Replies

DaveLoneRanger is handling the ping list because most of us are tired of being attacked by those who either hate God or who are deceived by those who hate God into believing that God is impotent and irrelevant, and that “all this” just came about because of chance. It’s a tiring discussion to have to refute what evolutionists consider “evidence” that supports their anti-God theory.

We’re tired of continuing to provide evidence that Reason exists, and that Reason brought “all this” about, that slime is not our cousin, that the evidence points to something other than “evolution.”

I don’t know if you’re a Christian or not. If you are, of course you don’t need to believe Scripture and the evidence to be saved. You simply need to have a humble relationship with Christ. If you are a Christian, though, there’s a joy and liberation to be able to believe the evidence and Scripture, to stand in awe of what the Lord has done, rather than to believe in the theory that God is a liar and is not involved.

If you’re not a Christian, then your position on evolution naturally follows from your God-is-irrelevant presupposition.

i>DaveLoneRanger is handling the ping list because most of us are tired of being attacked by those who either hate God or who are deceived by those who hate God into believing that God is impotent and irrelevant, and that “all this” just came about because of chance. It’s a tiring discussion to have to refute what evolutionists consider “evidence” that supports their anti-God theory.

The use of Evolution to attack Christianity is not justified. It is a scientific abuse by such an attacker because science is impotent to address issues of faith. Evolution is neither pro-God or anti-God.

Evolution has happened and continues to happen with every passing generation of every living thing. Natural selection is the theory that explains these observations.

My biggest problem isn't with Christianity, for I am Christian. My issue is with the literal interpretation of Genesis which is not supported by physical observation. To me, it is the interpretation that needs to be re-examined, not denied. My faith is not threatened by a world billions of years old and a dwelling place for creatures that faded to extinction long before we were here. There is great awe in that.

There is no evidence of any kind that supports a 6 day creation about 6000-10000 years ago. Genetics undeniably does show that 'slime' is a distant biological relation to us.

Like I told DLR, one must understand his opposition before trying to counter it. I have yet to meet a creationist who has done this.