It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why do Christians have a problem with Evolution?

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Excellent Shane.. and yes I found those same passages interesting myself.
However I see it as proof that god in fact was not the creator of everything as the christian religion makes him out to be. He was nothing more than a scientist that created life much like our scientists do today with cloning and test tubes and gene splicing. He is not an all powerful, all seeing being. Yes perhaps he did create this version of man.. but he was not alone.. how do we even know that the angels were not just like subordinates under a ship captain? If he used the word OUR when saying what image man was to be created in that implies that regardless of color.. the angels are in the same form as god... which means that it is entirely possible that he was not a higher being but merely the one in charge.

Just some thoughts..




posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by NephraTari
To answer your original question.. christians have a problem with evolution because it challenges what they have been taught their whole life as reality.
In the end it is more ego than anything that makes them refuse to consider any possiblity besides creation as a reality. If something else was proven to be how we got here.. that would make them wrong.. and noone likes to be wrong.

EGO


Can this not go both ways? Can't evolutionists be refusing to accept creation because they have been taught to believe evolution since a young age?



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   


Can this not go both ways? Can't evolutionists be refusing to accept creation because they have been taught to believe evolution since a young age?


Possibly, but in defense of that argument I'd have to say those of more scientific standing are taught to question everything, including evolution. From a more 'sane' POV there is no evidence of "creation" at all. There's still alot to learn about how and when certain events occured that allowed for the universe and life within, but it's not really realistic to just end it all by writing it off to unseen and untestable forces invented by primitive man. Some of us like to learn.



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:25 PM
link   
Considering the fact that throughout history religions from the same regions take bits and peices from each other is enough in my view to discedit them all. It merely shows that the teachings are based off of what man wanted, not some omnipotent being. Pathetic people need pathetic excuses to live their life and not do stupid things, which they still do. If there had not been Sumeria and Babylon there would be no Judaism, Christianity and no Islamic beliefs. Say that a prophet sent from god were to come back today, nobody would believe them. There is a reason why there are no modern prophets. People aren't dumb enough to buy it on a large scale and therefore it doesn't serve any purpose. When you can't actually perform miracles you can't fool educated people. Unless you are David Copperfield. (



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Well NephraTari, thank you for the nice comment.

I certainly hope you have held these opinions and come to this conclusion prior to seeing my post though. This was not the intent I had for this post, and If I did influence your reply, I apologize.

But if this is something you've thought through or realized previously, then excellent.

And some of what you suggest, may end up not falling to far from the tree, so to speak. Certainly, God and the Angels are "Like" in spirit, but they are also distinct from eachother with idenitifiers unique to each.

But as to what God is, I have no problem knowing God is ALL Powerful, and not as simple as you have suggested.

I would love to ask a Sodomite from the Lost City what he thought about this!

What would Goliath say?

How about the Egyptians the day after their First Born Males had been slaughter?

But again, I thank you for the conversation and look forward to more in
the future, either here, or in Atlantis. Really seem to be drawn to that Section.

Ciao



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ralph_The_Wonder_Llama
First off: I believe the Bible to be the Word of God.

Second off: I also believe the Bible to be a book that has been translated across four very different languages. Go type in "And the Word was with God. And the Word was God" in babelfish.com and translate it from English to Hebrew to Greek to Latin and back to English.

Third off: the Bible Creation story is ambiguous.

It was considered heresy and a threat to the Church when Copernicus, Galileo and Kelper suggested that the galaxy is heliocentric and not geocentric. At the time, the current understanding of the Biblical Creation Story was that the Earth was the center of everything. To say that the Earth revolved around the Sun was blasphemy. It took a long time for religious leaders to accept it.

It was just as bad that Kepler and Newton suggested that the planets' orbitals were not perfectly circular, but more elliptical. This was blasphemy itself because non-circular motion suggested imperfection in God.

It is widely accepted that the Seven Days of the Creation were seven periods of undetermined time. There were periods of the Dispersal of Matter, the Grouping of Matter, the Forming of an Environment, the Growth of Plants, the Growth of Creatures in the Sea, followed by Creatures on the Land. Humans came last.

The story of the Universe, formation of the Earth, and the Evolution of life follows this closely. If evolution is the way that God decided to create us, then so be it. If we just sort of popped into existance, well that's fine too.

Remember that the word "create" from the Bible is actually translated from the Hebrew word "organize." The world was Organized from particles from the Big Bang. Man was Organized from existing creatures.

