Creation and Evolution Compatible...Questions

[gnostic]

What did you believe though? If you got Christendom's version of "Christianity" then you had the same choices that I did. I was raised in the church system....I realized in my late teens that it was complete rubbish! Different versions of the same lies. No one really followed what Jesus taught.

But you agree as with all Christians that Isaiah’s sign had to do with Mary, virgin birth and Jesus, which make your JW view in alignment to all other Christian teachings.

So you accusing other Christians and other churches being corrupted or false teachings, you are being hypocritical and bias because your JW actually shared the same views as other churches.

You cannot accuse others being not “true Christians” when you and your JW are in the same boat.

 

[Deeje]

Immanuel is Maher-shalal-hash-baz, not Jesus. The signs (in 7 & 8) all relate to both king of Assyria and the invasion of Judah.

Isaiah's sons were given as a "sign"......Immanuel is both Isaiah's son and the son of Mary in a prophetic sense.

You seemed to be forgetting, Deeje, is my points bringing up the sign of Immanuel, is that it was my first doubt (in 2014) on Christian interpretation of the bible.

You did not really have a "Christian" interpretation of the Bible to begin with.....you had "Christendom's" interpretation....just like I did. That is NOT Christianity. There are so many introduced ideas in Christendom's teachings that they miss the point of everything. They ignore much of what Jesus taught but slavishly follow their introduced traditions.

The names given to "the son" of prophesy in Isaiah were not in his official designations. Where will I find Jesus called "Wonderful Counsellor"...."Mighty God"...."Eternal Father" or "Prince of Peace"? (Isaiah 9:6-7)

You stated earlier in the thread, that I have been indoctrinated by the evolutionists.

Do you think that indoctrination by the teachings of evolution did not fit snugly into the void created by your unbelief? What exists in a vacuum?

No, there was no indoctrination by science. It was me rethinking the whole bible without Christian preconceptions that started me doubting Matthew 1:22-23 and Isaiah 7:14.

That was the origin of my agnosticism, not Evolution vs Genesis creation. I didn’t join the Evolution vs Creation until 2003.

Whenever it was that you filled the void, your unconscious mind was trying to find what would fit in it. You obviously found what you were looking for......but so did I....and they were two opposite conclusions.

I examined the evidence that was put forward by evolutionists to remove the possibility of a Creator, and it has had the opposite effect. The more evidence I saw the more I was convinced that our existence on this planet in this vast universe is no accident. You need to step back to see the big picture.

I did question Genesis creation in 2000-2003, but not from evolution or biology standpoint, but from Christians identifying the serpent to Satan/Devil.

I disagree with Christian argument that Satan was Eden’s serpent (Genesis 3) as well as with Christian view that Satan was Lucifer (Isaiah 14:12).

What is your issue with the identity of satan the devil? The apostle John identified satan as the serpent in Eden. (Revelation 20:1-3) Nowhere in scripture is satan ever called "Lucifer" however.

According to Strongs,

"Lucifer = "light-bearer"

shining one, morning star, Lucifer."

In other translations this one is called.....

"day-star, son of the morning" (ASV)
"Shining morning star" (Hollman)
"O Day Star, son of Dawn" (ESV)
"O star of the morning, son of the dawn" (NASB)

Interestingly, satan is called "an angel of light" in 2 Corinthians 11:14-15.

There can be dual meanings to many things.

These are more Christian colouring Jewish Hebrew texts.

Like I said, its who you believe.....the Jewish texts were already 'colored' when Jesus walked the earth.

"The Jewish religious leaders had added to the written Word many verbal traditions that they viewed as indispensable to true worship. Paul (Saul), as a Pharisee before his conversion to Christianity, was unusually zealous to follow the traditions of Judaism. These would, of course, include the unobjectionable ones as well as the bad ones. But by following the “commands of men as doctrines,” he was led to be a persecutor of Christians. (Matthew 15:9) For instance, they ‘did not eat unless they washed their hands up to the elbow, holding fast the tradition of the men of former times.’ (Mark 7:3) Among those men, this practice was not for hygienic purposes, but it was a ceremonious ritual that supposedly had religious merit. Christ showed that they had no basis for criticizing his disciples for not following that and other unnecessary “commands of men.” (Matthew 15:1, 2, 7-11; Mark 7:4-8; Isaiah 29:13) Furthermore, by their tradition regarding “corban” (a gift dedicated to God) the religious leaders had made God’s Word invalid, overstepping the commandment of God.—Exodus 20:12; 21:17; Matthew 15:3-6; Mr 7:9-15.

