Why do some Christian's dismiss Creationism?

[ThaiDuykhang]

The Pope's word is law, in heaven and on earth, until overturned by another Pope's decree. However, I hold, as I do with Genesis, that teachings can be for a moral reason. The church had no solid date to ascribe to the birth of Christ. It used a pagan holiday for two reasons:

1. It made Catholicism more tolerable to the pagan population, as they still were able to celebrate on the traditional day.
2. It allowed the Catholic church to "overwrite" a pagan holiday, effectively removing any chance of it resurfacing as it is now occupied by Christmas.

The actual date of Christ's birth is unimportant and has no affect on salvation. Our acceptance of the teachings of Christ are important.

1. Satanic influence. gate of hell has prevailed against Catholic Church, it seems. your big irony is Catholic Church still teaches it's Jesus' birthday
2. non-sequitur, pagans still can celebrite that day.
do you really accept Jesus' teaching? He also teaches world is made in six days.

 

[Dannager]

No, you don't take God seriously. Exodus has God himself said He created the world in six days. and no faithful dare to forge God's words.

I take God seriously. The Genesis book of the Bible states that God created the world in six days. Wonderful. I accept the Genesis book as one of God's morality lessons, not literal fact. As I said, to accept it as literal fact would be to lie to myself. I highly doubt that God would be interested in all of us lying to ourselves (though I don't propose to know what God is actually interested in).

What's the world around?

You'll have to rephrase that sentence as it does not make sense. The world is around the center of the world. What else would it be around? It's likely that English is not your primary language, and thus this is understandable.

Only consists of atheists, agnostics, communists, nazist, terrorists, socialists?

Without knowing what the last sentence meant, I can't even begin to presume what you meant here.

 

[Dannager]

1. Satanic influence. gate of hell has prevailed against Catholic Church, it seems. your big irony is Catholic Church still teaches it's Jesus' birthday

Actually, there is no satanic influence involved. That would require that pagan teachings still be present in modern Christmas celebration, which is no longer true. The only reminders of this are the Christmas tree (pine trees were a pagan icon, but there is no longer any pagan significance attached to the Christmas tree) and the date (again, no pagan significance attached to the date - it is only viewed as Christmas now, and nothing else).

2. non-sequitur, pagans still can celebrite that day.

The can still celebrate the 25th of December but, as I stated, it removed any chance that it would resurface. When you start hearing about mass celebrations of the pagan feast of the 25th of December, then you can start calling my comment a non sequitur.

do you really accept Jesus' teaching? He also teaches world is made in six days.

I accept Jesus' teachings about how to live one's life. I do not accept that Jesus would contradict the view of creation that everyone at the time held, and thus he referenced the Old Testament's Genesis book. He wasn't lying to his people when he said that God created the world. He was simply telling it to them in terms that they were capable of understanding. Telling the literal fact to the people (that the world came into being billions of years ago and that they have evolved to their present form through the process of natural selection combined with mutation) would have been pointless and would have probably made even more people think him crazy. Not exactly a fine way to win over the hearts of men.

 

[ThaiDuykhang]

He wasn't lying to his people when he said that God created the world. He was simply telling it to them in terms that they were capable of understanding. Telling the literal fact to the people (that the world came into being billions of years ago and that they have evolved to their present form through the process of natural selection combined with mutation) would have been pointless and would have probably made even more people think him crazy. Not exactly a fine way to win over the hearts of men.

Do you need to lie to win hearts or does God need to lie to win hearts?

This shows your understanding of God.

2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished

I guess Peter is also a liar to you, since he referred to the flood.

 

[Dannager]

Do you need to lie to win hearts or does God need to lie to win hearts?

This shows your understanding of God.

My understanding of God is that he sent his son to earth to save us from ourselves by demonstrating how a Christian should live his life. My understanding of God does not include God sending his son to earth to correct a misunderstanding of the actual duration of the earth's existence which no one at the time cared about.

