Why is Christianity opposed to the theory of Evolution?

[justlookinla]

Why? It wouldn't be a meaningful conversation if we failed to use the proper terminology. I wouldn't call a third-degree burn a "big ouchy" if I called 911. These words exist for a reason. Let's not dumb it down.

If some people need to go do a Google search to understand, there's no shame in that. I've had to do it before on this website. Stanfordella was even nice enough to provide a link.

It's more than just 'burn' vs. 'big ouchy'. Theories in common language are views which aren't based on fact, evidence, observation. They're 'we don't know' and are guessing, supposing.

As I said, Darwinist evolution is full of such 'theory' language.

 

[Cearbhall]

It's more than just 'burn' vs. 'big ouchy'. Theories in common language are views which aren't based on fact, evidence, observation. They're 'we don't know' and are guessing, supposing.

Right. There's the colloquial definition, and then there's the disciplinary definition. I think it's pretty obvious which would be the appropriate usage in a life sciences discussion.

Honestly, do you complain about this sort of thing when you go to conferences? "Everyone stop using big words. Just because we're having an academic discussion and we're all adults doesn't mean you get to use the right words! Because I say so."

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Why? It wouldn't be a meaningful conversation if we failed to use the proper terminology. I wouldn't call a third-degree burn a "big ouchy" if I called 911. These words exist for a reason. Let's not dumb it down.

No let's, let's take the advice of the experts.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein

So let's see how well you understand your own theory you claim to understand.

 

[Cearbhall]

No let's, let's take the advice of the experts.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein

So let's see how well you understand your on theory.

Oh, I could easily explain it to a 6-year-old. However, I was under the impression that I'm talking to fully-grown adults who paid attention in school and don't expect people to keep spoon-feeding them elementary information for the rest of their lives. Click the link that Stanfordella kindly posted, and then look for further information if you're still confused.

If you'd like to start a thread asking someone to explain it to you, be my guest. That's not the point of this thread, and I have not volunteered to be anyone's teacher on that subject.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Oh, I could easily explain it to a 6-year-old. However, I was under the impression that I'm talking to fully-grown adults.

So you can use a few big words then, but first define species. For talks of apes and men are useless if one won't follow their own scientific definitions. Agreed?

And I don't think you can.

 

[Cearbhall]

As I said, Darwinist evolution is full of such 'theory' language.

I'm sorry, are you under the impression that Darwinism is the extent of science? I'm not understanding your accusation here.

And I don't think you can.

I guess you won't be inviting me into your new thread then. How sad for me. Like I said, I haven't volunteered to do so, so I won't.

I'll be getting back on topic now.

 

[ljglazner]

That still doesn't answer my question. I highly doubt millions of people oppose evolution because two men disagreed hundreds of years ago.
My question is: why do some Christiants refuse to accept evolution as a reasonable explanation to our becoming if the data strongly suggests it?

I don't believe in evolution because it can't possibly be true. I do believe in the ability to breed a thousand different kinds of dog (to be clear), and that actually is evolution by design, God himself probably doing some of the designing. You cannot, however, breed dogs to the place where it is a CAT. That is what the evolutionists believe happened. I have one question that exposes the impossibility of evolution being the process by which God created the world. I ask, "How many generations does it take to evolve a reproductive system?" How many? Without the reproductive system being PERFECT in the FIRST of its kind, NONE OTHER of its kind would exist. It can only take ZERO generations to "evolve" a reproductive system. Since the system includes 100% of the DNA CODE for the creature it is in, it has to be there BEFORE the first reproduction could occur - because it is that same exact DNA in EVERY CELL of our bodies that tell the cells how to turn into what we are.

 

[Cearbhall]

I have one question that exposes the impossibility of evolution being the process by which God created the world. I ask, "How many generations does it take to evolve a reproductive system?" How many? Without the reproductive system being PERFECT in the FIRST of its kind, NONE OTHER of its kind would exist. It can only take ZERO generations to "evolve" a reproductive system. Since the system includes 100% of the DNA CODE for the creature it is in, it has to be there BEFORE the first reproduction could occur - because it is that same exact DNA in EVERY CELL of our bodies that tell the cells how to turn into what we are.