Neither Jesus nor his disciples ever quoted oral Jewish tradition to support their teachings but, rather, appealed to the written Word of God. (Matthew 4:4-10; Romans 15:4; 2Timothy 3:15-17) Once the Christian congregation was established, observance of the unscriptural Jewish traditions amounted to a “fruitless form of conduct” that Jewish persons had ‘received by tradition from their forefathers [Gr., pa·tro·pa·ra·doʹtou, “given along from fathers”].’ (1Peter 1:18) Upon becoming Christians, those Jews abandoned such traditions."
Tradition — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Things are not always what they seem....

 

[Deeje]

But you agree as with all Christians that Isaiah’s sign had to do with Mary, virgin birth and Jesus, which make your JW view in alignment to all other Christian teachings.

It was the angel Gabriel who announced that Jesus would be born of a virgin. (Luke 1:26-35)
Why would the prophesy in Isaiah not relate to the manner of Jesus birth? It was a sign....and Isaiah's wife was not a virgin when she gave birth to her second son. It was the meaning of the name "Immanuel" ("With us is God") that was important. God was with his people when Jesus began his ministry. Previous to that God said that the sheep in Israel were lost. He sent his son to them, not to the Pharisees.

So you accusing other Christians and other churches being corrupted or false teachings

No...they accuse themselves by what they teach and what they practice.

you are being hypocritical and bias because your JW actually shared the same views as other churches.

We share very little with any of them. If you cared to actually find out how we differ, you might be surprised at how much you can agree with.

You cannot accuse others being not “true Christians” when you and your JW are in the same boat.

Not even in the same ocean.....

 

[ecco]

It is obvious to me that anything that cannot be proven requires faith and belief. Evolution, (which cannot be proven according to the scientists here) requires as much, if not more faith and belief IMO than ID does. Evolutionists just can't admit it.

If you understood science, you wouldn't be harping on the word "proof". Science is about evidence. There is overwhelming evidence, from every relevant branch of science, supporting evolution.

Fundamentalists just can't admit it because that would go against their belief in Genesis.

 

[ecco]

We humans need to have purpose. It goes with having a concept of the future and planning for it. Animals do not have this capacity. A meaningless life with no purpose but selfish concerns benefits no one.

I have purpose in my life. I am not selfish. I have concerns for the benefit of others. Ask my wife, my children, my relatives, my friends. Ask anyone who knows me.


Why do you believe that atheists have no purpose in life? Why do you believe that the lives of atheists are meaningless? Why do you believe that atheists are selfish? Is it because you were taught from your early childhood that atheists were evil? That was part of you religious indoctrination, wasn't it? It still is part of your religious indoctrination isn't it? Is that part of what you are indoctrinating others into believing?

 

[ecco]

You don't know much about JW do you? The majority of JW's on earth today have no desire to go to heaven. God's purpose in the beginning was to have humans live forever on earth. This is "home" to us.

But your life on earth - afterwards - is eternal isn't it? Think about it, really think about it. In just ten million years you would be so bored that you would pray for death. What would there be to look forward to? What could you do that you hadn't already done thousands of times. How often could you have the same conversations with the same people - over and over and over.

 

[ecco]

.... What do atheists have to look forward to? They only have today to accomplish whatever it is they need to do in life. No one is guaranteed tomorrow. Once it's over, it's over. How can that be a satisfying thought?

Atheists look forward to many enjoyable tomorrows. If a next tomorrow doesn't come, it doesn't come. Acceptance of death is acceptance of reality. Some people don't want to, cannot, accept reality, so they delude themselves into hoping/believing there is something beyond death.

What if you were a person finally completing many years of a university degree, with great plans for the future and a promising career, but whose life is lost in a car accident before they can use any of their education.....just a tragedy?

It's not a tragedy if the person enjoyed the many years of learning and living a good life while doing it.