I guess Peter is also a liar to you, since he referred to the flood.

Peter's whole world did flood. The entire world that Peter knew flooded. He was saying exactly what he knew. That didn't mean the entire planet earth was flooded, but Peter's world was.

Edit: Let's keep on track here. The topic of the veracity of the flood is huge and we've already got enough on our plate.

 

[ebia]

I accept Jesus' teachings about how to live one's life. I do not accept that Jesus would contradict the view of creation that everyone at the time held, and thus he referenced the Old Testament's Genesis book. He wasn't lying to his people when he said that God created the world. He was simply telling it to them in terms that they were capable of understanding.

Indeed, reference to a shared story to make a theological point doesn't constitute saying "this story is a factual historical document in the post-enlightenment sense". Not that they would have understood what he was on about if he had said that.

Telling the literal fact to the people (that the world came into being billions of years ago and that they have evolved to their present form through the process of natural selection combined with mutation) would have been pointless and would have probably made even more people think him crazy. Not exactly a fine way to win over the hearts of men.

Not to mention a waste of his (very precious) time on earth needed to teach far more important things how many days it took to build the earth. Editted to add: sorry, you did mention this in your later post, cross-posted with mine.

 

[Dannager]

Indeed, reference to a shared story to make a theological point doesn't constitute saying "this story is a factual historical document in the post-enlightenment sense". Not that they would have understood what he was on about if he had said that.


Not to mention a waste of his (very precious) time on earth needed to teach far more important things how many days it took to build the earth.

Exactly.

 

[ThaiDuykhang]

My understanding of God is that he sent his son to earth to save us from ourselves by demonstrating how a Christian should live his life. My understanding of God does not include God sending his son to earth to correct a misunderstanding of the actual duration of the earth's existence which no one at the time cared about.

So you believe everyone back then has a misunderstanding of the origin of life? now answer me, who caused the misunderstanding: God or Satan and why? I remember someone said before the bible there were evolutionist. so it is through the reading of Bible, people become Creationist. that evolutionist is a pagan and has no access to Bible thus he can discover the truth. answer me, who caused the misunderstanding?

A parable for you:
a newly-graduated man applies for job. he forged his resume to say he's an experienced worker. he gets the job. later his forgery is discovered, he said I'm the best worker you can get, so I forged the resume to make you easier to accept me.
You're downgrading God to this man.

Peter's whole world did flood. The entire world that Peter knew flooded. He was saying exactly what he knew. That didn't mean the entire planet earth was flooded, but Peter's world was.

Edit: Let's keep on track here. The topic of the veracity of the flood is huge and we've already got enough on our plate.

Peter hadn't experienced the flood. Peter lived 2000 years after the flood. He got the information of his father, grandpa etc up to Noah. Noah told him the whole planet flooded, Noah doesn't know where Peter was going to live after 2000 years.
flood is one of the most important subjects in the debate of YEC/TE.

 

[shernren]

So you believe everyone back then has a misunderstanding of the origin of life? now answer me, who caused the misunderstanding: God or Satan and why? I remember someone said before the bible there were evolutionist. so it is through the reading of Bible, people become Creationist. that evolutionist is a pagan and has no access to Bible thus he can discover the truth. answer me, who caused the misunderstanding?

Who caused the misunderstanding? Human stupidity. People believd that rotting meat miraculously produces flies and that elan vitae made living things move, and you're going to tell them about evolution?

A parable for you:
a newly-graduated man applies for job. he forged his resume to say he's an experienced worker. he gets the job. later his forgery is discovered, he said I'm the best worker you can get, so I forged the resume to make you easier to accept me.
You're downgrading God to this man.

Here's a better parable:

I tell my little brother when he's 10 that the Sun is a big blazing ball of fire.
When he goes to college he learns about nuclear fusion and the carbon-carbon cycle and plasma and comes back home one day and says I freaking lied to him.
I reply: "Would you have known half a percent of what I was talking about if I'd told you about nuclear cross-sections when you were 10?"

