Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
Switch to Forum Live View How many creationists truly understand Christianity?
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 12:19AM #1
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013
It occurs to me that we are trying to educate YECs about evolution in a less than optimal way.

The problem is that they seem to be terrified that admitting to the reality of evolution will somehow invalidate Christianity.

We know that the mainstream Christian sects have largely come to terms with the science, and accept things like evolution, and old earth, etc.

Clearly the first and most important stumbling block is the fear that YECs have, based on their mistaken belief that science and Christianity are capable of invalidating one another.

What we need to do is educate them about the true options of Christian belief, so that they can then accept and come to terms with the historical and scientific realities of the origins of life, evolution, cosmology, the earth, physics, chemistry, biology, logic, geology, anthropology, paleontology, and all those other fields they are running away from or trying unsuccessfully to redefine.
PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 6:49AM #2
udcstb
Posts: 2,769

Sep 9, 2011 -- 12:19AM, d_p_m wrote:

What we need to do is educate them about the true options of Christian belief,...


The enemy of creationists has never been science. That's just a subterfuge. The true enemy of creationists has always been and will always be, their fellow Christians. And pseudo-science is their weapon of choice.

"As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand."
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 9:10AM #3
christzen
Posts: 5,809
The problem is that you can never educate the ones that hold to a literal view of the Bible.Not even their fellow Christians can reach them,as they are regarded as fallen away from the true faith once delivered.No amount of reason will reach them.case in point.On another popular discussion site,I was once castigated as a fool for not accepting that God had a literal temple in the Sun in which He sometimes stayed,and for believing that the Earth revolved around the Sun.Seriously.It all started in a discussion about taking the Bible literally to the extreme,which means believing both of the previous claims because the Bible says so,and I was roundly denounced as a fool for NOT accepting both as facts,along with gibberish about geo stationary orbits being proof that the Earth doesn't spin but the Sun revolves around the Earth.I can point anyone to this discussion if needed.

Second,I once had a similar discussion in the religious forums here,and it was around the issue of slavery in a literal Bible.When I finally pinned the poster into a corner about the Bible never condemning it but allowing Christians to have slaves,as it does,the poster conceded that yes,it WAS OK for Christians to own slaves.The evil people then became the slave traders.That was evil,but somehow buying slaves from them and owning them was not.All because the Bible mentioned that some early Christians owned them.


There is no logic involved with the literalists.And believing that there is is folly.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 10:15AM #4
57
Posts: 20,556

It's interesting to watch the so-called christians here filter their faith through the concepts of the false science called evolutionism.  They think they have used their "science" to straighten out the bible.  


Believing their science to be true they have crossed out the following verse:


1CO 15:47     The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven.


In fact other verses need to be stricken from the bible:


1TI 2:13      For Adam was formed first, then Eve.


Other verses become problematic for those that filter their bible through evolutionism:


JUD 1:14      Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men: "See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones


Even the following verse from Luke 3 is in error:


Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, Heli,Matthat,  Levi,  Melki,  Jannai,  Joseph,Mattathias,  Amos,  Nahum, Esli,  Naggai,Maath,  Mattathias,  Semein,  Josech,  Joda,Joanan,  Rhesa,  Zerubbabel,  Shealtiel,  Neri,Melki,  Addi,  Cosam,  Elmadam,  Er,Joshua,  Eliezer,  Jorim,  Matthat,  Levi,Simeon,  Judah,  Joseph,  Jonam,  Eliakim,Melea,  Menna,  Mattatha,  Nathan,  David, Jesse,  Obed,  Boaz, Salmon,  Nahshon,Amminadab,  Ram,  Hezron,  Perez, Judah,Jacob, Isaac,  Abraham,  Terah,  Nahor,Serug,  Reu,  Peleg,  Eber,  Shelah,Cainan, Arphaxad,  Shem,  Noah,  Lamech,Methuselah,  Enoch,  Jared,  Mahalalel,  Kenan,Enosh, Seth,  Adam,  God.


In the above linage where do you start to strike out the text?  It's obvious that according to those that filter their bible through evolutionism Adam must be crossed out. Should be cross out all the names preceding David?


Oh what a mess the Theo-Evo liberals make of the bible. 


Even the words of Jesus Christ must be eliminated:


MAT 19:4      "Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,'


Their so-called "science"  is being presented as not being in conflict with the bible.  If that be the case how do you justify all the portions that need to be crossed out?  


.....and their is more.


Noah and the world wide flood has been disproven.  The bible is wrong once again when Jesus says:


MAT 24:37     As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.
MAT 24:38     For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark;
MAT 24:39     and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.


The Theo-Evo claim is, there was no flood, there was no ark and there was no Noah.  jesus was wrong.


Even the following verse must be lined out:


HEB 11:7      By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.


