The Lie of Evolution......

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
U

UnderGrace

Guest
God did not write the creation of the universe like a text book because science is not the lesson God is teaching. He could have filled volumes of books about every scientific process but he didn’t. God’s focus is on Jesus and our relationship with God, Jesus and fellow man.
God never intended for there to be endless discussions on if the earth is ten thousand years old vs. billions.

When Christianity ( meaning both nominal and genuine Christians) accept the lie of macro evolution and that man descended from primates then the discussion is valid and necessary.

When Christianity (meaning both nominal and genuine) accept/believe that death preceded the fall then the discussion is valid and necessary

In the world of macro evolution the gospel is not even necessary do you even realize this?

The fact that science is not the primary focus of scripture is not sufficient reason to accept ideas that are contrary to the revelation and nature of God

God's focus is also on truth, His character and nature, which is the basis of the whole relationship.
 
U

UnderGrace

Guest
Actually, you are quite wrong. The ancient Jewish idea is that God worked with preexisting waters, that he put chaos into control, that he bound Leviathan. Also ancient cultures generally accepte the view that God put chaos into cosmic order by his logos. You are indoctrinated by modern day preachers who are without deep historic knowledge.
Okay:eek:
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
...accept the lie of macro evolution.....
Can you tell me why do you still use "lie" as the name for it?

If there is a huge amount of evidence and if it works in various fields of scientific research, if its possible to make predictions, to develop treatments etc. based on the evolution model, you cannot call it lie.

You can call it wrong model or mistake or something like this, but you are still trying to make it like some kind of conspiracy.
 

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,409
13,750
113
Can you tell me why do you still use "lie" as the name for it?

If there is a huge amount of evidence and if it works in various fields of scientific research, if its possible to make predictions, to develop treatments etc. based on the evolution model, you cannot call it lie.

You can call it wrong model or mistake or something like this, but you are still trying to make it like some kind of conspiracy.
To the bolded part: what works in a practical sense is not necessarily what is based on truth. Many hypotheses survive repeated experimentation only to be disproved later on.

The ability "to make predictions, to develop treatments etc. based on the evolution model" has not been established. "The evolution model" is fundamentally nonscientific, because it cannot be tested. If you used a term less prone to equivocation than "evolution" then perhaps your statement would be valid.
 

trofimus

Senior Member
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
To the bolded part: what works in a practical sense is not necessarily what is based on truth. Many hypotheses survive repeated experimentation only to be disproved later on.

The ability "to make predictions, to develop treatments etc. based on the evolution model" has not been established. "The evolution model" is fundamentally nonscientific, because it cannot be tested. If you used a term less prone to equivocation than "evolution" then perhaps your statement would be valid.
Scientists have better things to do than to invent lies for the public. Therefore I do not like such fanatical naming. Its like flat earth view of the evil scientific/gov world trying to build lies around us.

I am not sure what you mean that it cannot be tested. If it works for example in antivirotic treatments, if it can be seen in our genome, then its tested in practice... or do you mean something else?
 

Embankment

Senior Member
Feb 28, 2017
703
196
43
When Christianity ( meaning both nominal and genuine Christians) accept the lie of macro evolution and that man descended from primates then the discussion is valid and necessary.

When Christianity (meaning both nominal and genuine) accept/believe that death preceded the fall then the discussion is valid and necessary

In the world of macro evolution the gospel is not even necessary do you even realize this?

The fact that science is not the primary focus of scripture is not sufficient reason to accept ideas that are contrary to the revelation and nature of God

God's focus is also on truth, His character and nature, which is the basis of the whole relationship.
I am far beyond this discussion.