 

[ecco]

....or a child born in a third world country, put to hard labor in a mine with no choices about anything? Is that child really living? Who cares about these children? In this day and age, has man's rulership given hope to anyone that they can ever get things right? You have to have faith in them, because who else is there?

Do you believe your god cares about them?

 

[ecco]

It's funny how atheists can sit in judgment on the Being who is responsible for their existence.

I don't sit in judgement of figments of peoples imaginations. Occasionally I do sit in judgement of people who believe the figments of their imagination are real and try to impose their beliefs on others.

 

[ecco]

Since you have a very distorted view of this Being and his activities, it is your conclusions that are sad. If you even took the time to see the big picture rather than staring at a few apparently dead pixels, you would understand that digging deeper reveals more evidence.....just as it is suppose to do in science.

"staring at a few apparently dead pixels"? You certainly have a way with meaningless phrases.

I started "digging deeper" when I was about eight years old. I was sent to Sunday school to get some religion. The thing I remember most was the cutsey pictures of all the little animals with their heads sticking out of the top of the arc. What utter nonsense. Shortly thereafter I came to realize that god was no more real than any of my comic book characters.

More "digging" as I got older reinforced that conclusion. God? Which god? Why were there so many gods and why did so many people believe in them? It became obvious after a while that people believed in the god their parents taught them to believe in. The god of their early indoctrination. You know all about that, don't you.

 

[ecco]

You assume that all ID proponents are YEC's. That is not true. JW's believe in an old earth and a slow and deliberate process of creation over eons of time. The Genesis account does not disagree with this. Some deeper research will reveal that.

So when the Genesis account says on the first, second, etc day it doesn't really mean on the first, second, etc day. It's not about what is written, it's about how it's interpreted - right? Who decides which interpretation is right?

Everyone makes their own decision about which parts are literal and which parts are allegory. That's a heck of a disrespectful way to treat "The True Word Of God". As silly as are the claims of literal fundamentalists, I have more respect for them than I do for people who pick and choose to suit their own agendas.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So when the Genesis account says on the first, second, etc day it doesn't really mean on the first, second, etc day. It's not about what is written, it's about how it's interpreted - right? Who decides which interpretation is right?

Everyone makes their own decision about which parts are literal and which parts are allegory. That's a heck of a disrespectful way to treat "The True Word Of God". As silly as are the claims of literal fundamentalists, I have more respect for them than I do for people who pick and choose to suit their own agendas.

There is an amazing range in creationist beliefs. From Flat Earth YEC's to YEC's to OEC's and then theological evolution believers. And yet YEC's will rely on the work of theological evolution believers such as Michael Behe to support their errant beliefs even though Behe would clearly disagree with them.

 

[gnostic]

You did not really have a "Christian" interpretation of the Bible to begin with.....you had "Christendom's" interpretation....just like I did. That is NOT Christianity. There are so many introduced ideas in Christendom's teachings that they miss the point of everything. They ignore much of what Jesus taught but slavishly follow their introduced traditions.

Yes, but you still have exactly the same interpretations of Isaiah’s sign, thinking that the sign has to with Mary and Jesus, as every other Christians the same things.

You say that follow traditions, but your JW are actually based on the same scriptures, and since your view that the sign is about the virgin birth, then you are still thinking the same traditional view.

So you really are no different from “them”, and you are just being hypocritical, when you are trying to think your belief is different from their, when it is not.

 

[ecco]

...why? Because their position represents their "religion". Yes, science is a "religion" to some people.

That's a ridiculous comment. Science is not a religion to me nor is it to anyone who understands the English language:

re·li·gion
rəˈlijən/
noun
the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.
​

Why does it suit the purpose of so many theists to hold this nonsensical belief?

Accepting what science can prove, ...

There's that word prove again. Just a reminder, outside of mathematics, science is not in the business of proof. It is in the business of continually seeking evidence, continually throwing out bad evidence and continually accepting good evidence.

...and also seeing the plain evidence of design in creation, gives us plenty of space to accept both science and the Bible. Since we believe that God is responsible for both, we have no conflict. We are not anti-science, just anti-science fudging the truth....presenting suggestions as if they were real evidence.