Do you believe in the existence of single-celled organisms that are able to reproduce sexually?

 

[justlookinla]

Right. There's the colloquial definition, and then there's the disciplinary definition. I think it's pretty obvious which would be the appropriate usage in a life sciences discussion.

Honestly, do you complain about this sort of thing when you go to conferences? "Everyone stop using big words. Just because we're having an academic discussion and we're all adults doesn't mean you get to use the right words! Because I say so."

Just speak in the terminology which reflects the fact that Darwinist evolution is based on guesses, suppositions, could be's and possibly's. What's so difficult in presenting views which are commonly understood?

 

[SteveB28]

Huh?? You just said that evolution is a theory and it is also a fact...and then you said facts and theories are different things.

Now how to reply to that kind of logic?

Watch carefully. Its very complicated.....

Being an Australian, being an octogenarian and being a male are 3 different, separate things.

I am an Australian. I am also an octogenarian. I am also male.

That's how you "reply to that kind of logic"...........

I was taught in SCHOOL that until something was proven it is not a fact.

History has changed so why not the definition of the word ''fact''

You were taught insufficiently. A fact, according to Oxford, is "something that is known, or proved to be true." It has a wider purpose than the meaning you were given.

 

[justlookinla]

I'm sorry, are you under the impression that Darwinism is the extent of science? I'm not understanding your accusation here.

I'm under the impression this section of the forum is for discussion creationism and evolution.

 

[SteveB28]

Oh yeah, the schools have heard the lie long enough to call it a fact. Apparently hoping for a generation who can't think for themselves. No wonder homeschooling has become so popular.

This must be my day for uncovering irony.............

 

[laurie2777]

Oh yeah, the schools have heard the lie long enough to call it a fact. Apparently hoping for a generation who can't think for themselves. No wonder homeschooling has become so popular.

Between the TV and nonfactual and illogical information being crammed down children's throats .. that generation has arrived. There is always the exception.. but by and large, we now have the heard mentality ..and anyone that thinks independently is ostracized and considered "weird" and unapproachable. So in order to be accepted.. they go along to get along and the ability of reason and common-sense is no longer revered or appreciated.

Where did it all start?

When the Bible was taken out of the classroom and corporal punishment was outed by law. And when abortion became the law of the land..well that just ruined our country.. If one can kill an innocent for any reason at any stage of development in the womb... that's the end of a rational and moral society.

How Crazy.. one can legally go to a clinic in full term and have a partial birth abortion (baby stabbed in the brain)..but if that same girl didn't make it in time and had the baby on the way there and then killed it after it came all the way out..she would be a murderer.

Now you take most people.. what I just said would infuriated them and I would be called names.. But not so long ago.. it would have been considered an inconceivable outrage.. and a nightmare on elm street kinda thing.

We have to be in the very end days.. People cannot go downhill much further.

 

[SteveB28]

I don't believe in evolution because it can't possibly be true.

You are committing a logical fallacy there. It is known formally as The Argument from Incredulity.

I do believe in the ability to breed a thousand different kinds of dog (to be clear), and that actually is evolution by design, God himself probably doing some of the designing.

Most of your sentence is supported by evidence, but the final clause is an unsupported assertion.

You cannot, however, breed dogs to the place where it is a CAT.

Who claims such a thing?

That is what the evolutionists believe happened.

No, they do not. Wouldn't it have been advantageous to find out what it is, exactly, that your adversary is proposing, before you attempt an attack on his position?

I have one question that exposes the impossibility of evolution being the process by which God created the world. I ask, "How many generations does it take to evolve a reproductive system?" How many? Without the reproductive system being PERFECT in the FIRST of its kind, NONE OTHER of its kind would exist. It can only take ZERO generations to "evolve" a reproductive system. Since the system includes 100% of the DNA CODE for the creature it is in, it has to be there BEFORE the first reproduction could occur - because it is that same exact DNA in EVERY CELL of our bodies that tell the cells how to turn into what we are.

You do realise that we have varieties of living things, existing now, that don't have reproductive systems as such !?

 

[mickiio]

Between the TV and nonfactual and illogical information being crammed down children's throats .. that generation has arrived. There is always the exception.. but by and large, we now have the heard mentality ..and anyone that thinks independently is ostracized and considered "weird" and unapproachable. So in order to be accepted.. they go along to get along and the ability of reason and common-sense is no longer revered or appreciated.

