21 Jan '14 10:27>1 edit
One claim that is frequently made by creationists (especially Young Earth Creationists) is that evolution is rejected by Christians as being at best anti-God and at worst designed by the devil.
This statement is demonstrably false, since there are many Christians who accept that the ToE best explains the current diversity of life on earth.
One prominent example of such Christians is Francis Collins, at one time leader of the Human Genome Project, an outstanding scientist and Christian, and also evolutionist.
There are many other examples, (myself included) but only one would suffice to disprove the originally stated belief.
The only way that one could still cling to the opening statement is to say that Francis Collins (and many others) are not Christians at all, but that would open up an entirely new debate.
As a general rule, YECs base their beliefs on a literal interpretation of the Bible, specifically the first chapters in Genesis.
However, in a recent thread (How did Jesus interpret the Bible?) RJH,(who, in his discussion of "evilution", constantly repeats the claim that Christians don't accept this branch of science) admitted that scripture should be interpreted on cultural and historical grounds.
Genesis 1 is a beautiful poem, but a poem nonetheless. It carries the key message that God is the origin of everything, and that what he made was good. It cannot, and should not, be taken as a literal scientific discourse.
I'm glad that we have got that sorted out now.
This statement is demonstrably false, since there are many Christians who accept that the ToE best explains the current diversity of life on earth.
One prominent example of such Christians is Francis Collins, at one time leader of the Human Genome Project, an outstanding scientist and Christian, and also evolutionist.
There are many other examples, (myself included) but only one would suffice to disprove the originally stated belief.
The only way that one could still cling to the opening statement is to say that Francis Collins (and many others) are not Christians at all, but that would open up an entirely new debate.
As a general rule, YECs base their beliefs on a literal interpretation of the Bible, specifically the first chapters in Genesis.
However, in a recent thread (How did Jesus interpret the Bible?) RJH,(who, in his discussion of "evilution", constantly repeats the claim that Christians don't accept this branch of science) admitted that scripture should be interpreted on cultural and historical grounds.
Genesis 1 is a beautiful poem, but a poem nonetheless. It carries the key message that God is the origin of everything, and that what he made was good. It cannot, and should not, be taken as a literal scientific discourse.
I'm glad that we have got that sorted out now.