sure those prohibitions were never removed from god's laws to humans...

 

[dssfghjbnkm1]

For Jews maybe, lol.

Why do you believe in Jesus, but not his laws, a.k.a., the 10 commandments. Those are the laws of Moses, and if you don't follow those, your not a follower of Christ...

 

[verysincere]

I'm pretty sure all prohibitions of food given to Moses are still prohibited today.

Only for "signers" of that Sinaitic Covenant (i.e., ancient Children of Israel.)

Read Acts 15 which makes it clear.

 

[CabVet]

Actually, it was about 3,500 years ago.

Whatever you say.

I'm pretty sure all prohibitions of food given to Moses are still prohibited today.

I've seen countless Christians eating pork, oysters, lobsters, crabs, etc.

What fabrics are prohibited? Never heard anything about that...please, enlighten me.

Leviticus 19:19 Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.

I'm pretty sure the punishment is still going to happen...

Oh then tell me where Christians do this:

Stoning women that don't marry virgins:

Deuteronomy 22:20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: 21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the harlot in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

Death penalty for adultery:

Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

Should I keep going?