As long as you are crossing out Noah, you might as well cross out Abel, Enoch and Abraham....along with all the others mentioned with Noah.


Even Peter got it wrong when he wrote:


1PE 3:20      who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water,


Didn't Peter know there was no flood?  If Peter only knew about the future and the science involved in striking out certain portions of  the bible. 


What else does this science say? Mans science says when you die...you stay dead...especially after 3 days.  The resurrection of Christ never happened.  It's just a feel good theology.  


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 10:57AM #5
amcolph
Posts: 16,283

Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:15AM, 57 wrote:


 


What else does this science say? Mans science says when you die...you stay dead...especially after 3 days.  The resurrection of Christ never happened.  It's just a feel good theology.  


 




Once again 57 denies the divinity of Christ.  Peter only did it three times--57 is going for the record.

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 11:00AM #6
EarthScientist
Posts: 3,419

Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:15AM, 57 wrote:

I have nothing constructive to say




Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 11:01AM #7
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013

Sep 9, 2011 -- 9:10AM, christzen wrote:

The problem is that you can never educate the ones that hold to a literal view of the Bible.Not even their fellow Christians can reach them,as they are regarded as fallen away from the true faith once delivered.No amount of reason will reach them.case in point.On another popular discussion site,I was once castigated as a fool for not accepting that God had a literal temple in the Sun in which He sometimes stayed,and for believing that the Earth revolved around the Sun.Seriously.It all started in a discussion about taking the Bible literally to the extreme,which means believing both of the previous claims because the Bible says so,and I was roundly denounced as a fool for NOT accepting both as facts,along with gibberish about geo stationary orbits being proof that the Earth doesn't spin but the Sun revolves around the Earth.I can point anyone to this discussion if needed.



I do have a certain interest in psychopathology, but I'm not sure if I should look at that.


Oh, what the heck. Geostationary orbits prove the sun revolves around the earth? Where?

PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 11:09AM #8
d_p_m
Posts: 9,013

Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:15AM, 57 wrote:


Believing their science to be true they have crossed out the following verse:


* * *


In fact other verses need to be stricken from the bible:


* * *


Other verses become problematic for those that filter their bible through evolutionism[sic]:


* * *


Even the following verse from Luke 3 is in error:


* * *


Their so-called "science"  is being presented as not being in conflict with the bible.  If that be the case how do you justify all the portions that need to be crossed out?  


.....and their[sic] is more.


Noah and the world wide flood has been disproven.  The bible is wrong once again when Jesus says:


* * *


The Theo-Evo claim is, there was no flood, there was no ark and there was no Noah.  jesus was wrong.


Even the following verse must be lined out:


* * *


Even Peter got it wrong when he wrote:


* * *


What else does this science say? Mans science says when you die...you stay dead...especially after 3 days.  




So? We know the  bible isn't literally true.


Most Christians also know that doesn't matter, theologically.

PHARAOH IRY-HOR, FROM THE 3100s BC, IS THE FIRST HUMAN WHOSE NAME WE KNOW.

-- cool facts from xkcd


"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 11:14AM #9
EarthScientist
Posts: 3,419

Sep 9, 2011 -- 11:09AM, d_p_m wrote:


Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:15AM, 57 wrote:


Believing their science to be true they have crossed out the following verse:


* * *


In fact other verses need to be stricken from the bible:


* * *


Other verses become problematic for those that filter their bible through evolutionism[sic]:


* * *


Even the following verse from Luke 3 is in error:


* * *


Their so-called "science"  is being presented as not being in conflict with the bible.  If that be the case how do you justify all the portions that need to be crossed out?  


.....and their[sic] is more.


Noah and the world wide flood has been disproven.  The bible is wrong once again when Jesus says:


* * *


The Theo-Evo claim is, there was no flood, there was no ark and there was no Noah.  jesus was wrong.


Even the following verse must be lined out:


* * *


Even Peter got it wrong when he wrote:


* * *


What else does this science say? Mans science says when you die...you stay dead...especially after 3 days.  




So? We know the  bible isn't literally true.


Most Christians also know that doesn't matter, theologically.





Look, if you can't go to war with your neighboring pagan tribes and kill everyone except the young virgin girls, then you can't believe Jesus rose from the dead. Simple as that.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Sep 09, 2011 - 11:34AM #10
57
Posts: 20,556

Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:57AM, amcolph wrote:


Sep 9, 2011 -- 10:15AM, 57 wrote:


 


What else does this science say? Mans science says when you die...you stay dead...especially after 3 days.  The resurrection of Christ never happened.  It's just a feel good theology.  


 




Once again 57 denies the divinity of Christ.  Peter only did it three times--57 is going for the record.




Yes amcolph, using my evo-modified bible I can deny Christ divinity.  Thanks for noticing. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook