Should Christians embrace evolution ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tjm190 said:
Typo- i meant infertile. Infertile offspring/offspring of offspring between two groups means they are different species.
Click to expand...
No problem.
tjm190 said:
And those who believe in evolution put it above all else? Evolution has been all but confirmed by genetics and anatomy, with evidence provided by other fields as well.
Click to expand...
Some Darwinists surely seem to worship either Darwin or uniformtarianism, they appear so. I appreciate you honesty in “…has been all but confimed…” I don’t deny that there’s data there which can be read as evolution. I don’t deny it can be read as Creation, either.
tjm190 said:
Neither side of this debate is the ‘God’ option- You defend literal evolution of Genesis, I evolution. I don’t worship my side, and I hope you don’t worship yours.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, I don’ let anybody deny me my ‘God option’.
I defend God’s creation, which your evolution attempts to describe. Evolution is the creature, God the Creator of DNA, etc. When some evangelical evolutionists quit trying to kick God out of His creation, they will no longer be the problem.
I don’t worship the creature, and I’m glad you don’t, either.
tjm190 said:
If we were debating whether Brad Pitt or Johnny Depp were the better actor, you could take a side without ‘worshiping.’
Click to expand...
😃 Yes, you and I could do that. But, sometimes I wonder about other people, the way some of the public carries on about celebrities.
 
StAnastasia said:
Donsnow, you’re comparing apples and democracy. “God” and “evolution” are not even remotely comparable “objects.” There is no contradiction between believing in God and accepting the scientific evidence for biological evolution.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
StAnastasia -

You’re right in all you say. It just seems to me that some of the people who evangelize evolution or push skepticism can’t stand us who worship God and admit that there’s evidence out there, but who question the interpretation of that evidence.
 
Cruciform said:
Why wouldn’t they? This is a bit like asking, “Should Christians embrace gravitation?” or “Should Christians embrace photosynthesis?” Rather silly.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+
Click to expand...
Hi, Cruciform -

I think comparing evolution to gravitation and photosynthesis is like comparing apple to an orange and the apple to itself.
 
donsnow said:
StAnastasia -You’re right in all you say. It just seems to me that some of the people who evangelize evolution or push skepticism can’t stand us who worship God and admit that there’s evidence out there, but who question the interpretation of that evidence.
Click to expand...
Donsnow, I agree with your distaste for evangelical atheists, but that doesn’t change the cogency of the scientific case for evolution, any more than it changes the cogency of the theory of plate tectonics, or of electromagnetism. There is a good reason why 100,000 biologists accept evolution: they find it to be the most elegant and compelling explanation for terrestrial biodiversity.

I have friends and colleagues who are both Catholic priests and evolutionary biologists, and they find no contradiction between those positions. This really is a pointless argument that goes on year after year. Not God or evolution, but God and evolution!

StAnastasia
 
StAnastasia said:
Donsnow, I agree with your distaste for evangelical atheists, but that doesn’t change the cogency of the scientific case for evolution, any more than it changes the cogency of the theory of plate tectonics, or of electromagnetism. There is a good reason why 100,000 biologists accept evolution: they find it to be the most elegant and compelling explanation for terrestrial biodiversity.

I have friends and colleagues who are both Catholic priests and evolutionary biologists, and they find no contradiction between those positions. This really is a pointless argument that goes on year after year. Not God or evolution, but God and evolution!

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
Honestly. Do you have any scientific documents that connect God to evolution in any way?

Peace,
Ed
 
StAnastasia said:
Kevroy, my bible does not use the word “slime.” Rather, God tells the earth and the seas to bring forth appropriate creatures (Genesis 1:20, 24).
Click to expand...
The Scripture actually says “And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” Genesis 2:7
Also, Scripture says that “God also said: Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth under the firmament of heaven. And God created the great whales, and every living and moving creature, which the waters brought forth, according the their kinds, and every winged fowl according to its kind.” Genesis 1:20
So this tells me that man existed before he was given a soul, so if he existed without an immortal soul he would be an animal. He had to have a face for God to breath a soul into that existed before he was given a soul.
Also, the waters bringing forth the creeping creature that has life coincides directly with what scientists believe about the evolution of life, that it crawled from the sea. This is supported by Gen1:20 which states that every living creature was brought forth from the waters. I don’t think there were birds being brought out of the water, but the ancestors of birds, which ties together scripture and science.
And I’m using the Douay Rheims version of the Bible, so that is why there was a difference in the Scripture. I think it is the most accurate translation.
 
As individuals we are evolving human beings so Christians should embrace evolution. We can’t just be sinners for life.
 
