Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Evolution vs. God: Shaking the foundations of Faith
Way of the Master ministries ^ | Oct 2, 2013 | Ray Comfort

Posted on 10/17/2013 1:18:41 PM PDT by redleghunter

If you are familiar with Ray Comfort and the man on the street Way of the Master ministries, you will like this video. WoM ministries produced the linked youtube 30 minute video on Evolution vs. God. Ray and crew go to two CA universities to interview and debate science students and science faculty on Darwinian evolution.

So please set aside a half hour from your busy schedule and enjoy "Evolution vs. God."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0u3-2CGOMQ#t=743


TOPICS: Ministry/Outreach; Moral Issues; Religion & Science; Skeptics/Seekers
KEYWORDS: bible; evolution; faith; intelligentdesign
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last
A brilliant approach by the WoM crew. Christians are told their faith is blind. After viewing this video you find just how much those who cling to atheism and evolution take that "blind leap into the dark" faith with evolution.
1 posted on 10/17/2013 1:18:41 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Fun for later.


2 posted on 10/17/2013 1:20:49 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Waiting for next tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

The THEORY of evolution does not preclude the fact of God. They are not mutually exclusive ideas.

The problem is that we have no way to understand the concept of eternity.


3 posted on 10/17/2013 1:22:57 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Life is a subset of creation.

How did the universe evolve?


4 posted on 10/17/2013 1:24:45 PM PDT by ex-snook (God is Love)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

for later


5 posted on 10/17/2013 1:25:06 PM PDT by deweyfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter
http://www.pray-as-you-go.org/mp3/PAYG_131018.mp3
6 posted on 10/17/2013 1:26:35 PM PDT by Berlin_Freeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

False dichotomy.


7 posted on 10/17/2013 1:29:31 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Lets play the God V Evolution game.

Watch the video and score yourself:

10 points for every stray man
15 points for every false premise
5 points for any logic fallacy (specify)


8 posted on 10/17/2013 1:29:59 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

>>Life is a subset of creation.<<

Everything is a subset of creation.

>>How did the universe evolve?<<

If physics, geology, chemistry and astronomy are not compelled to answer the question of abiogenesis as a prerequisite, neither is TToE.


9 posted on 10/17/2013 1:31:45 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Evolution is simply not possible. Natural selection cannot make new species. Mutations are nearly always destructive, or, at best, do not add anything significant to a species. Lamarckianism has been shown to be false. What were once viewed as vestigial organs and structures, i.e. holdovers from an evolutionary past, are now shown to have a function. “Junk DNA,” containing the failed evolutionary experiments of a species is not present. The history of paleontology is rife with fakes, frauds, and fudged date. Furthermore, the DNA molecule is information, and information always has an intelligent source. Indeed, it takes a very blind leap of faith to hold to Darwinism.


10 posted on 10/17/2013 1:31:50 PM PDT by attiladhun2 (The Free World has a new leader--his name is Benjamin Netanyahu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: attiladhun2

>>Evolution is simply not possible. Natural selection cannot make new species. Mutations are nearly always destructive, or, at best, do not add anything significant to a species. Lamarckianism has been shown to be false. What were once viewed as vestigial organs and structures, i.e. holdovers from an evolutionary past, are now shown to have a function. “Junk DNA,” containing the failed evolutionary experiments of a species is not present. The history of paleontology is rife with fakes, frauds, and fudged date. Furthermore, the DNA molecule is information, and information always has an intelligent source. Indeed, it takes a very blind leap of faith to hold to Darwinism.<<

Every single statement is scientifically incorrect (except maybe the one about fakes, which science itself discovered — religion has no such ability to police itself).

And there is no such thing as “Darwanism.”


11 posted on 10/17/2013 1:36:08 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Religious people who disrespect science are every bit as annoying as scientific people who disrespect faith.


12 posted on 10/17/2013 1:36:59 PM PDT by Catmom (We're all gonna get the punishment only some of us deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Evolution is the only explanation for the existence of leftist vermin. If God specially created them then he is not good.


