I'm looking for an explanation for why evolutionists choose evolution? What is the reason? They come from all faiths and nationalities, yet they all accept the same lie. Why is this?
Clearly when an atheist from the western world accepts evolution he does so to express his rejection of Christianity. But why do atheists from Hindu and Buddhist and Islamic and Jewish cultures accept evolution? It must be that Islamic and Jewish atheists accept evolution because they reject the Genesis accounts from the Bible, but how do you explain the atheists from Hindu and Buddhist cultures who accept evolution? Are they just brainwashed by the worldwide evolutionist conspiracy?
When a geologist finds sea shells on a mountain top, why does he irrationally reject the obvious explanation, that Noah's flood left the shells there? Of course he rejects the possibility of Noah's flood because that would lend credibility to the Genesis story he rejects. But why does he reject it? And why don't at least some geologists who reject the Genesis account say, "Well, it wasn't Noah's flood, but it was clearly a flood." It was obviously a flood that put the sea shells there, so why don't they just say so? They only lose credibility by denying the obvious.
It's a similar situation with the geologic layers. Looking at the Grand Canyon, anyone can tell that these layers must have been deposited quickly by a gigantic flood. Why do geologists make themselves look like idiots by denying this? If they reject the Bible and/or Christianity then they can claim that it wasn't Noah's flood that created the layers of the Grand Canyon, but it was still a flood. But not a single non-creationist geologist admits that it was a giant flood. Why is that?
The biggest mystery is Christians who accept evolution. Just because they err in rejecting the plain words of the Bible doesn't mean they have to accept evolution. There must be countless other ways to misinterpret God's word, but they almost exclusively choose evolution. Why do these misguided Christians almost universally accept a theory that is without evidence or any scientific foundation whatsoever? Why isn't there at least some variety in the alternatives they choose? Why always evolution?
It's a puzzlement!
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Fix grammar.
™ Version 4.2