The key words in what you wrote are "we believe". You believe because you were taught to believe your interpretations of what is written in your holy scripture just as other people believe in their interpretations of what is written their holy scripture. Everyone can't be right. But you know you are.

Your examples leave out the obvious law of "cause and effect". All of those things have a common cause.....why can't that great first cause be an all powerful Creator?

Besides wishful thinking, why does there need to be an all powerful creator?

Does science really KNOW that such a power cannot exist?

Does science really KNOW that psychic snowflakes cannot exist? Does that make psychic snowflakes real?

Why is such a belief so repugnant? Isn't it because of what creationists insist is the Bible's scenario?

It isn't repugnant, it's just childishly silly regardless of whose interpretation of the bible are used.

The truth is somewhere in the middle.....but balance is not easy for a lot of people.

There is no middle ground. EITHER gods are real OR gods are the creations of man's imaginings. It's a binary.

 

[gnostic]

Do you think that indoctrination by the teachings of evolution did not fit snugly into the void created by your unbelief?

No, it isn’t. I told you what my life was regarding to religion.

I began questioning Christian views a few years before I knew what Evolution is.

Why do you I throughout up the subject of the gospel and Isaiah’s sign?

Isaiah 7 is when I FIRST started questioning Christian prophecy of Jesus. It has nothing to do with evolution.

Can you not read that you cannot comprehend my replies?

I clearly stated why I am arguing that Matthew’s claim that Isaiah verse relating to Jesus and the virgin is wrong, because it completely ignore the rest of the verses relating to Immanuel.

You are making me repeating my points unnecessarily. My questioning the bible have nothing to do with evolution because the bloody bible is not a science book.

The only one who is currently under indoctrination is you, Deeje, and you cannot see what is front of your fact. You preferred fantasy and fairytales of talking serpent that you have become blind of everything else.

 

[ecco]

There is an amazing range in creationist beliefs. From Flat Earth YEC's to YEC's to OEC's and then theological evolution believers. And yet YEC's will rely on the work of theological evolution believers such as Michael Behe to support their errant beliefs even though Behe would clearly disagree with them.

 

[Subduction Zone]

One note when dealing with "proof". The word, like most words in the English language, has different meanings and standards. Science never "proves" anything in the mathematical sense and they wisely avoid using that word when discussing their work. But when dealing with people that have no science education, and especially those that have no concept of what is and what is not evidence, then one may sometimes use the same definition of "proof" as used in a court of law. In a court of law the standard is "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". Since creationists either do not understand what is and what is not evidence or they dishonestly ignore it they cannot have a reasonable doubt by definition. There is a reason that certain people are not allowed on juries, and those that have demonstrated that they cannot make a reasonable judgment are eliminated in the jury selection process. By the legal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" the theory of evolution has been proven. And if they have ever accepted a guilty verdict by a jury they demonstrate their own hypocrisy when they reject the theory of evolution.

When dealing with a creationist that demands "proof" one should make sure they understand that the proof must be of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" sort. Then one must see if they understand the concept of scientific evidence. There are simple tests to see if they understand the concept and due to their prejudices they will almost always fail. A simple question on the order of "Is Australopithecus afarensis evidence of human evolution?" will usually make them fail. When they deny that they demonstrate that they do not understand what is and what is not evidence. They are as a result unable to even form a reasonable doubt.

 

[Deeje]

If you understood science, you wouldn't be harping on the word "proof". Science is about evidence. There is overwhelming evidence, from every relevant branch of science, supporting evolution.

There is overwhelming 'suggestion'......the 'evidence' is all in the interpretation. Please be honest. Saying there is overwhelming evidence and providing it are two completely different things. Have you not noticed that whenever evolutionists provide a link and I show then what their link actually says, they never respond except to excuse the the uncertainty of the language.

Fundamentalists just can't admit it because that would go against their belief in Genesis.

Actually nothing in the evidence itself contradicts Genesis at all. What contradicts Genesis is the interpretation that science gives for its evidence. Its all about the "might haves" and the "could haves" and "this leads us to believe that...." You really believe that wishful thinking is a substitute for actual proof that what science says is actually true?
That is the language of belief based on suggestion....it permeates everything I have ever read on the subject. Most people read right over it as though it wasn't really a suggestion but a substantiated fact.....there is no such thing in regard to macro-evolution.