Where did it all start?

When the Bible was taken out of the classroom and corporal punishment was outed by law. And when abortion became the law of the land..well that just ruined our country.. If one can kill an innocent for any reason at any stage of development in the womb... that's the end of a rational and moral society.

How Crazy.. one can legally go to a clinic in full term and have a partial birth abortion (baby stabbed in the brain)..but if that same girl didn't make it in time and had the baby on the way there and then killed it after it came all the way out..she would be a murderer.

Now you take most people.. what I just said would infuriated them and I would be called names.. But not so long ago.. it would have been considered an inconceivable outrage.. and a nightmare on elm street kinda thing.

We have to be in the very end days.. People cannot go downhill much further.

Nope. What is good is evil, and evil is good. We are seeing that play out. Complete fulfillment of prophecy, "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter." Is. 5:20

 

[SteveB28]

Between the TV and nonfactual and illogical information being crammed down children's throats .. that generation has arrived. There is always the exception.. but by and large, we now have the heard mentality ..and anyone that thinks independently is ostracized and considered "weird" and unapproachable. So in order to be accepted.. they go along to get along and the ability of reason and common-sense is no longer revered or appreciated.

Where did it all start?

When the Bible was taken out of the classroom and corporal punishment was outed by law. And when abortion became the law of the land..well that just ruined our country.. If one can kill an innocent for any reason at any stage of development in the womb... that's the end of a rational and moral society.

How Crazy.. one can legally go to a clinic in full term and have a partial birth abortion (baby stabbed in the brain)..but if that same girl didn't make it in time and had the baby on the way there and then killed it after it came all the way out..she would be a murderer.

Now you take most people.. what I just said would infuriated them and I would be called names.. But not so long ago.. it would have been considered an inconceivable outrage.. and a nightmare on elm street kinda thing.

We have to be in the very end days.. People cannot go downhill much further.

Let me try to piece together something sensible from what you have said there......

The reason that Christians don't like evolution is because we can't beat children in school any more, the US Constitution is upheld when it comes to school prayer and it allows women to decide about their own reproduction??

No, never mind. I can't make any sense from it.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

No let's, let's take the advice of the experts.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein

So let's see how well you understand your own theory you claim to understand.

I first learned about evolution being both a fact and theory when I was seven and it was explained simply but accurately at the wonderful educational exhibit I attended at the Australian Museum in Sydney, so I guess I was a bit of a slower learner, haha. At that age I already understood that many words have distinctive meanings. We had an entire segment about words with various meanings in my 2nd grade Language Arts class, so it wasn't complicated for me to grasp at all. Through everyday observation outside of school I also picked up on many words with various meanings. I knew that when people were discussing the sex of the baby of an expectant mother that they were referring to gender, and that it was different from the s-e-x meaning of adult intimacy.

I think children can more readily comprehend educational concepts because they haven't yet developed the cognitive dissonance present in many adults. My little sisters are already learning about evolution and understand the basics of it of ages 8 and 9. We're a Christian family and the church we attend, like all others we've belonged to in various cities we've lived in over the years, fully supports evolution as being compatible with our faith rather than tilting at windmills about it.

This site has many helpful and reputable resources that might be of assistance to you: http://www.evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IIAjusttheory.shtml

 

[AV1611VET]

The mistake was not in trusting the evidence, the mistake was in not gathering enough evidence.

I don't buy that for two reasons:

1. They had to trust something, and I submit that something was evidence.
2. How can you call it a "mistake," when they were told to do more testing and didn't?

 

[SteveB28]

Oh, and the use of "heard mentality" amuses me a little.

"I heard it from someone, so I believe it with all my heart." I wonder who that best describes.

 

[mickiio]

You are committing a logical fallacy there. It is known formally as The Argument from Ignorance.

Let's try this: I won't believe in macroevolution because it goes against Laws of Physics (Law of Cause and Effect & Law of Inertia), Laws of probabilities, Laws of Mathematics and II Law of Thermodynamics. The proofs are based upon circular reasoning....fossils proved in rocks, rocks proved in fossils.