Why is Christianity opposed to the theory of Evolution?

[laurie2777]

What does the big bang have to do with evolution.

You keep showing your lack of knowledge, yet you are certain it is all a lie. Quite a trick.

Ok then.. If evolution no longer holds to the big bang theory.. what is it's claim?..

If you're going to reply..please..just a short simplified version.

 

[bhsmte]

There are millions of evangelical Christians who doubt evolution... forgive me if you think many overstates millions.

Is there doubt of evolution based on providing scientific explanations that place evolution in doubt, or is is based on evolution threatening their personal faith belief?

 

[bhsmte]

Ok then.. If evolution no longer holds to the big bang theory.. what is it's claim?..

If you're going to reply..please..just a short simplified version.

You didn't answer my question. What does the big bang have to do with evolution?

 

[justlookinla]

Is there doubt of evolution based on providing scientific explanations that place evolution in doubt, or is is based on evolution threatening their personal faith belief?

There's doubt that certain views of Darwinist evolution is based on the scientific method.

 

[bhsmte]

In certain cases, there is the question of if someone is writing while under the influence.

And there are sober people who are just bluffing; therefore, one might just keep bluffing, or give a reference which even says not a word about your question or point > bluff and run-around.

And there's the claim that certain calculations have been made, and you can't understand unless you know advanced trig or whatever.

But I have read someone's clear explanation of things I brought up, which no one else came close to explaining . . . though the explanation included some required assumptions. But that one might have also said there were some very highly technical discoveries made, which I could not understand; and so I'd have to just take the person's word for it. But I can't prove someone is not lying.

What interests me, about someone's evolutionary theory, is the person's "therefores". What do you do because of your belief?



Possibly someone believes in having and being more than others; and so he or she is willing to accept the concept of "survival of the fittest".

But someone else could appreciate how species can be very highly dependent on each other . . . with need even for very weak species, such as fish which clean the mouths even of predators. Someone into sharing and helping might see evolution as being survival of the sharing and helping, and appreciate how differences can mean more various resources.

In law, there are different sorts of evidence > including "circumstantial" which is not acceptable, also false evidence which has been rigged or contaminated, and forensic evidence which can have one or more interpretations, and actual witnessed evidence; yet, even eyewitness evidence can be misunderstood.

So, can you present on this thread one item of proof evidence, here - - not a run-around or bluff of some link or claim??

I do not know of any breakthrough benefit which has come from believing in some theory of evolution.

I believe Loudmouth already posted in this thread, a site that discusses the scientific evidence to support evolution. This type of evidence has been provided countless times in evolution/creation threads and it is either ignored, or a fundy will just say, it is all a lie, with no scientific reasoning as to why it it a lie.

I understand though, evolution is an enormous threat to certain religious beliefs and no matter what the evidence, or lack of desire to understand it, it must and will be denied.

 

[bhsmte]

I do not know of any breakthrough benefit which has come from believing in some theory of evolution.

Good luck telling that to people who work in medicine.

 

[justlookinla]

I do not know of any breakthrough benefit which has come from believing in some theory of evolution.

Good luck telling that to people who work in medicine.

You're making a misleading claim. Darwinist evolution's claim that all life is the result of only random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism doesn't drive medical research. Medical research conducted on such a process would result in failure time after time after time.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Please show us where in the scientific theories God does anything that is detectable or testable. You could do it for plasma physics if you want. How does God cause plasma to redshift light? How is God a part of the process of absorbance and emission?
In other words, you have no evidence.

God is light, because light is energy. And plasma redshift is a natural occurrence because those laws all of physics obeys (constantly - not randomly) were set in motion by Him. There is no effect without cause - a primary mandate of science.

At least you got the redshift part and the plasma part correct.

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/hubble/

It's only too bad it makes your bending, expanding, accelerating, nothing unneeded and left as the Fairie Dust it started as.

How is He not? Romans 1:20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

So what's your excuse for ignoring your own science? What's your excuse for needing so much energy in your neutral universe you had to invent 73% more?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You're making a misleading claim. Darwinist evolution's claim that all life is the result of only random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless mechanism doesn't drive medical research. Medical research conducted on such a process would result in failure time after time after time.

Shhhh, you are not supposed to present facts, just Fairie Dust.

 

[justlookinla]

Shhhh, you are not supposed to present facts, just Fairie Dust.

I think they make these claims without thinking about what they're saying.

 

[com7fy8]

I do not know of any breakthrough benefit which has come from believing in some theory of evolution.

Good luck telling that to people who work in medicine.

Can you write here one example of how any idea of evolution has produced a breakthrough in medicine?

