Creationism in science class rooms

[aspen]

you guys are funny......if you reject a literal creation account in Genesis, you reject God! No! i am a Christian!

If you reject evolution, you reject everything that comes from science! No! i like medicine!

Two sides of the same Modernism coin.......

 

[KingJ]

you guys are funny......if you reject a literal creation account in Genesis, you reject God! No! i am a Christian!

Both a Genesis creation and evolution require faith. Why not place our faith in what scripture says?

If you reject evolution, you reject everything that comes from science! No! i like medicine!

Two sides of the same Modernism coin.......

A scienctific fact is that science will never provide an answer to the origin of the first particle. There has to be a Creator from a realm not limited by the laws of phsyics. Once we grasp this we can 'move on' and grasp that either 1. creation happened instantly or 2. He guided evolution. As a catholic you can accept theistic evolution. But look at how it is defined : Francis Collins describes theistic evolution as the position that "evolution is real, but that it was set in motion by God", and "Theistic evolution, which accepts that evolution occurred as biologists describe it, but under the direction of God.

Evolution of today would have us believe that it is unguided. They would never come to a conclusion on findings that support scripture.

Have a look at our discussions on mutation in the other thread. Evolution is not needed to support science / medicine.

 

[aspen]

KingJ - my point is not support of secular evolution, instead, i believe God is the creature of the universe AND the genesis account was never meant to be a literal account of creation. i have no idea how God did it, but based on the evidence, evolution is looking plausible. What is difficult to watch is the fan mentality of creationist and evolutionists who stubbornly point out each others stubborness and deny their own

 

[KingJ]

KingJ - my point is not support of secular evolution, instead, i believe God is the creature of the universe AND the genesis account was never meant to be a literal account of creation. i have no idea how God did it, but based on the evidence, evolution is looking plausible. What is difficult to watch is the fan mentality of creationist and evolutionists who stubbornly point out each others stubborness and deny their own

Whats being taught today clashes with theistic evolution. How many true evolutionists believe God's guiding hand is involved in evolution? There would be no conflict if evolution was removed to a theology class. It is a sick child that science is being forced to carry.

 

[River Jordan]

Please. You have no proof the lineages were ever one, much less split. And of course it was 6 million years ago. Because who could know? You simply prove that there is no evolution taking place as you are wanting to preach.

That is your faith. You can't prove life comes from chemicals, but you believe it. This is why evolution is a faith and shouldn't be taught in public schools.

If I drive people away because I don't believe in evolution, then they can go away. Big deal. I am told to be a witness. I don't change the story to make it palitable for everyone to come. God knows those who are His and they will come. The others can go their way.

Oh yeah, Science finds what it needs to in fossils. Why? Because it can't find it in the real world. Because they have no proof anywhere they must go back millions of years to claim something they see is something they believe. Its laughable.

If evloution were true, we would continue to see the monkey men. Should see the 'progress' taking place. But we don't. Its got to be in some lab under some microscope which science can use as a stage to present its lies of 'evolution'.

Your response is nothing more than "No it isn't....you can't prove it" over and over again. IOW, just reflexive denialism with no thought involved. I suppose I could respond back "Yes it is" and you could answer "Not it isn't" and we could continue down that road forever....

....but I'm not really interested in that.

Goatsbeard?

Was it natural selection of random mutations?

Yes.

you guys are funny......if you reject a literal creation account in Genesis, you reject God!

That's the black/white, all or none, mindset of fundamentalism. In such absolutist, simplistic thinking there are no nuances. You're either with them or against them.....period.

 

[aspen]

ok. i have now determined how we were all created. in another demention - God and humanity were one in relationship. it was a perfect relationship......when we broke it, we literally fell out of demention - through a blackhole - that explains gravity, space time distortion, red shift, the appearance of evolution, and the Trinity. it is all the pulling apart of reality - thankfully, we will exit this blackhole and Christ will be there to catch us. whew! that was exuasting! I need a nap. Oh and you are all welcome

 

[Quantrill]

River Jordon

I specifically asked you if you could prove that non-living chemicals could produce a living cell. You said no. I then asked you if you believed it. You said yes. So, there you have it. Evolution is a belief not a science. Evloution is your faith.

