Why is evolution taught in our schools?

[YeshuaFan]

No

He did things only God can do, such as resurrecting from the grave!

 

[YeshuaFan]

That is what is written in the Gospels, but the Gospels were written by non-witnesses over a generation after Jesus died. Not very reliable when it comes to evidentiary claims.

Think of it this way. If you read that some followers of a person claimed, more than 30 years after his death, that he had come back from the dead and there were no contemporaneous accounts of him existing at all would you believe them?

Let's try to keep focused on the science. No one is trying to refute the story of Christianity here but it seems that you want to do so.

The Gospels were all written by someone who was either among His Apostles, were direct eyewitnesses, ir else who interviewed the eyewitnesses, as Luke did...

 

[YeshuaFan]

Why? That has nothing to do with evolution.

if there was No creator, how did anything get here?

 

[tas8831]

You mean like the Roman historian who recorded His life and death, and that His followers saw Him as now being alive again?

Please re-read what I mentioned:

"Then surely you can provide extra-biblical corroboration for this from contemporaneous authorities, e.g., Scribes or similar folks from nearby lands that would have experienced, for example, the claimed effects of Jesus' crucifixion?"

 

[Aman777]

Not according to the book of Job. Perhaps you need to work on your understanding of The word "literally" .

Please identify your unscriptural view so it can be refuted.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Gospels were all written by someone who was either among His Apostles, were direct eyewitnesses, ir else who interviewed the eyewitnesses, as Luke did...

What makes you think that? Not even the Gospels make that claim.

 

[AV1611VET]

Strange that you would say that, as there are many, such as a Simon Greelee, who looked at all of the evidence and concluded that it was one of the most attested to events in history!

Who? He was wrong.

The Resurrection is not one of the most attested to events in history?

I don't think even academia would deny that -- but then, considering that's probably where you got that doosey of a remark -- I'm probably wrong.

I haven't been to college in forty years, and that's forty years of tare growth.

So ya ... that's probably where you got it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

if there was No creator, how did anything get here?

You want to fly before you can even crawl. Please don't change the subject.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The Resurrection is not one of the most attested to events in history?

I don't think even academia would deny that -- but then, considering that's probably where you got that doosey of a remark -- I'm probably wrong.

I haven't been to college in forty years, and that's forty years of tare growth.

So ya ... that's probably where you got it.

But it isn't. Where, even in the Bible, are there eyewitness accounts of it?

 

[Aman777]

Why? That has nothing to do with evolution.

Cop out from someone who is afraid that Jesus is real.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Please identify your unscriptural view so it can be refuted.

Please ask properly. My views are not "unscriptural".

 

[Subduction Zone]

Cop out from someone who is afraid that Jesus is real.

You need to quit the false accusations. I never said that there was not a man named Jesus. And it was not a cop out. I want to keep the discussion on topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

Why? That has nothing to do with evolution.

Chemical evolution can take a hike, can it?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Chemical evolution can take a hike, can it?

No, please use proper terminology. Trying to use an equivocation fallacy is being less than honest. The subject is evolution. Not abiogenesis, not the Big Bang theory, not the nebular hypothesis. When people are losing the argument they often try to move the goalposts. If you can admit that life is the product of evolution then I will gladly discuss what preceded evolution. If you can't then there is no point.

 

[AV1611VET]

Think of it this way. If you read that some followers of a person claimed, more than 30 years after his death, that he had come back from the dead and there were no contemporaneous accounts of him existing at all would you believe them?

You mean like ...

Acts 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Acts 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

Let's put it this way:

If I took the academic approach today ... the I-wont-believe-it-until-I-see-it ... I would not be posting as a Christian.

 

[Aman777]

But it isn't. Where, even in the Bible, are there eyewitness accounts of it?

1Co 15:5 And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 1Co 15:6
After that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 1Co 15:7 After that, He was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 1Co 15:8
And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

The last verse is speaking of Paul, who was taken to the 3rd Heaven, to see the resurrected Jesus and obtain His Gospel.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You mean like ...

Acts 18:24 And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
Acts 18:25 This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism of John.

Let's put it this way:

If I took the academic approach today ... the I-wont-believe-it-until-I-see-it ... I would not be posting as a Christian.

And what does that quote do for you?

But yes, if you took a proper approach to this topic you probably would not be a believer.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, please use proper terminology.

That term came from Harvard.

Update your formulary.

 

[Aman777]

Please ask properly. My views are not "unscriptural".

Chapter and verse from Job, please.

 

[tas8831]

as nature itself cannot add the additional Dna required for that to happen

Why is "additional" DNA required?!

Why can't nature supply it?!

What does "nature itself cannot add the additional Dna required" even mean?!

You must be able to explain these assertions! Use science!