Christians battle each other over evolution

[Guest shiloh357]

I've seen it posted on the Boards here.

Okay, I see what you mean.

[Guest Butero]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1720...ref=online-news

Thoughts?

I started a thread on this topic sometime back. My point is that there are too many doctrines in the Bible that make the Christian faith incompatable with the theory of evolution. I don't think that it is impossible for a Christian to believe in evolution, because many don't know their Bible, or haven't been in the faith long enough to understand the problems this denial of Genesis creates. At the same time, a Bible-believing Christian should come to a place where they see the flaws in evolution, and reject it for the nonsence it is.

[Guest Butero]

i don't think what's found is the problem. i think it's the interpretation of what's found that is out of wack. some of the assumptions made about the evidence found and how it relates to evolution are not exactly scientific. we cannot know what certain things were like in the past, and science will make assumptions about them: atmosphere, moisture, barametric pressure, etc. so they make assumptions based on the past that they do know. which makes sense, but nothing assumed can truly be said to be accurate without doubt.

Christians have not much helped in the debunking of evolution, that is true. but the defense goes up on both sides. Christians may have a difficult time looking at scientific facts, but at the same time, scientists have a difficult time admitting that the theory of evolution is just a theory and maybe the interpretations of the facts have been wrong and the assumptions not true. well, maybe i shouldn't say "scientists"--although i'm sure some are this way. i should say that promoters of evolution do this.

i went to high school a long time ago, but i remember being taught that evolution was basically "fact" even back then. can't imagine what it's purported as today. and many students do not know the truth of the Bible, so they don't even know to refute or question what they have been taught.

science is not the enemy of Christianity. but many times Christians become the enemy of science. therein, i believe, lies a big part of the problem.

I was listening to Coast to Coast AM one night, and heard a guest on the program that has a book describing how come scientists have come to faulty conclusions concerning the age of the earth, and how scientific evidence does not contradict the Genesis account of creation as most scientists claim. According to this man, things changed drastically as a result of Noah's flood, and when scientists are trying to figure out the earth's age, they are coming up with incorrect data because they start out with the assumption that the story of the flood is a myth. I am providing a link to a web-site where you can read the entire book on-line.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook

[mizzdy]

I was listening to Coast to Coast AM one night, and heard a guest on the program that has a book describing how come scientists have come to faulty conclusions concerning the age of the earth, and how scientific evidence does not contradict the Genesis account of creation as most scientists claim.

That might have been Stan Deyo, I have heard him speak about the flood a few times.

[Fraught]

It is not a "distraction." That is not the problem

The problem is that Evolution is seen by those opposed to biblical Christianity as an escape from accountability before the Universal Moral Lawgiver and the Judge of all mankind.

It is not a distraction at all, but rather a smokescreen. If mankind can successfully challenge what the Bible says about man's origin, he then has a right to challenge what the Bible says about sin.

Evolution is a challenge to God's credibility. If God cannot get it right when it comes to where man comes from, if God can be shown to fallible in the very first chapter of the Bible, then what right does God have to define sin and hold man accountable for it?

Absolutely right. I see this in others and i see it in myself. if evolution is correct, earth is a random accident and so am i. my life now has one eye on eternity. if i believed that i am here by random accident, i would have both eyes on the here and now, because that's all there is.

[Fraught]

A big complaint secular scientists have against the Creation debate is that it puts a cap, if you will, on scientific pursuits and studies. I'm not sure how to explain this in a way anyone here (who is not scientific minded) would appreciate. It's like talking with my brother about movies. I evaluate movies with my intellect (because that's how I process the world). But this drives my brother crazy. He doesn't care about plot and theme and consistency and all that; all he cares is whether or not he got a joy-ride out of the movie. Well, this is how the scientist feels and thinks arguing with the "God made it that is all you need to know" Creationist. We feel like Creationist consider it a sin to investigate and dig.

I don't really know of any regular Christian that is opposed to scientific inquiry pertaining to how the world works. Most Christians are not opposed to science per se. We use science every day when we make our food, brush our teeth or drive our car.

An opposition to the Evolutionary model is not an opposition to science or the scientific method or any of the science disciplines.

What most of us oppose is being told that the Bible cannot be taken seriously as a genuine, historical account of the origin of man, and that we must adopt a theory that is predicated on the absence of a personal Creator. If we don't accept the evolutionary model, we are cast as anti-Science and I don't think that is fair.

I realize that you are not saying that, but a lot of those who support the evolutionary model do.

Shiloh, can i use one of your above statements? It is perfect for something i need right now.

An opposition to the Evolutionary model is not an opposition to science or the scientific method or any of the science disciplines.

great way to put it!

[canuckamuck]

Except that scientific method precludes extranatural causation.

[HAZARD]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1720...ref=online-news

Thoughts?

Hi 'nebula.'

I believe the world is older than 6,000 years and Scriptures support this. I found this link by accident one day and so far I find it to be the most exacting and complete Biblical explanation of creation and evolution since Genisis. It really is worth looking at if one is interested in fossils and animal remains buried deep under solid rock formations which have been sometimes turned upside down. I have personally seen these things working in the mining industry all my life. I have seen fossilized trees in thirty feet high coal seams 200 feet deep under rock, so hard we had to drill and blast it away, in which the leaves are preserved so exactly the veins are clearly seen.

Link:

http://www.kjvbible.org/

Rightly-Dividing Geology and the Book of Genesis Beyond

the "Gap Theory" of Christian Creationism.

Regards,

Haz.

[Guest Tommis]

You forgot to mention ">

Edited July 12, 2009 by Tommis

[Guest man]

You forgot to mention ">

It would appear that you have also.

Welcome to Worthy.