So, why is the faith of evloution allowed to be taught in public schools?

Quantrill

 

[Mr.Bride]

God is absolute Truth, but imperfect man can only view absolute truth through a cloudy glass. God is not limited, be we are and therefore the we are not able to understand all-knowing-ness. Sorry, DaDad.

You have not because you ask not..

That's the black/white, all or none, mindset of fundamentalism. In such absolutist, simplistic thinking there are no nuances. You're either with them or against them.....period.

That's the Bible

 

[aspen]

so i am not all knowing because i do not ask....hmm.

 

[Mr.Bride]

so i am not all knowing because i do not ask....hmm.

But I have an unction from the Holy One, and I know all things...

 

[DaDad]

KingJ - my point is not support of secular evolution, instead, i believe God is the creature of the universe AND the genesis account was never meant to be a literal account of creation. i have no idea how God did it, but based on the evidence, evolution is looking plausible. What is difficult to watch is the fan mentality of creationist and evolutionists who stubbornly point out each others stubborness and deny their own

To All,

It seems that GOD certainly provided for his creation to come together in a reasonable fashion:


1. ... the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

2. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

3. ... and God divided the light from the darkness

4. And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

5. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

6. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

7. And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

8. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

9. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

10. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.


he project starts at the foundation and is under the hand of the master carpenter until finished. And where we see what some would describe as "evolution" Christians know that each phase requires Intelligent Design, and so we see the Hand of GOD.

This seems no different that the "miracle" at Jericho. Most claim that GOD threw the walls down, but a Bible-Military-Historian argued in a History Channel program that it was CLEARLY a MILITARY accomplishment. So is it a "supernatural miracle" or did GOD use tangibles (Joshua & a distraction to sequentially funnel special forces into Rahab's appartment) to perform HIS "military miracle"? And please note that when Joshua listened to GOD, he was victorious. But in the next battle, the battle of Ai, apparently Joshua was confident of his own resources, and his men were soundly defeated.

And of course, we see through the ages how GOD works, bringing individuals and circumstances together, even unto the a/c.


With Best Regards,
DD

 

[River Jordan]

I specifically asked you if you could prove that non-living chemicals could produce a living cell. You said no. I then asked you if you believed it. You said yes. So, there you have it. Evolution is a belief not a science. Evloution is your faith.

Um.....that's one of the more ridiculous things I've read from a creationist in quite some time.

I looked back through this thread and saw how many times and by how many different ways I tried to get you to understand what evolution is. It's very clear now that you have absolutely no interest in understanding anything about this subject. You seem to be quite satisfied with your terribly inaccurate understanding of science, no matter what anyone says or shows you.

It's a waste of time to try and engage in a discussion with someone like that.

So with that, I'm done.

But I have an unction from the Holy One, and I know all things...

What will the lottery numbers be this week?

 

[aspen]

DaDad - is it any less miraclulous if God uses ordinary methods to accomplish extrodinary outcomes? i thought the miracle of Jericho was that god used the weak to bring down the strong - it is kind of a theme throughout the Bible, you know? I hope you wont downgrade the miracle if weapons brought down the walls instead of marching around in circles........

 

[KingJ]

DaDad - is it any less miraclulous if God uses ordinary methods to accomplish extrodinary outcomes? i thought the miracle of Jericho was that god used the weak to bring down the strong - it is kind of a theme throughout the Bible, you know? I hope you wont downgrade the miracle if weapons brought down the walls instead of marching around in circles........

Aspen, it is high time that you, River and all the Christians that think evolution is compatible with scripture open their eyes!

Evolution claims and ''findings' and matters of faith DO NOT make space for any to believe in theistic evolution! Capeesh?

Evolution is a sick child that science is forced to carry!!