13 posted on 10/17/2013 1:42:47 PM PDT by Wanderer99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

To the headline: who’s faith, not mine


14 posted on 10/17/2013 1:46:42 PM PDT by svcw (Not 'hope and change' but 'dopes in chains' obama's America)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

I would agree that the most common error in the dialog between science and theology is on the misunderstanding of evolution, its evidence and its shortcomings.
Those on the religious side discount all of evolution’s points based on an interpretation of Genesis which is uncompromisingly literal when a compelling argument can be made that much of it is beautifully poetic and symbolic.
Those on the science side exploit the layman’s knowledge of most people to try and extrapolate from evidence conclusions that simply don’t follow. Lawrence Krauss does this continually with physics. It’s ridiculous to pretend evolution is some airtight theory that disputes God. It has many deep problems, and things it can’t explain, like the puzzling Cambrian explosion.

You also have that origin of life question. Over time, mathematicians have found that the spontaneous creation of life on earth is so improbable, you’d be surprised how many scientists genuinely believe life on earth was seeded by aliens.


15 posted on 10/17/2013 1:47:39 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

“seeded by aliens” just pushes the problem to another planet.


16 posted on 10/17/2013 1:48:55 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
"There is no such thing as 'Darwanism'"

This gentleman disagrees...


17 posted on 10/17/2013 1:48:59 PM PDT by who_would_fardels_bear
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
"If physics, geology, chemistry and astronomy are not compelled to answer the question of abiogenesis as a prerequisite, neither is TToE."

Nope no escape. If they make the 'no creator theory' that evolution does they have to answer for the existence of matter as well as life.

18 posted on 10/17/2013 1:49:08 PM PDT by ex-snook (God is Love)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

So you are claiming Lamarckianism is true?


19 posted on 10/17/2013 1:49:57 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

>>Nope no escape. If they make the ‘no creator theory’ that evolution does they have to answer for the existence of matter as well as life.<<

Since TToE makes no such representation, it is on par with its fellow branches of science.


20 posted on 10/17/2013 1:50:38 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Since TToE makes no such representation, it is on par with its fellow branches of science."

Science is therefor insufficient to explain the origin of matter.

21 posted on 10/17/2013 1:53:47 PM PDT by ex-snook (God is Love)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ifinnegan

>>So you are claiming Lamarckianism is true?<<

I made no such statement nor can one be inferred from my post(s).


22 posted on 10/17/2013 1:53:52 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Ah, but it allows you to say “Well, we don’t know what the conditions on this alien planet would be. Perhaps they might make life more probable!”

There is another problem that presents itself however. Let’s say aliens did seed life on earth.
One of the problems evolution has encountered is with each successive discovery, it seems the first life has been pushed further back in time. That shortens the amount of time available for the variables to line up, decreasing the probability.
How many years would an alien species take to evolve to the level of space travel required to reach earth from the nearest possible system? Far longer than earths’ history for sure. So we’re pushing the time back further. And what if life on the alien planet was just as unlikely as here, and was in fact seeded by ANOTHER alien race? With each successive ‘seeding’ the probability would get closer and closer to bumping up against a period where no life could have existed in the universe, period.


23 posted on 10/17/2013 1:55:42 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

I see now this is in the Religion forum.

I shall now retire from the thread at least knowing I have informed lurkers many of us Conservatives do know and embrace science AND do not buy into invented false dichotomies of faith vs. science (there is no conflict).

Have a good day all.


24 posted on 10/17/2013 1:55:45 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

I would fully agree with this statement. Since matter (as we known it) comes into being with the creation of the ‘natural world’, science cannot exceed its bounds to before that time. When the ‘natural world’ begins, science begins. When the ‘natural world’ ends, science ends.


25 posted on 10/17/2013 1:57:18 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

bfl


26 posted on 10/17/2013 2:01:22 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

Theory is the highest level of proof in science. Newton’s Laws of Motion were corrected by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity.