We humans need to have purpose. It goes with having a concept of the future and planning for it. Animals do not have this capacity. A meaningless life with no purpose but selfish concerns benefits no one.

I have purpose in my life. I am not selfish. I have concerns for the benefit of others. Ask my wife, my children, my relatives, my friends. Ask anyone who knows me.

My point was that because evolution teaches that we are nothing more than animals, we can then be excused for behaving like them.
Our actions are not excusable because we can anticipate where a certain course will lead. That makes everything that humans do, that causes harm to other humans or the planet, inexcusable. Who are the ones who dictate to others about what is done or not done...? Who makes the laws? Is justice really carried out anywhere? And yet you trust these people to govern you? If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. God has the solution, but most people think its a fairy tale. No one can force us to believe anything against our will.

Why do you believe that atheists have no purpose in life? Why do you believe that the lives of atheists are meaningless? Why do you believe that atheists are selfish?

It is my personal experience, after many years on these forums, that those who treat "believers" with the most contempt are usually atheists. They answer to no one but themselves.

How can life be meaningful if you can lose it tomorrow with no way to get it back? Life might be meaningful to an extent for some, but death is the end of it completely. Humans are not designed for death. Premature death always feels wrong. Why do we grieve?

Is it because you were taught from your early childhood that atheists were evil? That was part of you religious indoctrination, wasn't it? It still is part of your religious indoctrination isn't it? Is that part of what you are indoctrinating others into believing?

Well actually, all I have to do is look at the impact that godless science has made on this planet in the last 100 years or so. Most scientists who push evolution are atheists. It isn't about what I was taught, as much as what I observe with my own eyes and ears.

People who identify as "Christians" must of necessity follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and imitate his example as much as humanly possible. None of us are perfect at it, but real Christians will have the courage of their convictions. They will not cower when the big boys get heavy on the ridicule and derision in an effort to force weak ones to acquiesce or to compromise.
Its easy to call yourself whatever you like, but its what you do that determines the truthfulness of the designation.

I've been here a long time and no one to date has been able to provide evidence to scientifically back up what they suggest. I see the theory of evolution as an elaborate castle built on matchsticks. The emperors are all strutting about thinking that their regalia is splendid, but in truth, they are really naked.

But your life on earth - afterwards - is eternal isn't it? Think about it, really think about it. In just ten million years you would be so bored that you would pray for death. What would there be to look forward to? What could you do that you hadn't already done thousands of times. How often could you have the same conversations with the same people - over and over and over.

Wow! You don't know much about what God is offering then, do you? It is certainly not an eternity of this life.....this is a poor counterfeit, filled with heartache and trouble....the real one will be nothing like this. You need to take your concepts to a much higher level.

Atheists look forward to many enjoyable tomorrows. If a next tomorrow doesn't come, it doesn't come. Acceptance of death is acceptance of reality. Some people don't want to, cannot, accept reality, so they delude themselves into hoping/believing there is something beyond death.

Reality is what we all have to face sooner or later. We can't really avoid the end of life as long as this system lasts.....but beyond this life is something you obviously cannot even contemplate. You will never miss what you never have though, I guess. If you expect life to end at death, then you will not be disappointed, will you?

It's not a tragedy if the person enjoyed the many years of learning and living a good life while doing it.

Its a tragedy when a baby dies...or when children lose their mother or father prematurely. Seeing families racked by grief, what comfort can atheists offer them? Platitudes? There is no comfort in knowing that all that is left of that person is in the memory of others, who will eventually die as well. What is the point of life if this is all there is? We all just pass away into the forgotten past.

It is human nature to want to go on living...we are unique in this. Animals do not contemplate their own death...but humans do, and it scares the hell out of them. I have no belief in life continuing in a spiritual form after death, but I do believe in the Bible's promise of a resurrection. I believe that it will be back to a better life here on earth as God intended in the beginning. We are involved in the outworking of a grand purpose that most humans do not even care to find out about. There are reasons for everything, but it is their choice not to know....my role is only to give them the knowledge of what God has done and is doing. He doesn't force it on anyone. He doesn't force life on anyone.