 

[DaDad]

DaDad - is it any less miraclulous if God uses ordinary methods to accomplish extrodinary outcomes? i thought the miracle of Jericho was that god used the weak to bring down the strong - it is kind of a theme throughout the Bible, you know? I hope you wont downgrade the miracle if weapons brought down the walls instead of marching around in circles........

Hi Aspen,

I'm not exactly sure of your point, but it seems we both agree that when we hear from GOD, our weakness is made strong, as evidenced in Jerhico. And when we go in our own strength, our weakness is manifest, as evidenced in Ai.

With Best Regards,
DD

 

[River Jordan]

Aspen, it is high time that you, River and all the Christians that think evolution is compatible with scripture open their eyes!

Evolution claims and ''findings' and matters of faith DO NOT make space for any to believe in theistic evolution! Capeesh?

If creationists would just stop there, we'd all be fine and this whole thing would barely be an issue. But no.....

Evolution is a sick child that science is forced to carry!!

For some reason, creationists just have to try and argue against the science of evolution. Why? If this is indeed a "matter of faith", then what the science says shouldn't matter at all....not one single bit.

I'm actually thinking that it's the creationists who have the weakest faith. Their main approach to this issue (trying to argue against the science) is a tacit admission that science is more powerful and persuasive than faith. IOW, their argument seems to be based on the underlying principle that if evolution is scientifically true, then their faith is destroyed.

If they truly believed this was a "matter of faith" and that faith is more powerful and persuasive than science, things like "scientific creationism", "intelligent design", and such would never even exist. Creationists would just say "This is a matter of faith", support their position from a faith-based standpoint, and be done with it.

But as we can see, they don't do that. Instead they spend inordinate amounts of time and effort trying to justify their particular religious beliefs via scientific arguments. It looks very much to me like they're really, really desperately wishing that the science was on their side....

....as if their faith isn't enough for them.

 

[KingJ]

For some reason, creationists just have to try and argue against the science of evolution. Why? If this is indeed a "matter of faith", then what the science says shouldn't matter at all....not one single bit.

Do you have a bible in your house? Just curious, when you open it do you pray first, thank God for His word and start at the beginning?

On to a more pressing issue, do you believe the bible is the word of God? Yes or No? Now if you answer Yes, what do you think Him calling it 'His word' in John 1:1 means?

Then, why do you keep calling evolution science? Do you know something I don't? All I have heard are claims requiring a lot of faith.

 

[River Jordan]

You are one angry person KingJ. It just oozes from your posts, and that makes me sad.

 

[KingJ]

I don't have much patience with false teachers. Nor did Paul. You KNOW scripture and yet you still come with heresy. You are worse then an atheist because you come with a Christian banner. If you never called yourself a Christian, there would be no need to rebuke you. The JOKE is that you reject so MUCH scripture that you are beyond rebuke from it.

I think I said it best when Jesus said to the devil ''it is written'' he shut his mouth. Yet YOU keep talking and can't like Jesus say ''it is also written'. Thus making whatever comes from you a pretty weak / carnal opinion that I need only google on an atheist forum.

 

[River Jordan]

You know, I hear those atheists also believe in gravity. So according to your mindset, you have to deny it. After all, you can't be advocating anything atheists believe in, right?

Seriously though, you put me in mind of a lecture I attended once. The speaker (a Pastor) talked about the issue of evolution and how people like you approach it. His main point was that your approach indicates a very weak, insecure type of faith. You and folks like you figure that if evolution is scientifically true, then all of Christianity is false. IOW, your brand of Christianity is so weak and insecure, something as simple and obvious as evolution is enough to destroy it forever. Simply put, it's a threat.

So in a different time and place people like you persecuted people like me....not because we were wrong, but because our thoughts were a threat to your authority and your faith. Fortunately we're not in those times now, so all you have left is to insult and attack me in online forums. But the same fundamental issue is in play....

...an insecure, weak faith built on simplistic thinking and blind authority, being threatened by objectivity and critical thinking. This conflict is probably as old as humanity itself.