This is not what I think shoud be taught in schools. Let the schools teach biology and evolution in their pure forms, NOT Intelligent Design. If you learn nothing else from your biology class except to look at something, notice something about it, and ask yourself why it is, and then try to figure out the answer... your teacher has done more good than anyone can ever tell. God GAVE us the ability to reason and use logic. Don't waste it.

My freshman (college) biology professor wrote a chemical equation on the board describing the conversion of ethyl alcohol to water:

CH3CH2OH ---x---> H2O

He put an X through the arrow to show that this is not a chemical reaction. He said that miracles are one-time occurrences that cannot be repeated. They can't be proven, and they can't be disclaimed. He also said that the theory of evolution is not an attack on religion - it is just observations of people who try to make sense of the world around them with the information they have available.

Okay, I'm getting off my soap box.



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:43 PM
link   
Sodom, didn't exist. Goliath, didn't exist. The death of the first born males in Egypt, didn't happen.



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Hello Proton

No evidence of Creation???? This is what you suggest???

Let's look back. Ta Daaaa The Ice Age, as you know it. Look thru the texts and literature. Take a good look at Life on Earth.

Sabertooth Tigers? How many millenium would be required to eliminate those Saberteeth???

Three Toe Horses? Jumps two evolutionary steps to become a Sinlge toe creature?

Here are two quick examples. Here's another

Lucy? Again leaps in evolutionary steps when positioned aside 6th Day Man, leaving Science to puzzle about where the Missing Link between the two could be located.

These are examples rapidly picked to dismiss this notion there is no evidence of Creation. These clearly indicate Evolution is not the reasons these change occured, and that leaves the Other to step up to the plate.

Sabertooth Tiger did not become Pocketknife Tiger, and later simply Tiger. They disappeared completely and were replaced by Jaguar's, Pumas, and such. Only creation could account for this. Science can not.

And in these observations, there is nothing noting any transition between Pre Ice Age, to Post Ice Age. Show me the Fossil records!

Just thought you deserved a response.

Ciao



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   
There is no theory that is more in tune with the Great Truth Of Life than the theory of evolution.

Everything ascends, evolves.

Upward.

Acorns
evolve
into
Oak
Trees.

That is not a theory.

That is an obvious fact based on simple observations.


Babies evolve into adults.

Caterpillars evolve into Flutterbyes(flutter by).


Everything ascends.



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by pRoPhEcY
There is no theory that is more in tune with the Great Truth Of Life than the theory of evolution.

Everything ascends, evolves.

Upward.

Acorns
evolve
into
Oak
Trees.

That is not a theory.

That is an obvious fact based on simple observations.


Babies evolve into adults.

Caterpillars evolve into Flutterbyes(flutter by).


Everything ascends.


merit but not fully there



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by mcktj
merit but not fully there


Before haughtiness comes destruction.



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shane
Sabertooth Tigers? How many millenium would be required to eliminate those Saberteeth???

[....]

Sabertooth Tiger did not become Pocketknife Tiger, and later simply Tiger. They disappeared completely and were replaced by Jaguar's, Pumas, and such. Only creation could account for this. Science can not.



ToE does not suggest that modern felidae evolved from the sabre-tooth cats (they are not tigers).

None of what you posted is evidence for creation, just evidence that you don't understand ToE.

I'll let someone else pull the rest of your post apart...

[edit on 10-4-2006 by melatonin]



posted on Apr, 10 2006 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Sammuel

A News Release and Map my Friend. Even the New York Times seem to disagree on this with you.

www.people.virginia.edu...

www.people.virginia.edu...

As for giants, ponder on these. Reported finds, with a Size Graph and a nice little article to consider

www.stevequayle.com...

www.onelight.com...

And as for Egypt and the Passover slaughter of their firstborn Males, it certainly impressed Israel, seeing what the meaning of passover is.

But it's curious how you came to this conclusion. Using this as the basis of thought, then you do not exist Sammuel. Nor do I for that matter.

Have a good evening

Ciao

[edit on 10-4-2006 by Shane]



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
Hello Melatonin

To correct this, I understand ToE.

It's how many things suddenly appearing all at once and in a relatively short period of time I have problems with.

The last so called evolutionary changes occured only some 14000 years ago. What we find today in the Animal and Plant World have basically been here from this point on. And just prior to this, distinctly different Animals and Plant life dissappeared.

This is not the evolution we see taught is it? It has been sometime since I was in a classroom, but evolution was a process of adaption to the environment which took 1000s and 1000s of year to even be noticed, to say the least.