Do you believe your god cares about them?

Yes I do, which is why he offers them a better life under his governance of this earth in the future. This is what Christians were taught to pray for....God's Kingdom to "come" and for God's will to be "done, on earth as it is in heaven". It will come, ready or not.

I don't sit in judgement of figments of peoples imaginations.

If you believe in evolution, then I think you do. You have judged that the fantasy created by godless men is good enough for you...so be it. You are entitled to your beliefs. Just understand that "beliefs" is what they are.

Occasionally I do sit in judgement of people who believe the figments of their imagination are real and try to impose their beliefs on others.

There is no imposition when one is offered an alternative. Everyone is free to choose. Shooting the messenger will not make the message go away.

 

[Mock Turtle]

It is obvious to me that anything that cannot be proven requires faith and belief. Evolution, (which cannot be proven according to the scientists here) requires as much, if not more faith and belief IMO than ID does. Evolutionists just can't admit it.

A quote from Richard Feynman (a rather well-known and respected scientist (deceased)), on what being a scientist is all about - and with which many of us would agree:

I have approximate answers and possible beliefs in different degrees of certainty about different things, but I’m not absolutely sure of anything.


Not sure that actually mentions faith, and just describes what all of us tend to do every day but in much greater depth - even those with a religious belief .....

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is overwhelming 'suggestion'......the 'evidence' is all in the interpretation. Please be honest. Saying there is overwhelming evidence and providing it are two completely different things Have you not noticed that whenever evolutionists provide a link and I show then what their link actually says, they never respond except to excuse the the uncertainty of the language.

Deeje, you have never done that. You have only demonstrated an inability to understand. And what is and what is not evidence is rather well defined in the sciences. Why don't understand the concept?

Actually nothing in the evidence itself contradicts Genesis at all. What contradicts Genesis is the interpretation that science gives for its evidence. Its all about the "might haves" and the "could haves" and "this leads us to believe that...." You really believe that wishful thinking is a substitute for actual proof that what science says is actually true?
That is the language of belief based on suggestion....it permeates everything I have ever read on the subject. Most people read right over it as though it wasn't really a suggestion but a substantiated fact.....there is no such thing in regard to macro-evolution.

That is not true at all. There is no scientific evidence for the creation myth, and I can explain why. And your inability to understand scientific language does not refute scientific ideas. You only make yourself look worse by this ignorant flailing about. That is not the language of suggestion that is the language of science. And your daily dependence upon the science that you scorn does not reflect well on you.

My point was that because evolution teaches that we are nothing more than animals, we can then be excused for behaving like them.
Our actions are not excusable because we can anticipate where a certain course will lead. That makes everything that humans do, that causes harm to other humans or the planet, inexcusable. Who are the ones who dictate to others about what is done or not done...? Who makes the laws? Is justice really carried out anywhere? And yet you trust these people to govern you? If you are not part of the solution, then you are part of the problem. God has the solution, but most people think its a fairy tale. No one can force us to believe anything against our will.

As always man makes the laws. Man enforces the laws. Justice is a man made concept. Your God has no solution, in fact the god of the Bible, especially of the Old Testament, is a vile unjust creature that no one should worship.

It is my personal experience, after many years on these forums, that those who treat "believers" with the most contempt are usually atheists. They answer to no one but themselves.

That is because you cannot see creationists that go out of their way to earn that contempt. You do that quite often yourself. You have only yourself to blame. Seriously, why don't you try to learn for once? With all of the time that you have wasted here you could probably have had a biology degree now and you would fully understand how you are wrong.

How can life be meaningful if you can lose it tomorrow with no way to get it back? Life might be meaningful to an extent for some, but death is the end of it completely. Humans are not designed for death. Premature death always feels wrong. Why do we grieve?

That is rather sad that you believe that. A life can be meaningful in one's legacy. Not just in material matter left behind, but in the many different ways that a person can make the world a better place to live in. And premature death feels wrong because we know it is the end and we grieve for the loss. That person was not able to leave a lasting legacy of making the world better for others.

