Again with the Evolution stuff?

Question

Why do Christians always attempt to deconstruct this particular theory, when there's others that equally cast doubt on a literal bible? Other than the occasional dig at the Big Bang, of course. Why do we never see anything on geology and rock strata? Nothing on heavier elements being formed in supernovae? Quantum indeterminancy?

Is it just a nagging unease about possibly being distantly related to primates, or something else?

Stackoladan: I accept that not all Christians believe these things. I was mostly addressing the ones who do. No offence to yourself intended :)

Whoever pointed out atheists don't raise these points either: Well, you haven't read many of my answers, presumably. Can't speak for the rest, given that we're not all in some big card-carrying atheist club.

Answer 1

I've always wondered this myself.

When everything gathered from the fields of physics, geology, chemistry, genetics, comparative anatomy, astronomy and cosmology is all equally incompatible with a literal reading of Genesis, why do they focus their attacks on the theory of evolution?

I thought maybe it was because they thought they could understand the theory of evolution, and thus refute it, but judging by the responses on this board, they don't even know what a theory is, let alone the actual evidence which supports evolution.

Then I thought maybe it's because there's so much evidence to support evolution, they can cherry pick some of the more puzzling bits to pick holes in the theory. But instead of picking the puzzling bits (i.e. conodonts, macharidians), they continually go back to the same debunked arguments, over and over and over and over and over and over again - in many cases, more than 150 years after they were debunked.

I'm beginning to think it's more akin to the way an autistic child will continually ram his head against the wall. No matter how much you try to convince him it's conterproductive, no matter how many times you explain the same points over and over and over again, it just doesn't sink in.

Answer 2

OMG - why can't both be correct within all our limited thinking and awarenesses?

How about this one

God created the big bang and made things that go through evolutionary processes. Just look around. That is what the Bible is talking about a revolutionary evolutionary process of faith and awareness. By the way, science knows that we are more like sheep mechanics-wise than apes. (That is why they cloned the sheep not the ape). Which of course is supported by Jesus the shepherd and all his references to sheep (us). But that doesn't mean I came from sheep any more than an oak tree evolved from a cattail reed.

Truth will out regardless of which side of 'the fence' a person is on. Offer, suggest, provide information, and if not well received move on or, 'kick the dust of your feet and move on down the road' in other words.

Until science provides the 'missing link' science can't stand on its own feet here and is as open to fallibility as much the other side thinks biblical fallacy exists.

Why do I even bother answering? People think what they choose to think based on imbedded theology or other imbedded trainings. Takes alot to move from there into true 'free thought' where there just may be more truth than someone is willing or able to see.

God is, whether we believe it or not. Argue all you want. I think there will be alot of surprised folks 'in heaven'. Surprised that they aren't the only ones. And since In my Father's house are many mansions - we won't have to get into controversy over it. We can move into acceptance. Heavenly thought acceptance. (doesn't necessairly mean approval).
:) Just my opinion folks, don't kill me for it.

Answer 3

Evolution does not comply with a literal translation of the Bible. It's moronic to think that infinite wisdom would translate well to human concepts 2000 years ago. Take into consideration that this message was passed by oral tradition for centuries before transcription and later canonization giving each of its storytellers an opportunity to add a little flair of their own. (the children's game of "Telephone") By the end, the story could have changed quite dramatically. The Bible may contain the word of God, but it certainly is not inerrant, literal, reconcilable with scientific observation. If you take it as metaphorically the messages make much more sense.

Given the majority of answers/questions on here, you wouldn't expect most people to have thought this out on their own, so give them a break.

Answer 4

You do realize this is not the Christian norm, but it is a Christian generalization. I am a Christian, and I believe in evolution and the big bang. Actually, I am very interested in quantum theory, origins of the universe and evolution. And I have a BS in molecular biology. So, please don't generalize that Christians have this anti-scientific belief. Some do, but not all.

Answer 5

Using pseudo science to disprove actual science is always good for a laugh. They also like to stress the fact that it is a theory as if that somehow discredits it. They apparently don't know the difference between a theory and a hypothesis.

Answer 6

Is God the fabrication wrought from the sense of awe experienced as we uncover the mysteries of nature ?

I think that is the real question today.

My answer to this is that yes in part He is the product of imagination/conclusion, but the HUMAN part of our nature ie the kindness, curiosity, wonderment,sense of joy, the congealing of all the senses to an integrated ganglion capable of producing original conception makes me conclude that this is put together by an intelligence far beyond our own, and far beyond our comprhension.

Answer 7

I think it just messes with their egos more. It's more offensive to them that we're related to animals (or that we *are* animals) than that the earth is millions of years older than the Bible says. That's also why they focus so much on the monkey/ape issue rather than the millions of other things they could focus on; they're afraid it would mean that humans aren't as important as we wish we were.

Answer 8

I am also tired of hearing "well if we descended from apes, why are they still around? huh? huh?"
Who said that we are descended from the apes you see today?
They also descended from a common primate somewhere that was probably much larger! The earth had a lot more available oxygen back then, and many species were much larger than they are today.

Answer 9

And you're thinking that the earth just happened to be the exact distance from the sun, and some slime started to reproduce and we came from that? Now where did that slime come from? Did it just develop into a monkey and then we came from the monkey, but what did the monkey evolve from?
Could it be that there is a Supreme Being out there?Nah, we came from the slime via the monkey.

Answer 10

Could it be they have no idea what those other things are?
Which makes sense because to dismiss Evolution really means they don't understand it, or never tried to.