Yet we have Wooly Mammoths found frozen in the Tundra still eating their last meal. Gone in an instant. And then we find all this new life within a few short days, so to speak in an evolution unit of measure, popping up out of the blue. You would think if things can change that fast, why do we not see it occuring in the Animal and Plant World today.

I trust you understand what was implied better, and I'm sorry for not making this clearer. It was never a fact I find it difficult to believe the fossil record, which is very detailed and recorded. It is we have nothing to inspect from the time prior and leading up to the last extinction, to the new and improved everything. And this lack of evidence is extended to the Man as well. That was the point being made, or at least it was supposed to be.


Ciao



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 12:37 AM
link   
Shane...

Your first link didn't do much for your case. They offered possible scientific explanations for the story that refute the supernatural tales in the bible. But, I see, it's all good for Christians to use science, just as long as it agrees with their story...


And, giants?



Man, the tallest guy who ever lived on record died from complications as a result of his height. Imagine the costs of being 36 FEET tall; I can only imagine how big your heart would have to be to circulate blood around that frame.


Since this guy knows about giants, how about he post some pics of these giant skeletons that have been "found and hidden" in museums.
I guess the best he could do was post really short dudes next to really tall ones...
(I call that smoke and mirrors)



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 12:53 AM
link   
Proton,

Can you at least open your mind a bit? Could you at least find it in your heart to think about how creation could be a possibility instead of just saying, "no it can't be?" I'm not forcing you to believe anything, but it couldn't hurt to consider the idea of a creator. Work the idea around in you mind some, and see what you come up with.

Troy



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 05:36 AM
link   
Shane,




No evidence of Creation???? This is what you suggest???


This is correct, there is literally no supportive evidence for "creation".



Let's look back. Ta Daaaa The Ice Age, as you know it. Look thru the texts and literature. Take a good look at Life on Earth.


Not following you on this one. Ice age? I was unaware that a natural occurance was evidence for creation. Or perhaps you are unaware that ice age's happen naturally?



Sabertooth Tigers? How many millenium would be required to eliminate those Saberteeth???


I'm not very knowledgable with smilidon, but it would be interesting to see how you can possibly tie this species into a creation theory, please elaborate. Read melatonin's post again also.



Three Toe Horses? Jumps two evolutionary steps to become a Sinlge toe creature?


Ok, we're still lacking evidence for creation, this is no surprise.



Lucy? Again leaps in evolutionary steps when positioned aside 6th Day Man, leaving Science to puzzle about where the Missing Link between the two could be located.


Missing links? Wow, what year is this again? Have I gone back through time or something? Keep up to date on the theory buddy.



These are examples rapidly picked to dismiss this notion there is no evidence of Creation. These clearly indicate Evolution is not the reasons these change occured, and that leaves the Other to step up to the plate.


You fail to explain how those example's "prove" creation. All you've done is shown lack of understanding on what your talking about. Go look those 'examples' up, take the "leap of faith" of learning.



Sabertooth Tiger did not become Pocketknife Tiger, and later simply Tiger. They disappeared completely and were replaced by Jaguar's, Pumas, and such. Only creation could account for this. Science can not.


Lol too cute. Please, go learn some more about it, your talking crazies here now.



And in these observations, there is nothing noting any transition between Pre Ice Age, to Post Ice Age. Show me the Fossil records!


Yes master, let me possess all possible answers at the snap of a finger to satisfy your minute ego. Learning and discovery doesn't equal absolute knowledge, just in case your curious.

So, when are you going to show me evidence for creation? I mean, it was a mighty fine post of lack of knowledge, but I thought we were discussing creation? IDK, maybe I was wrong.



To correct this, I understand ToE.


Oh yes, looks like you did. Missing link and sabertooth tiger = all cats.



It's how many things suddenly appearing all at once and in a relatively short period of time I have problems with.


Well I'm sure 'mother nature' is very sorry and feels bad she couldn't provide every fossil for you to study at the snap of your fingers.



The last so called evolutionary changes occured only some 14000 years ago. What we find today in the Animal and Plant World have basically been here from this point on. And just prior to this, distinctly different Animals and Plant life dissappeared.


Last evolutionary change? Wha? Man, your stuck in the past aren't you? Evolutionary change's are happening still to this day guy lol. What exactly are you having trouble with in regards to extinctions?



This is not the evolution we see taught is it? It has been sometime since I was in a classroom, but evolution was a process of adaption to the environment which took 1000s and 1000s of year to even be noticed, to say the least.


Partially correct, but as I said the theory has changed drastically from what Darwin first proposed. Learning is a CONTINUOUS exercise. Keep at it or you'll continue to look silly.



Yet we have Wooly Mammoths found frozen in the Tundra still eating their last meal. Gone in an instant. And then we find all this new life within a few short days, so to speak in an evolution unit of measure, popping up out of the blue. You would think if things can change that fast, why do we not see it occuring in the Animal and Plant World today.


There's already to many threads dismissing this idiotic myth. If this isn't proof enough that creationist's abhor learning, idk what is. Shane, look up this whooly mammoth problem here on ATS. Many fine intelligent people have numerous post's correcting this ignorant myth.



I trust you understand what was implied better, and I'm sorry for not making this clearer. It was never a fact I find it difficult to believe the fossil record, which is very detailed and recorded. It is we have nothing to inspect from the time prior and leading up to the last extinction, to the new and improved everything. And this lack of evidence is extended to the Man as well. That was the point being made, or at least it was supposed to be.


The fossil record is very far from deatiled. There's still alot missing from it imo. We've probably only discovered a fraction of the species that once lived on our planet in the past. I'm not sure what this silly last extinction nonesense your talking about is, could you provide links for me to look at? Would be interesting to read antiquated theories.

cybertroy,



Can you at least open your mind a bit? Could you at least find it in your heart to think about how creation could be a possibility instead of just saying, "no it can't be?" I'm not forcing you to believe anything, but it couldn't hurt to consider the idea of a creator. Work the idea around in you mind some, and see what you come up with.


Having an open mind and following what the evidence dictates are two different thing's. I don't necessarily dismiss the possibility of thier being a god or creation out right, but I do disregard both as untrue due to lack of evidence supporting the idea and due to the evidence of a man made god. There are MANY man made gods and MANY man mande creation myths.

If your going to ask me to keep an open mind on but just ONE creation scenario I'd say your ridiculous. Why must it be just that one? Because it's the most "popular" creation myth? It's only popular due to law and violent conversions and early superstitous fears. What if THAT creation myth is absolutley wrong and what if say, the sumerian creation myth is the right one? Have an open mind right? Ha, what a joke. Religous people are the most closed minded folk on the planet. Don't ask me to have an open mind if you follow just one creation myth.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Prot0n

There's still alot to learn about how and when certain events occured that allowed for the universe and life within, but it's not really realistic to just end it all by writing it off to unseen and untestable forces invented by primitive man. Some of us like to learn.


I dont know why evolutionists keep saying that we are lazy or don't want to learn. Why are we lazy because I believe that God created the earth. I am learning about evolution. Im not just sitting here and saying, "i dont care what you think" and dismissing your remarks saying im rite. Im using the greatest invention known to man "GOOGLE." I am researching it fervently. I am not lazy and i'm sick and tired of you telling me that I am.



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by sambo5us
I dont know why evolutionists keep saying that we are lazy or don't want to learn. Why are we lazy because I believe that God created the earth. I am learning about evolution. Im not just sitting here and saying, "i dont care what you think" and dismissing your remarks saying im rite. Im using the greatest invention known to man "GOOGLE." I am researching it fervently. I am not lazy and i'm sick and tired of you telling me that I am.


And what are you learning by writing off something to an unseen intelligent force that doesn't exist?

No, we don't know exactly how the universe came to be as we can't see beyond the boundries of our observable universe, but to say it MUST require an intelligent creator imo is pure laziness. No one offer's any supportive evidence for such a lazy idea. Or what they do attempt to offer is through lack of understanding on exactly what they're offering. Yess, google is a great tool for looking up information, but WHAT information is the key issue. If your looking at creationist site's, chances are your looking at false information as many of them keep propagating the same myths that have long since been dispelled.

The evidence in support for how the Earth came to be in our solar system far exceeds any sort of creation myth. Explain to me exactley why it has to be YOUR creation myth as true and not the hundreds of other's believed by many different people and culture's through out history? Why yours? Your creation myth has just as much evidence as any other. Nothing. So why yours and yours alone? Why not the Sumerian myth, or the Egyptian, or the Native American, or any one of the Oriental myths? Why your myth and why your God?



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 07:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by sambo5us

Can this not go both ways? Can't evolutionists be refusing to accept creation because they have been taught to believe evolution since a young age?
No because most people are not taught evolution since a young age.. evolutionists are not fanatical the way creationists are. I was taught creation from a young age so there goes your theory.




top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join