27 posted on 10/17/2013 2:14:21 PM PDT by muir_redwoods (Don't fire until you see the blue of their helmets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

Darwin at 22 after leaving Christ’s College, Cambridge, and previously raised in a Unitarian environment, jumped upon the opportunity to join a an evangelical trip abroad on the converted brig ship, the Beagle, to return Christianized natives to Tierra Del Fuego circa 1832, personally financed by his father’s 400 pound annual allowance and labeled himself a self-financed gentleman’s companion to the 26 year old Captain.

The Christian communities at that time believed in the harmony of science and theology, but sought to explain Scripture based upon science, rather than science upon the Providence of God. Cambridge considered his findings more heretical than scientific a he definitely lacked the prior academic background to be considered a postgraduate student at the time. Many of his assertions for transmutation were within several years pointed out as improper identification of well known species and improper labeling, rather than ancient evolutionary evidence.

The consequence of begging the question, placing science before God, simply seeks to justify its premise by reasserting its premise, placing the Creation before the Creator.


28 posted on 10/17/2013 2:14:26 PM PDT by Cvengr (Adversity in life and death is inevitable. Thru faith in Christ, stress is optional.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter
We have a Sunday morning TV show called Give Me An Answer. The pastor from a Connecticut church goes to different college campuses to debate with students about God and the Bible. The pastor knows his stuff and he can explain it in simple terms. He runs circles around the die hard atheists.
29 posted on 10/17/2013 2:23:14 PM PDT by peeps36 (I'm Not A Racist, I Hate Douchebags f All Colors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
So Lamarckianism is true? Mutations create new species? There are vestigial structures? There is junk DNA?What are you implying?

Scientists may have discovered the fakes, but there were many who regarded the fakes as genuine, even after the fakery was discovered. I used to have the same kind of awe for scientists you seem to have. However, the alar scare, the global cooling and then the global warming scares, the population-bomb scare, the running out of resources scare, hocky-stick graphs, and a number of other things have showed me that scientists are often wrong and very often defend their errors with vehemence.
30 posted on 10/17/2013 2:27:50 PM PDT by attiladhun2 (The Free World has a new leader--his name is Benjamin Netanyahu)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

pfl


31 posted on 10/17/2013 2:29:31 PM PDT by RedHeeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Someone wrote a series of statements including:

“Lamarckianism has been shown to be false”

To which you responded:

“Every single statement is scientifically incorrect”


32 posted on 10/17/2013 2:32:54 PM PDT by ifinnegan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

“If physics, geology, chemistry and astronomy are not compelled to answer the question of abiogenesis as a prerequisite, neither is TToE.”

Ok, sure. However, you do need to establish common descent as a prerequisite, which you cannot do.


33 posted on 10/17/2013 2:35:47 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

“And there is no such thing as “Darwanism.””

Have you called up Stanford and informed them of this yet? They’re still listing it in their encyclopedia of philosophy as if it was an actual thing!

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/darwinism/


34 posted on 10/17/2013 2:38:28 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wanderer99

God didn’t create any man as a leftist. He just gave us free will, and some of us chose to become douchebags.


35 posted on 10/17/2013 2:39:46 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Catmom
Religious people who disrespect science are every bit as annoying as scientific people who disrespect faith.

There is something true in that, within reason. "Science says we are causing our planet to heat up."

36 posted on 10/17/2013 2:41:44 PM PDT by Tenacious 1 (Waiting for next tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Wanderer99
If God specially created them then he is not good.

Well we all have our crosses to bear....Liberals are one of them.

37 posted on 10/17/2013 2:43:27 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: attiladhun2

What troubles me is how scientists who balk at evolution are treated by their peers who espouse the evolutionary line. Reminds me of close-minded liberals.


38 posted on 10/17/2013 2:51:09 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
God didn’t create any man as a leftist. He just gave us free will, and some of us chose to become douchebags.

Nonsense. None of us could be as stupid as them. Not even if we tried our hardest. It's one thing to consciously choose evil out of rebellion against God. It's an entirely different thing to a mindless, soulless left-wing goon.
39 posted on 10/17/2013 3:15:25 PM PDT by Wanderer99
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: attiladhun2
Indeed, it takes a very blind leap of faith to hold to Darwinism.