 

[Gene2memE]

Again, the atheist here must isolate God and throw Him into the realm of causation just like their own flawed arguments. This is a perfect example of the limited worldview that the atheist takes in order to understand God. No Christian that I know has ever claimed to understand God and His infinite knowledge and power. We simply have faith. On the other hand an atheist must, for their own satisfaction, try to understand God based on the known knowledge of science - eg. the causation clause. But it was Jesus Himself that said He is the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. God exists. Always have and always will exist. He is timeless. This is again, inconceivable to the non-believer and yet you only need faith to believe in it.

Fallacy of special pleading.

If there can be an infinite, timeless, eternal being, why not an infinite, timeless, eternal universe? Why should I accept the existence of either on faith?

The atheist will always say that the burden of proof is on us Christians to prove the existence of God.

That's because it is. If you ask me to believe in something, I'm going to want a good reason to believe it. I'm not trying to argue you out of your beliefs, I just want to know why you think I should have them as well.

The apostle Paul had a great counter to this when he said, "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things." Romans 1:19-23.

That's just an attempt to shift the burden of proof, via the claim that everyone already has knowledge of God.

It doesn't work like that. When I state I have no knowledge of God, I mean it. Simply asserting "yes you do" doesn't undercut that statement. Its pre-suppositionalism gone mad.

The only difference is today, science is the new god for atheists. Hiding behind the "facts of evolution" and empirical evidence, they overlook how it is that Natural Law exists or how fossils show extinction and not evolution.

Shock and horror! A reasonable examination of the available evidence - evidence which was incidentally not available to the ancient Mesopotamians, on whose myths the Genesis narrative is based - comes up with a different explanation for the origins of the universe, our earth and us.

Atheists dont make science a 'god' and we dont "hide" behind facts. Facts are what we present to counter faulty arguments.

Atheists overlook the awesomeness of our exact location in our solar system; how if we were just one planet over to the sun, we would burn up or if we were one planet farther, we would freeze to death. What about the composition of our atmosphere? How is it our oxygen levels are perfect for sustaining life? If our oxygen was just a few parts less O2, we would suffocate...or if there was more than 21% 02, we would combust. How do scientists explain the anthropic principle?

If things were different, they'd be different. We'd be different.

There are many formulations of the anthropic principle, and any number of exceptionally rigorous examinations of it, both supporting and opposing. Its an unresolved questions.

Your point about oxygen is completely incorrect though - in the last 300 million years, the oxygen content of the atmosphere has swung wildly, reaching above 35% and below 15%.

Again, the atheist would love to separate evolution from the origins of the universe. Why is that? Why must there be a separation?

When examining a problem to solve, it is best to take it one dilemma at a time.

The origin of the universe is a problem that is completely removed from the questions of evolution or human origin. One is cosmology, one is biology. One involves the study of the early universe of 13.75 billion years ago, the other involves the study of organisms on earth over the last 4 billion years of so.

Lumping cosmological origins and evolution together is like pairing salmon farming and carbon nanotube development. They dont exactly fit together.

Could it be to fulfill their very narrow-minded and frankly, dogmatic view of life in the universe?

Apart from non-belief in deities, name an atheist dogma.

 

[justlookinla]

Apart from non-belief in deities, name an atheist dogma.

Humans are simply the sum of the firing of synapses in their brain.

 

[bhsmte]

Can you write here one example of how any idea of evolution has produced a breakthrough in medicine?

Evolution helps medicine develop better treatments for disease, by understand how bacteria and other disease causing agents, evolve and adapt.

Next time you go to your physician, ask them how evolution has benefited medicine. You likely won't like the answer.

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/medicine_01

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Thank goodness the schools are including the evidence at younger ages. I didn't know a thing about genetics or physical anthropology until I was in college.

I think children will begin to learn about evolution at an earlier age once the Disney movie about Charles Darwin comes out in a couple of years. I'm sure there will be educational science books that will accompany the film, and hopefully teachers will seize on the opportunity to present material connected to a movie that has captivated the interest of kids.

My eight and nine-year-old sisters are already impressively knowledgable about evolution thanks to their excellent science classes, our family's trips to world-class museums, and some wonderful books. I first learned about evolution when I was seven from visiting a fantastic museum in Sydney, Australia, and then following it up with visits to museums in the United States in my elementary school years. My first science class on it was when I was in the sixth grade. I went to a Christian school, but of course they fully accept evolution. I've only ever had science teachers with the sufficient education and experience to knowledgeably teach their students.

Education, is the kryptonite, for biblical creationists beliefs.