Abu said:
Kevroy, as you seem to have little understanding of the Church’s Scriptures or of science, a careful look at the web references given should be very useful for you. In particular a goldmine is at The Roman Theological Forum: rtforum.org/lt/index.html

You might note that naturalist Dr Andrew Denton believes that DNA “is remarkably fit for directed evolution” (ND 265) but he also admits that the mechanism for the jump from chemistry to living organisms remains to this day, even granted intelligent design, a total mystery (ND 292-293).

Most evolutionists have all sorts of assumptions, and little science, but this eminent molecular biologist says the MECHANISM (how life might have arisen from a chemical soup) is a TOTAL MYSTERY. The big problem is that no claims have been demonstrated to be true out of all the assumptions of mechanisms said to be true, from Darwin to now. The ape ancestors and multitudinous claims are all false – in this gigantic fraud the emperor has no clothes.
Click to expand...
Where is my misunderstanding? Just because we don’t know how God did it doesn’t mean that God didn’t do it. God cannot deceive or be deceived, so why would He give us all of this fossil and genetic evidence that leads to evolution if it wasn’t true?
 
edwest2 said:
Honestly. Do you have any scientific documents that connect God to evolution in any way? Peace,Ed
Click to expand...
Ed, I’m not sure what a “scientific document” is. What precisely do you mean by this term?
 
Kevroy said:
Where is my misunderstanding? Just because we don’t know how God did it doesn’t mean that God didn’t do it. God cannot deceive or be deceived, so why would He give us all of this fossil and genetic evidence that leads to evolution if it wasn’t true?
Click to expand...
Don’t worry about Abu; no insult he casts at you is worth the paper (or the cyberspace) on which it is written. You are right on track in your interpretation of the fossil record.
 
Kevroy said:
Where is my misunderstanding? Just because we don’t know how God did it doesn’t mean that God didn’t do it. God cannot deceive or be deceived, so why would He give us all of this fossil and genetic evidence that leads to evolution if it wasn’t true?
Click to expand...
Abu’s ability to take part in this discussion is dependent completely upon his ability to google evolutionist arguments and post creationist rebuttals he finds- pay his accusations of ignorance little mind.
 
Kevroy said:
Where is my misunderstanding? Just because we don’t know how God did it doesn’t mean that God didn’t do it. God cannot deceive or be deceived, so why would He give us all of this fossil and genetic evidence that leads to evolution if it wasn’t true?
Click to expand...
If one is walking on the beach and sees only left footprints as far as he can see, what should he conclude? Was a deceiver at work?
 
StAnastasia said:
You are right on track in your interpretation of the fossil record.
Click to expand...
So Dr. StAnastasia has spoken. So it must be. Well, at least for the rest of the day. Tomorrow may bring something different, since science is provisional LOL.

Dr. StA - have you also measured the heavens with a span?
 
I think that one of the fundamental issues which i don’t think is really being addressed is the fact that some of the people on this thread have a distrust in the human ability to know Gods creation as it really is.

Am i correct in making this assumption?

I am right, your wrong. Get over it. 👍
 
StAnastasia said:
Donsnow, I agree with your distaste for evangelical atheists, but that doesn’t change the cogency of the scientific case for evolution, any more than it changes the cogency of the theory of plate tectonics, or of electromagnetism. There is a good reason why 100,000 biologists accept evolution: they find it to be the most elegant and compelling explanation for terrestrial biodiversity.

I have friends and colleagues who are both Catholic priests and evolutionary biologists, and they find no contradiction between those positions. This really is a pointless argument that goes on year after year. Not God or evolution, but God and evolution!

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
StAnastasia -

What you write are also my sentiments. I view evolution as science’s attempt to describe God’s creation. I’m just tired of some people trying to leave God out of His creation…can’t be done. And if those people don’t stop their pushing, and we don’t resist if they don’t stop pushing, then we’re all in trouble, imho.
 
buffalo said:
If one is walking on the beach and sees only left footprints as far as he can see, what should he conclude? Was a deceiver at work?
Click to expand...
He can choose between two possibilities.
  1. Somebody has two left feet, and is on the run from fascists who hate people with two left feet.
Or
  1. Somebody deceptively made it look as if somebody has two left feet.
This makes me think actually. Why don’t we ever find people fossilized with Prosauropod dinosaurs? It seems there is a vast genetic tree of organisms that change or go instinct throughout the ages before we ever get to human beings. Why is that if evolution is not true? Is God trying to deceive us because we are bad people?
 
donsnow said:
StAnastasia -

What you write are also my sentiments. I view evolution as science’s attempt to describe God’s creation. I’m just tired of some people trying to leave God out of His creation…can’t be done. And if those people don’t stop their pushing, and we don’t resist if they don’t stop pushing, then we’re all in trouble, imho.
Click to expand...
Why create the world in seven days?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top