God had more important things to do than to tell people how He made the universe, which they'd figure out given a few thousand years anyway. He was far more interested in telling them why He made the universe and that He in the first place made the universe, things which people are still getting wrong even today.

 

[lismore]

No, you don't take God seriously. Exodus has God himself said He created the world in six days. and no faithful dare to forge God's words.
?

Thats true. And God does not lie. So we have to leap to the conclusion then that perhaps he was telling the truth.

As Jesus said believe in the miracles you have seen. God is able to form the earth in six days and he is able to speak to you and tell you for himself.

What's the world around? Only consists of atheists, agnostics, communists, nazist, terrorists, socialists?

You're right. We dont need anymore in the church.

 

[The Lady Kate]

did Jews' 7 days a week came from pagans?

Precisely. The Babylonians had it first. You haven't proven this wrong yet.

You said Genesis is of pagan origin. this is offensive. God doesn't need pagan gods to teach anything. It is the Judeo-Christian God that spoke to Moses and gave 10 commandments.

I said no such thing... I said that Genesis is, at least partially, based on a Babylonian myth. If you find that offensive, I suggest you get over your pride and look at the facts.

If God hadn't directly spoke to the Israelis about the creations, you should explain why Jews put this in the Bible? Just to show God is on their side? that's human reasoning. not God's. God did it and told it to Israelis.

Well, the Bible is a human book (inspired by God, but human nonetheless), and everything you've said about it is a product of human reasoning... is human reasoning only acceptble when it agrees with you?

Not only Sumerians have a flood story, Hawaiians have one, Chinese have one and many other cultures. and they have no contact with Sumerians, Hebrews according to evolution. why? the flood is historic truth. Noah's offsprings recorded this historic fact and went to these countries.
Thanks for arguing for me.

Is the Hawaiian flood story identical to the Hebrews? Does it predate the Hebrew story by 1,000 years?

It's a matter of faith that Noah's story is the correct one... don't pretend it's historical fact.

 

[lismore]

I accept Jesus' teachings about how to live one's life. I do not accept that Jesus would contradict the view of creation that everyone at the time held, and thus he referenced the Old Testament's Genesis book. He wasn't lying to his people when he said that God created the world. He was simply telling it to them in terms that they were capable of understanding. Telling the literal fact to the people (that the world came into being billions of years ago and that they have evolved to their present form through the process of natural selection combined with mutation) would have been pointless and would have probably made even more people think him crazy. Not exactly a fine way to win over the hearts of men.

Are you actually saying the Son of God would use decepetion to gain followers?

Read the bible. he was so controversial that almost everyone turned and left him. If evolution theory was true he would not have been afraid to say. he was not afraid of controversy- he crossed social barriers, spoke to prostitutes, and outcasts.

John 6

63The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit[e] and they are life. 64Yet there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him. 65He went on to say, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled him."

66From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed him.
67"You do not want to leave too, do you?" Jesus asked the Twelve.
68Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. 69We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God." 70Then Jesus replied, "Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!" 71(He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)


He referenced genesis because it is the truth- he is the creator God. he would know.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Are you actually saying the Son of God would use decepetion to gain followers?

So you believe in a literal Good samaritan and literal prodigal son?

Jesus told stories to express the truths of God in terms people could understand.

Read the bible. he was so controversial that almost everyone turned and left him. If evolution theory was true he would not have been afraid to say. he was not afraid of controversy- he crossed social barriers, spoke to prostitutes, and outcasts.

And would have been crucified that much sooner had he started talking about evolution... he would've lost his life before his ministry ever got off the ground for preaching an off-topic controversey.

 

[lismore]

I said no such thing... I said that Genesis is, at least partially, based on a Babylonian myth. If you find that offensive, I suggest you get over your pride and look at the facts.
.

Until you can prove that I am giving notice that i consider you to be lying. If you find that offensive, I suggest you get over your pride and hostility to the message of the bible and explain why.