Yep. Some seem to take pride in the immutability of their beliefs and to keep their minds impenetrable to any knowledge from a non-Creationist perspective. I was discussing the Biblical interpretation classes I've taken, and how they in tandem to my science education have furthered my belief that there is no conflict between evolution and my faith with a Young Earth Creationist recently. She immediately waved it off and said she'd never trust education from Stanford. Never mind that the professor of the Biblical interpretation class is a Christian who taught at Duke's Divinity School for longer than we've been alive; he's never taught at a Bible college that believes in YEC.

 

[bhsmte]

I think children will begin to learn about evolution at an earlier age once the Disney movie about Charles Darwin comes out in a couple of years. I'm sure there will be educational science books that will accompany the film, and hopefully teachers will seize on the opportunity to present material connected to a movie that has captivated the interest of kids.

My eight and nine-year-old sisters are already impressively knowledgable about evolution thanks to their excellent science classes, our family's trips to world-class museums, and some wonderful books. I first learned about evolution when I was seven from visiting a fantastic museum in Sydney, Australia, and then following it up with visits to museums in the United States in my elementary school years. My first science class on it was when I was in the sixth grade. I went to a Christian school, but of course they fully accept evolution. I've only ever had science teachers with the sufficient education and experience to knowledgeably teach their students.



Yep. Some seem to take pride in the immutability of their beliefs and to keep their minds impenetrable to any knowledge from a non-Creationist perspective. I was discussing the Biblical interpretation classes I've taken, and how they in tandem to my science education have furthered my belief that there is no conflict between evolution and my faith with a Young Earth Creationist recently. She immediately waved it off and said she'd never trust education from Stanford. Never mind that the professor of the Biblical interpretation class is a Christian who taught at Duke's Divinity School for longer than we've been alive; he's never taught at a Bible college that believes in YEC.

Disney is doing a movie about Darwin?

Wow, the fundies are going to be angry about that.

 

[justlookinla]

I think children will begin to learn about evolution at an earlier age once the Disney movie about Charles Darwin comes out in a couple of years. I'm sure there will be educational science books that will accompany the film, and hopefully teachers will seize on the opportunity to present material connected to a movie that has captivated the interest of kids.

My eight and nine-year-old sisters are already impressively knowledgable about evolution thanks to their excellent science classes, our family's trips to world-class museums, and some wonderful books. I first learned about evolution when I was seven from visiting a fantastic museum in Sydney, Australia, and then following it up with visits to museums in the United States in my elementary school years. My first science class on it was when I was in the sixth grade. I went to a Christian school, but of course they fully accept evolution. I've only ever had science teachers with the sufficient education and experience to knowledgeably teach their students.

Do your sisters accept the evolutionary view that they're the product of only random, mindless, meaningless, purposeless and goalless naturalistic mechanisms acting on an alleged single life form (unknown) of long ago? If so, why?

Yep. Some seem to take pride in the immutability of their beliefs and to keep their minds impenetrable to any knowledge from a non-Creationist perspective. I was discussing the Biblical interpretation classes I've taken, and how they in tandem to my science education have furthered my belief that there is no conflict between evolution and my faith with a Young Earth Creationist recently. She immediately waved it off and said she'd never trust education from Stanford. Never mind that the professor of the Biblical interpretation class is a Christian who taught at Duke's Divinity School for longer than we've been alive; he's never taught at a Bible college that believes in YEC.

Who, in your opinion, created you?

 

[justlookinla]

Disney is doing a movie about Darwin?

Wow, the fundies are going to be angry about that.

It'll fit very well with the fantasy movies that Disney is known for.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Disney is doing a movie about Darwin?

Wow, the fundies are going to be angry about that.

Yep! http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...ist-the-indiana-jones-treatment-10343470.html

I thought about creating a thread here regarding it in June, but....... it was summer and I wasn't in the mood for dealing with cranky creationists. I did Tweet about it, and at least my friends are looking forward to it.

 

[laurie2777]

You didn't answer my question. What does the big bang have to do with evolution?

Oh come on.. it has everything to do with it.. There had to be an explanation as to where everything came from (if you're an atheist) and so the big bang theory was born (never mind where the gasses that caused the explosion came from).. the beginning for the theory of evolving.. the universe and everything in it.. I don't know the specifics because I never cared to know. Why would I study something that repulses me? Do you study the Bible? And oh please..don't be one of those atheists.. (assuming you are one) that claims they have read the entire bible and studied it extensively.

I don't want to debate all this..and i'm not going to. I answered your question and now you can answer mine.. If you are so inclined.