Well actually, all I have to do is look at the impact that godless science has made on this planet in the last 100 years or so. Most scientists who push evolution are atheists. It isn't about what I was taught, as much as what I observe with my own eyes and ears.

You mean the ever increasing standard of living? The lack of infant death? The much improved chance of living a full and productive life? Yes, those are terrible things. You would have us using oxen drawn plows with women dying in childbirth at an outrageous rate and only half of those children living to adulthood if you had your way.

No thank you.

People who identify as "Christians" must of necessity follow the teachings of Jesus Christ and imitate his example as much as humanly possible. None of us are perfect at it, but real Christians will have the courage of their convictions. They will not cower when the big boys get heavy on the ridicule and derision in an effort to force weak ones to acquiesce or to compromise.
Its easy to call yourself whatever you like, but its what you do that determines the truthfulness of the designation.

Actually just as there are all sorts of "atheists" there are all sorts of "Christians". And why do you cower when it comes to learning? Are you saying that you yourself are not a "True Christian"? A real Christian should not be afraid to learn.

I've been here a long time and no one to date has been able to provide evidence to scientifically back up what they suggest. I see the theory of evolution as an elaborate castle built on matchsticks. The emperors are all strutting about thinking that their regalia is splendid, but in truth, they are really naked.

Since you do not even know what is and what is not evidence you have no way to judge whether what you said is correct or not.

Here is a simple test. Is Australopithecus afarensis scientific evidence for the theory of evolution or not? If you say "No" you demonstrate that you do not understand the concept of scientific evidence.

Wow! You don't know much about what God is offering then, do you? It is certainly not an eternity of this life.....this is a poor counterfeit, filled with heartache and trouble....the real one will be nothing like this. You need to take your concepts to a much higher level.

Really? Then you should be able to support this claim. This is a claim often made by Christians but never supported. Why should anyone believe you?

Reality is what we all have to face sooner or later. We can't really avoid the end of life as long as this system lasts.....but beyond this life is something you obviously cannot even contemplate. You will never miss what you never have though, I guess. If you expect life to end at death, then you will not be disappointed, will you?

And since life will end at death for you too you probably will not be disappointed either.

Its a tragedy when a baby dies...or when children lose their mother or father prematurely. Seeing families racked by grief, what comfort can atheists offer them? Platitudes? There is no comfort in knowing that all that is left of that person is in the memory of others, who will eventually die as well. What is the point of life if this is all there is? We all just pass away into the forgotten past.

A consoling arm is much more comforting than a fairy tale. You lose on this one.

It is human nature to want to go on living...we are unique in this. Animals do not contemplate their own death...but humans do, and it scares the hell out of them. I have no belief in life continuing in a spiritual form after death, but I do believe in the Bible's promise of a resurrection. I believe that it will be back to a better life here on earth as God intended in the beginning. We are involved in the outworking of a grand purpose that most humans do not even care to find out about. There are reasons for everything, but it is their choice not to know....my role is only to give them the knowledge of what God has done and is doing. He doesn't force it on anyone. He doesn't force life on anyone.

What?! All animals strive to continue to live. And you have not reacted with many animals if you have not seen the sad fear of death that comes to animals when they are seriously threatened.

Yes I do, which is why he offers them a better life under his governance of this earth in the future. This is what Christians were taught to pray for....God's Kingdom to "come" and for God's will to be "done, on earth as it is in heaven". It will come, ready or not.

So you claim. We are still waiting for valid evidence.

If you believe in evolution, then I think you do. You have judged that the fantasy created by godless men is good enough for you...so be it. You are entitled to your beliefs. Just understand that "beliefs" is what they are.

One accepts evolution as one accepts all reality. It has been tested countless times and always come through to date. What reasonable test would show your beliefs to be wrong? If you can't think of any or won't let yourself think of any then your ideas cannot be tested. They are rather worthless. In the world of science they would qualify as "Not even wrong." You see in the world of science when a scientist is wrong he can usually learn from his errors. Your ideas appear to be so out there that there is no learning from them no matter what.

There is no imposition when one is offered an alternative. Everyone is free to choose. Shooting the messenger will not make the message go away.

Actually for the rational thinker there is no choice in belief. When you say that one is free to choose you are in effect claiming that your beliefs are irrational.