Why do the religious hate evolution?

[Duty]

Evolution supports the notion of Adam and Eve (formed from a clot of blood?) I've rarely heard anything so ridiculous 

[bennyboy]

I don't think the hate evolution. They hate the theory of evolution, because it contradicts what their holy scriptures teach.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

People think they are special. A "common ancestor", extinguishes that notion quite conclusively.

Reminds me of a creationist Catholic nun who I had for a teacher during my freshman year in high school. She stated a number of times that evolutionary theory wasn't true because, "No one is going to call me a monkey!"

Imagine that, a penguin complaining about be called a monkey.

[AFTT47]

I think for many Christians, it's hard to square original sin with evolution.

Of course it's also hard to square Genesis with anything resembling modern science. Talking snakes for one, don't fit into modern understanding of biology too well.

If I were a Christian, I think I would be more comfortable with God working in mysterious ways I don't understand rather than Him working in ways which contradict known reality. I think I would be most comfortable with Genesis being some kind of metaphor.

[fredd bear]

I went to a Catholic boys school.

Catholicism has no problem with evolution, due to some pretty nifty thinking:

The Old Testament does not say how long is each day of creation. For all we know , it could be aeons., so evolution does not contradict dogma and may be accepted.

OF course Catholics are anti science as any Christian sect; Scientific claims are accepted by the Catholic church IF AND ONLY IF such claims do not contradict dogma.

Catholics are also more pragmatic: The institution of the church is aware of the absurdity of insisting the Old Testament is literally true; EG that all human came directly from 2 people. That the Towery of Babel is literally true..OR that it took the Israelites 40 years to travel from Egypt to Canaan.

Some of the protestant sects reject evolution because they believe the Bible, Old and New Testament, are the inerrant word of God. Yet another case of cognitive dissonance.Such people are simply ignorant, or choose not to consider the simple fact of how books were reproduced until the invention of the printing press---by HAND.

IT is not well known that scribes could be illiterate, IE they could copy, but not read or understand.with scribes who could read and write, it was common for bits to be omitted, or bits to be added. This is not new information, scholars have been aware of the practice for centuries, and tried their best to find original texts.this an often be simply educated guesswork.

One of my favourites is literalists will insist the commandment reads "Thou Shalt Not Kill". It does not. The translation from Hebrew says "Thou shalt commit no murder" .Critically important in a society in which many of the 613 commandments (not just 10) called for capital punishment, and where war was common.So far, I've never come across a single literalist who reads ancient Hebrew (Old Testament) or Greek (New Testament)

[Anomalocaris]

Because evolution provides an answer that is not god, and god depends on being that answer in order to justify demanding our belief.

If god is not the answer, even if he does exist he would seem to have a moral reason to make us care.

[Mister Agenda]

Millions of Muslims accept evolution as part of Allah's plan. You can even find Imams who do, though you'll likely have to shop around, and they probably aren't teaching it openly in certain Muslim-majority countries.

[The Grand Nudger]

Just like millions of catholics do.  The thing to remember, is that they accept evolution™, not evolution.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Why do they hate evolution? They're afraid evolution is going to cause them to be left behind.



And I wouldn't blame evolution one bit if it did.

[Anomalocaris]

Why do they hate evolution? They're afraid evolution is going to cause them to be left behind.



And I wouldn't blame evolution one bit if it did.

They hate evolution because evolution dared to insinuate their lineage may not have been nearly as inbred as they would wish.

Although on that particular point, and nothing else, I believe the creationists are right and evolution is wrong.