Skip to comments.The Dirty Little Secret Is Out: Religious Faith and Evolution Are Incompatible
Posted on 03/20/2009 7:59:40 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
In a recent book review, Jerry Coyne, professor of ecology and evolution at the University of Chicago, admitted that the secular worldview of macroevolution (the development of complex life from simpler forms) is at odds with Christian faith...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
It is entirely possible to give due credit and respect to both, at the same time.
However they are not at odds with Evolutionary Apologists.
Thought you guys might be interested.
Well, there goes the Roman Catholic Church.
It shows you what the Evos really think about old-age compromisers.
Why are so many so certain that God would not have used evolution for his creation process?
As Isaiah quoted God, “My thoughts are not your thoughts.”
I’m off to the movies. Thought you might be interesested in the VERY REVEALING comments of Jerry Coyne—GGG
Evolution is natural man’s thoughts.
What moron accepts theological conclusions from professors of ecology?
Good post billy, lots of us believers in Jesus Christ believe this.
God gave me a brain. I use it. The world is more than 6500 yrs. old. There are 70 branches of science that testify to this. More than abundance of evidence. Yet, you are obsessed with evolution. Bizarre. And here come the anti-catholic rants. Flame on fool.
Stupid conclusion. Belief in God does not preclude any evolution. After all, with God all things are ossible. Also, how then would a scientist define how evolution could evolve from Nothing????
It is not totally incompatible to believe in a God and to also have some belief in evolution/creation. The Catholic viewpoint is that evolution can be a legitimate explanation of the development of mammals, yet to be a Christian, one must understand and believe in the ultimate concept that God had to create something which evolved, that nothing comes from nothing. Also, at some time God infused a spirit/soul into humanity, and eventually began to reveal Himself to those humans.
How dare Dr. Coyne tell me that I can not believe in God and evolution at the same time. Just because his faith does not allow him to believe in science does not mean my faith can not. Coyne needs to learn to look outside of his narrow little mind.
“Belief” in evolution does not require faith.
If you believe in Christian doctrine, Faith is required for Grace. Without Faith there is no Grace.
Evolution has no such construct.
==What moron accepts theological conclusions from professors of ecology?
That’s professor of ecology —AND— evolution. That makes him a double moron.
Enjoy. I would highly recommend Grand Torino.
Why? What if God set the big bang in motion and knew all the laws of nature and thus predetermined everything including everything that has come since and will come after?
Then when he had to explain it to people 2000 years ago he’s like “Hmmm I don’t think these dudes are going to understand DNA and physics why don’t I just tell them a story so they get the basic point that I made everything”?
“Why are so many so certain that God would not have used evolution for his creation process?
As Isaiah quoted God, My thoughts are not your thoughts.”
Was that your best shot at a verse to back up your own beliefs?
You can do better than that, but in the meantime you have to toss out the entire book of Genesis along with most of the rest of the Bible.
What moron accepts evolutionary conclusions from theologions?
Right. St. Thomas Aquinas said that you should not argue faith against fact if it made faith look absurd.
Thank you. I saw Grand Torino...and it was indeed awesome.
How is this axiomatic, if it isn't so?
[[Why are so many so certain that God would not have used evolution for his creation process?]]
Because irt takes a GREATER faith to beleive in a process that is biologically, mathematically, chemically, and naturally impossible than it does to beleive God said exactly what He meant- When God looked aroudn hte garden for a mate for Adam, and found none- How long would Adam have had to wait while Macroevolution beat al lthe impossible odds against it (Which aren’t just trivial improbabilities, but SERIOUS odds)? Did he live billions of years while Eve ‘evolved from goo? Or did God itnentionally lie to us all when He said Adam had no mate, and that He put Adam to sleep and made Him a mate, and then awoke Adam? How are you goign to explain this away?
Thanks GodGunsGuts. Maybe later. :’)
I also love Bible “scholars” who believe it is both literal and metaphorical, depending on their needs.
This question is exactly the reason the Vatican recently hosted the conference under the theme "Biological Evolution: Facts and Theories. A critical appraisal 150 years after The Origin of Species," March 3-7. The summit is part of the Vatican co-sponsored STOQ Project (Science, Theology and the Ontological Quest).
What moron accepts theological conclusions from evolutionists?
How did we begin to populate the earth?
Of course you can give respect to them at the same time, you’ll just be in error.
People are in error on all sorts of things.
Read the bible instead of spouting a slogan. They had more than two offspring.
If God used macroevolution then there is a big problem. Evolution requires death. The bible states clearly that prior to man’s fall there was no death. Not just man’s death but all death. Paul says all of creation groans under the weight of the curse. By one man (Adam) death entered creation, and by another (Jesus) death was ultimately defeated.
Especially Bible literalism. Thanks for pointing that out. Its self evident, I know, but alot of freeper need to preach otherwise.
“”If you disagree with me not only are you wrong but also a pagan heathen.””
I’ve been taunted into these little discussions one too many times. You little Evos lick your wounds and act like hurt little puppies while you hurl insults... at least that’s what most of them do. Yet somehow, none of you will give an answer as to what it is you really believe and what the basis for those beliefs are. Odd, I think.
I for one think the Bible is literal except where it is alluded to that the parable is obvious. Unlike evolutionists who bend rib bones and pig skulls into people groups.
Not interested in the circular argument, my friend. I just don’t happen to think Evolution and Christianity can co-exist.
Only a fool says there is no God.
This “professor” must not be a Catholic. Catholicism says evolution is a scientific fact. As a Catholic, I’m fine with this because evolution is a fact of life.
I like Sir Isaac Newton: "Nature's Laws are God's thoughts." I wouldn't expect brightboy Coyne here to understand.
Those weren’t hte only children conceived by Adam and Eve. Man and woman were created with pure genes- no mutaitons- (and htis has been confirmed by a secular genetic investigaiton which foudn that hte further they traced the mtdna back, the purer it became)- As such, inbreeding did not have the dire consequences that we have today, and children born to a sister brother relationship were not genetically altered liek htye woudl be today- hence the taboo today on relations between close relatives. As the genetic code became corrupted via mutations (brought on by sin mind you- before hte fall, there was no problem), there came a tiem when relations of close relatives was no logner a viable means of populating hte earth with viable offspring, and it was then forbidden.
Why Evolution is impossible-
Evolution: Possible or impossible:
Why are so many so certain God could not have used creation for His creation process?
As Isaiah quoted God, My thoughts are not your thoughts.
Well, if God's thoughts are not man's thoughts, then man's thoughts about evolution are wrong cause God told us in Genesis that He spoke creation into existence.
I just love how evos say that religion has no place in Scripture and that you can't prove God and then turn around and try to use Scripture to support evolution.
You sneer out of disbelief. The Bible does have both literal and metaphorical meaning. It also has past, present and future meaning. How to explain to a scoffer? Well, I guess starting out by saying that those old Rabbis were just into that sort of thing. So was Isaac Newton.
I, myself, love scientific "scholars" who profess to know where the center of the universe is located, such as yourself in a previous exchange.
So, starlifter, just where is the center of the universe? I've been on pins and needles for a month.
“The dirty little secrete, you have a really large obsession.”
What’s a “dirty little secrete”?
Sounds nasty to me... you might wanna have a doctor take a look at that.
What are they?
How do they testify to that?