TA

 

[lismore]

So you believe in a literal Good samaritan and literal prodigal son?

Jesus told stories to express the truths of God in terms people could understand.
.

What words say there was not a literal prodigal son or good samaritan that Jesus based his story on? He used examples people to relate to. Nowhere does he use a parable to explain evolution theory. If you are teaching something that is un-Christian then thats what you are!

And would have been crucified that much sooner had he started talking about evolution... he would've lost his life before his ministry ever got off the ground for preaching an off-topic controversey.

No he wouldnt have been crucified sooner. the jews tried to kill him many times but couldnt, because his time had not yet come. He spoke what the Father gave him, evolution theory was around at that time but Jesus did not speak of it because its trash. Paul indeed tells us to aviod myths which is indeed what evolution theory is: a fairy tale for grown-ups, a myth fabricated and supported by people who will not face the truth.

John 3:19 NIV
This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

There is Jesus, the creator of the world, the saviour and there is judgement for those who fabricate myths because they will not repent and turn to this saviour and find life.

 

[lismore]

Precisely. The Babylonians had it first. You haven't proven this wrong yet.

The grass withers, the flowers fade, theories come and go, but the word of the Lord stands forever and will not return void, but will achieve the purpose for which it was sent.

Something that stands forever, is before something that was written we dont know when .

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Ad hominem attack. when you resort to this it shows you're losing.

I don't care what pagan festival is on December 25th. but it's called Christmas because Jesus Christ is born on that day. this is the origin of Christmas.
You use evolution to destroy the origin of man now you use evolution to destory the origin of Christmas.

Actually its not an attack at all, it is a statement of fact. I am not "using evolution" to do anything. How is saying that Jesus was not born on Dec. 25 equivalent to saying that He wasn't born at all?

Please show some scriptural proof for Jesus' birthday.

When asked for a scientific reference you gave a biblical one. When asked for a biblical reference you point to the pope. Is that an honest debate tactic.
When you asked me for references I provided them.

 

[The Lady Kate]

Until you can prove that I am giving notice that i consider you to be lying. If you find that offensive, I suggest you get over your pride and hostility to the message of the bible and explain why.

TA

Fact: The Babylonian Creation Myths predate Genesis.

Fact: History is full of instances where the culture and religion of one civilization is influenced by those which came before it.

Fact: The Hebrews were familiar with Babylonian mythology.

Fact: Genesis shares numerous similarities with the Babylonian myth.
(supposition: those similarities are not coincidence)


Conclusion: A resonable person would say that Hebrew writings, including the book of Genesis itself, while still being inspired by God, were also influenced by other cultures.
There are scores of reasons (textual clues, historical parallels, etc) to show this probability, and not much (indeed, not much of anything) to suggest otherwise.
And so what if this is the case? Is God's message to us somehow tainted because the writers chose to frame it in a familiar story?

Call me a liar if you want...call me anti-Bible if it makes you feel better about yourself... Go the whole nine yards and accuse me of not being a Christian (we both know that comes next) But you better come up with an idea which fits the facts... and that means all the facts.

Unfortunately for you, the Babylonian history isn't going to go away.

 

[The Lady Kate]

The grass withers, the flowers fade, theories come and go, but the word of the Lord stands forever and will not return void, but will achieve the purpose for which it was sent.

Something that stands forever, is before something that was written we dont know when .

But we know when the Bible was written... and the Babylonian mythology was written first. Why is that so offensive to accept?

 

[lismore]

Fact: The Babylonian Creation Myths predate Genesis.

Fact: History is full of instances where the culture and religion of one civilization is influenced by those which came before it.

Fact: The Hebrews were familiar with Babylonian mythology.

Fact: Genesis shares numerous similarities with the Babylonian myth.
(supposition: those similarities are not coincidence)


Conclusion: A resonable person would say that Hebrew writings, including the book of Genesis itself, while still being inspired by God, were also influenced by other cultures.
.

Prove it!