For a scientist...For the average Joe, not so much...Actually you don't have to know anything about it other than it's the antithesis of Christianity...

40 posted on 10/17/2013 3:20:22 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Catmom
Religious people who disrespect science are every bit as annoying as scientific people who disrespect faith.

1Ti_6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Evolution is falsely called science...Perhaps God annoys you as well...

41 posted on 10/17/2013 3:24:27 PM PDT by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Cvengr; All

There are two ideas, that without the existence of each, I should have become the most ardent of atheists....

The question of the origins of matter and energy which science can not even begin to touch and this premise of Paul’s...”If there be no resurrection of the dead, (including the first born of men, Christ Jesus) then let us eat, drink, and be merry for tomorrow we die!”

Everything about Christianity hinges on the resurrection of Jesus. For it proves God’s love for man and it also supports everything else in the Bible as being true. If Christianity be not truth, then there is no other truth....thus why bother to live righteously, love your neighbor, help the stranger? Life would be nothing but a party, assuming you are the one at the top of the food chain...otherwise life becomes the law of tooth and claw, the survival of the fittest!


42 posted on 10/17/2013 3:38:35 PM PDT by mdmathis6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: redleghunter

Bookmarking to read and share; thanks.


43 posted on 10/17/2013 3:55:37 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town

Are you saying God was incapable to create as revealed?


44 posted on 10/17/2013 3:59:27 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Come on you can do better than that.


45 posted on 10/17/2013 4:00:15 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DManA

Making assumptions without viewing?


46 posted on 10/17/2013 4:01:07 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Catmom
Religious people who disrespect science are every bit as annoying as scientific people who disrespect faith.

A good statement, however nothing of the kind happens in the video.

47 posted on 10/17/2013 4:04:01 PM PDT by redleghunter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I believe many Christians who believe in evolution do so because they don’t want to be seen as backward. It’s important to them for others to view them as intellectual, etc.

Personally, I couldn’t care less what people think of me.

Evolution and Christianity do not complement each other. In the New Testament, Jesus said that God created people “in the beginning.” Evolution teaches that humans are a recent arrival in the scheme of things.

Further, the Biblical creation account describes the Garden as a paradise with no death or suffering, until the fall. Evolution teaches millions of years of bloodshed among animals before mankind arrived. Evolution says death, suffering, and pain brought man into existence; the Bible says man’s sinful actions led to death. The two are completely contradictory.

Scripture says that God ended the work of Creation after He made it. It’s not still in the process of being finished and perfected. Right now the world and everything in it are under the curse that resulted from mans’ fall-—groaning in pain, waiting for God to restore it.

Upon finishing His work of creation, God looked on it and pronounced it “good.” But how could He, a holy, loving God, have called it that if He required millions of years of suffering and dying to finish it? That’s not what we know God’s nature to be.


48 posted on 10/17/2013 4:22:18 PM PDT by CatherineofAragon ((Support Christian white males----the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town
The THEORY of evolution does not preclude the fact of God. They are not mutually exclusive ideas.

Indeed. Science can no more prove nor disprove God existence.

The problem is that we have no way to understand the concept of eternity

I tried that, as a young Catholic. Trust me, just accept it or it will drive you nuts.
49 posted on 10/17/2013 4:41:12 PM PDT by 98ZJ USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jim from C-Town; redleghunter
The THEORY of evolution does not preclude the fact of God. They are not mutually exclusive ideas.

The problem is that we have no way to understand the concept of eternity.

According to Darwinist William Provine and conservative Evangelicals one cannot correctly hold both views.

“Modern science directly implies that the world is organized strictly in accordance with deterministic principles or chance. There are no purposive principles whatsoever in nature. There are no gods and no designing forces that are rationally detectable. The frequently made assertion that modern biology and the assumptions of the Judaeo-Christian tradition are fully compatible is false.” William B. Provine, “Progress in Evolution and Meaning in Life,” in Evolutionary Progress, ed. Matthew H. Nitecki (University of Chicago Press, 1988), p. 65

50 posted on 10/17/2013 4:45:49 PM PDT by GarySpFc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson