Belief in evolution?

[RedJack22]

@RedJack22

The old testament serves no purpose but to provide theological context and establish the 360+ messianic prophecies, all of which are fulfilled. Take everything else you've ever read from the old testament and completely forget it. Rip it out of your Bible, tear it up, and leave it on the floor on the very edge of the nonfiction section of the library. It is 99% complete trash, and functionally obsolete pursuant the claims of Christ in Mt 5:18 as well as the other synoptic gospels and multiple occasions in the epistles.

The unguided evolutionary fairy-tale that humankind spontaneously (but "slowly", as if that has any bearing LOL) spawned from mud is not false because "it says so on my doctored pseudo-Satanic (protestant) old-testament toilet paper". Rather, it's simply statistically implausible, as is any of the near-infinite number of finely tuned parameters that have been paramount in the progression of the universe into a state conducive to human life as we know it.

I agree that the Catholic God exists and that he is responsible for humankind. However, He is likely laughing that you would quote from an expired almanac (because that is literally what the old testament is) two millennia after His son explicitly told you not to (read Hebrews).

First of all, the Old Testament (OT) IS NOT expired! In fact, as cuber314259 said, the OT is still 100% accurate history. Now I get that Christians don't follow the Mosiac Law (that is, the law set in the days of Moses), but one reason to read all those accounts of how to build the Lord's temple is to show how holy and how perfect He is. The OT IS NOT trash, and God has put it in His word for a reason! After all, if it had no reason at all, then God would have ousted it.

Now I'm curious: where does Jesus tell us not to read the OT?

And also, I am not a Catholic. Catholic's are not Christians, and they don't even read the Christian Bible.

And another thing, why would you even thing that God is laughing at me because I am publicly proclaiming Him and His Word?

 

[WombatWarrior17]

Does the Bible not say that anyone who tries to add or take away from the Bible will be punished. Yes Christians don't generally follow all the old testament laws but that doesn't mean we shouldn't read them, that's why I read the Bible cover to cover usually. What happened in the old testament is still history (creation, corruption, catastrophe, confusion, [Israelites and the prophets], Christ, cross, consummation)

Revelation 22:19 is the verse that you are referring to.

Also, are any of us accomplishing anything by debating this? Because anyone who is willing to post on this thread (including me) will not change there mind on what they believe, so isn't just debating a waste of our time?

 

[Gomorrite]

What is the WR for Bible Speedreading?

 

[GenTheSnail]

What is the WR for Bible Speedreading?

I know that someone read it over the weekend (or in something like a couple days) once.
I think he was an atheist who wanted to know what his christian friends were talking about.

Then there was the guy who read and actually studied it in something like a month, which people usually do in a year.

 

[JustAnotherGenericCuber]

What was the point of reviving this thread? Nothing anyone says will change anyone's mind

 

[RedJack22]

Revelation 22:19 is the verse that you are referring to.

Also, are any of us accomplishing anything by debating this? Because anyone who is willing to post on this thread (including me) will not change there mind on what they believe, so isn't just debating a waste of our time?

What was the point of reviving this thread? Nothing anyone says will change anyone's mind

While I suppose that's true, I see it as an evangelistic opportunity. I want to bring people to Christ, and I can do that by refuting evolution. The only reason why I posted on it was I saw it randomly

 

[WombatWarrior17]

While I suppose that's true, I see it as an evangelistic opportunity. I want to bring people to Christ, and I can do that by refuting evolution. The only reason why I posted on it was I saw it randomly

I'm a Christian too, so I understand. But debating won't change anybody's mind. When you debate all you are doing is yelling your opinions at each other. And Christ never debated with the Pharisees, he simply answered their questions.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

I'm a Christian too

I'm a Christian too, and I also don't believe in evolution since there are a lot of problems with it.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

I want to bring people to Christ, and I can do that by refuting evolution.

But Christians like me and you could debate this better if we had more information about the problems of evolution and the big bang.

 

[WombatWarrior17]

I'm a Christian too, and I also don't believe in evolution since there are a lot of problems with it.

I didn't say there wasn't.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

And Christ never debated with the Pharisees

So what you're saying is that we shouldn't argue just simply answer their questions?

I didn't say there wasn't.

what do you mean?

 

[WombatWarrior17]

So what you're saying is that we shouldn't argue just simply answer their questions?

That's what Christ did, and we should be like him, so yeah that's what I'm saying.
If they ask us what the problems with evolution are, you tell them, if they argue with you then that means they aren't actually listening to you.
And some Christians can get so caught up in arguing that they forget what they should be doing.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

Any questions about why some Christians don't believe in evolution?

 

[Mastermind2368]

I'm a Christian and do not believe in evolution. Why? Simple. Tell me this, what is more likely. A God who can make the Universe, do whatever he wants to, make light, take darkness and turn in into the universe that we have. Or some dust meeting, making bacteria that evolves into fish that evolves into frogs ect... With a religion, you only need one crazy thing, but with evolution, you need to rely on some dust meeting that somehow makes life, then the life turns into slightly bigger life, that makes dinos, monkeys then us.

Also remember, Charles Darwin didn't expect it to become something this big, this were come some ideas he thought of and by the time he died, he even thought it couldn't work.

 

[RedJack22]

But Christians like me and you could debate this better if we had more information about the problems of evolution and the big bang.

I do suppose that's true. Thanks for that reminder!

 

[TDM]

Or some dust meeting, making bacteria that evolves into fish that evolves into frogs ect... With a religion, you only need one crazy thing, but with evolution, you need to rely on some dust meeting that somehow makes life, then the life turns into slightly bigger life, that makes dinos, monkeys then us.

There's more to it than that: firstly, there's time. Evolution on a large scale takes thousands of years. You also need to bear in mind the number of opportunities life would have had to start across the universe - with the size of the universe and the time people believe it to have existed for, there's every chance that basic life would have started in multiple places.

The part about the size of the universe is also very important: if you took any random planet in the universe, the chance of there being intelligent life on it (which is able to think about its own origin) is very small. However, we have a biased perspective, as in order to think about this question we need to be on one of those few planets. It may look ridiculous that life could ever have started by itself if we only look at Earth, but looking on a larger scale, it becomes much more plausible.

(of course, this argument can only hold if you assume the universe, and Earth, have existed for billions of years. If you assume that the Earth has existed for 6000 years, then... well, you're assuming that the Earth, and thus humans, were created. So the argument becomes a bit circular. )

 

[cuber314159]

There's more to it than that: firstly, there's time. Evolution on a large scale takes thousands of years. You also need to bear in mind the number of opportunities life would have had to start across the universe - with the size of the universe and the time people believe it to have existed for, there's every chance that basic life would have started in multiple places.

The part about the size of the universe is also very important: if you took any random planet in the universe, the chance of there being intelligent life on it (which is able to think about its own origin) is very small. However, we have a biased perspective, as in order to think about this question we need to be on one of those few planets. It may look ridiculous that life could ever have started by itself if we only look at Earth, but looking on a larger scale, it becomes much more plausible.

(of course, this argument can only hold if you assume the universe, and Earth, have existed for billions of years. If you assume that the Earth has existed for 6000 years, then... well, you're assuming that the Earth, and thus humans, were created. So the argument becomes a bit circular. )

You are however talking about very small chances, like solving a thousands of 33x33s by random turns simultaneously. The only reasonable way to go about this is to assume more universes- stuff you never have and never will have any evidence for, however god's word is true yesterday today and forever and by disbelieving in Jesus you are betting your life on the equivalent of thousands of 33x33s being solved simultaneously.
( If the Bible is true then the earth is 6000 years old approximately so we don't generally concentrate on proving the age of the earth but the truth in the Bible, it's often claimed that creationists focus on genesis and not the big picture, but by denying genesis 1-11 you are denying the authority of god's word, and far better science than evolutionary says that dead men don't rise and yet Christianity is based off such an event, disprove Jesus rose feom the dead and you have disproved Christianity.

 

[WombatWarrior17]

(of course, this argument can only hold if you assume the universe, and Earth, have existed for billions of years. If you assume that the Earth has existed for 6000 years, then... well, you're assuming that the Earth, and thus humans, were created. So the argument becomes a bit circular. )

It's actually circular reasoning to date fossils by the rocks and date the rocks by the fossils.

And evolution technically isn't science, since the scientific method is reliant on being able to observe what you are trying to prove, experimenting, and being able to replicate the results, none of which you can do with evolution.

Evolution is closer to being a religion than it is to being science since you're believing in a force you cannot see nor prove.

And if the universe came from a tiny spinning disk that exploded, why do some galaxies spin in the opposite direction of our own?
That very idea contradicts Newton's first law.

The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of any isolated system always increases. Meaning that things will only get worse over time.

 

[Raumaan Kidwai]

It is important to note: Evolution does NOT imply that living organisms weren't created by a higher power in the first place. It simply stipulates that living organisms evolved into new species of living organisms over billions of years. I personally believe that microorganism life was created by [a] God, and evolved according to His plan into us humans as well as countless other flora and fauna.

 

[Cubed Cuber]

like solving a thousands of 33x33s by random turns simultaneously

and also like shaking up a disassembled 33x33 in a huge container and expecting it to become a normal, fully functional 33x33