Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
If evolution is true ...
March 11, 2006
4:07 pm
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Okay, seeker, I take it back about your intentions with kathyGy.

As far as honesty goes...I do not think you intend to be misleading, but you should know that when you present "quotes" from scientists who work in the filed of evolution, that seem to have the author criticising the validity of evolutionary theory, you are most likely presenting the work of a dishonest person who went out of their way to disort the words and intention of the original author--in hopes that someone like you would then disseminate that false quote. You don't want to do that.

March 11, 2006
4:27 pm
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

SeekerW,

You are correct--believing in Evolution is not inconsistent with belief in God. But evolution aslo does not seem to demonstrate the existence of God--at least it doesnt demonstrate the intervention of God.

I think where evolutionists and Christians come to metaphorical blows is that Christians have a very specific story they want to believe in and sell, and that story is associated with very specific moral beliefs.

To me, science doesn't have much to say about the existence or no existence of God. But if there is a God, then science can say something about his/her methods.

March 11, 2006
4:29 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,

No, I don't want to disseminate any falsehood. Trouble is, it's very hard to tell what's true and what's false, and I don't always have the time to check my sources. Anybody can have their own private agenda ... how do you know who to trust?

I accept your taking-back. Thanks.

March 11, 2006
9:21 pm
Avatar
on my way
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 29, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,
That was a quote I posted, not Seeker.

March 12, 2006
12:29 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Guest,

You said: "All I wanted to hear was the benefits gained by believing in God"

And you said: "There _'may'_ be some benefits."

It sounds like something said may have created some reasonable doubt for you? If so, I think it is admirable of you to own up to something like that.

"That doesnt convince me however about its truth because benefit doesnt mean its true"

I hear that and I understand...

The cornered market on easy answers, I do not claim to have. I think anyone who does is either a fool or a liar...or both. What I know is that there is a endless body of evidence (both hard and soft...both circumstantial and direct) that keeps me steadfast and unmoveable in my faith.

I'd love the opportunity to share it with you...another time...another thread.

March 12, 2006
1:19 am
Avatar
garfield9547
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Seekerw

"Why is it that people who the people who advocate evolution also seem to be anti-Christian? Can somebody explain this? "

This is not true in my case. I am a christian believing in evolution.

Looks like I have the best of both worlds.

To answer you question I think people try to understand the Bible as a naturel book. That could make one crazy because it did not happen

If you look at the creation in Genesis naturally you would not be able to make sense out of it.

Garfield

March 12, 2006
3:09 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Garfield,

{"Why is it that people who the people who advocate evolution also seem to be anti-Christian? Can somebody explain this? "

I was thinking of those who are the most vociferous in promoting evolution. Not necessarily those who may quietly accept it but don't say much about it.

Don't get me wrong; I don't believe every word in the Bible is literally true. I saw you posting earlier on this thread about Genesis. Can we talk more about what you mean by understanding teh Bible not as a natural book, on teh Ask or Comment about the Bible thread?

Seeker

March 12, 2006
3:47 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Kathy,

{As to how I define evolution: "Darwin's Basic Premise

1.That biological types or species do not have a fixed, static existence but exist in permanent states of change and flux;

2.that all life, biologically considered, takes the form of a struggle to exist -- more exactly, to exist and produce the greatest number of offspring;

3.that this struggle for existence culls out those organisms less well adapted to any particular ecology and allows those better adapted to flourish -- a process called Natural Selection;

4.that natural selection, development, and evolution requires enormously long periods of time, so long, in fact, that the everyday experience of human beings provides them with no ability to interpret such histories;

5.that the genetic variations ultimately producing increased survivability are random and not caused (as religious thinkers would have it) by God or (as Lammarck would have it) by the organism's own striving for perfection.

The effect of all these points was to move man away from the center of creation and imply that God could hardly be nature's driving force. These are direct quotes from Darwin's book Origin Of The Species, in which he outlines his theory."
}

Points 1, 2, and 3 seem to say nothing about complex life arising from simpler forms. Agree?

Do you know what evidence Darwin used to support Point 4? He couldn't have used any direct evidence, as the process takes much too long for individuals to observe. I don't think enough was known about the fossil record in his day to have established support it. So how did he support it?

Assuming that Point 5 is correct, how could Darwin know that God did not use these random variations to create life? I don't believe Darwin ever claimed to know the mind of God.

Seeker

March 12, 2006
4:11 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,

You remember that quote allegedly from Steve Gould you say I quoted? Where on this site did I quote that? If you're going to accuse me of something like that, I want to see it for myself. I don't remember everything I post.

March 12, 2006
12:06 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests

YnR, I dont think the evidence will convince me if it doesnt convince scientists, but thanks anyway.

March 12, 2006
12:34 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Guest,

You're putting your faith in scientists at the NAS whom you don't personally know, whose motives you cannot know. Why not put your faith in yourself and your own ability to discern things?

Seeker

March 12, 2006
1:44 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests

Oh I put my belief there and thats why I'm an athiest now. If health benefits are the only things to be gained by believing in God, I'd rather take vitamins and exercise daily :D. This religious debate is endless. Its pretty pointless, in most cases. If anyone has to change their mind, they can do so only at their own will.

March 12, 2006
2:04 pm
Avatar
garfield9547
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

guest_guest

I can understand what you say. I tried to explain how I see things to you.

I think if you do not experience the power of God in your life it would be impossible to believe in Him.

((((Garfield)))))

March 12, 2006
2:15 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests

Thanks garfield, I'm pretty much decided on my views (like everyone else). I just warmed up fajitas in the microwave. If God could fly those right here onto my desk, I'd start believing in him hehe. That would be a show of God's power that I could believe in.

March 12, 2006
2:29 pm
Avatar
garfield9547
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

guest

I like your humour. Always have.
Enjoy the fajitas!!

Garfield

March 12, 2006
9:05 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Guest,

"YnR, I dont think the evidence will convince me if it doesnt convince scientists, but thanks anyway."

But, who says the evidence doesn't convince scientist?

I understand that evolution is a widespread concept in the scientific community. Who could make war with that fact?

Part of the reason for this popularity is because those appointed to influential teaching positions in the ivory towers were expected to be supporters of Darwin evolution. Therefore, we read their writings, we humbly adopted their views, we learned obedience to the dogma.

But even then, not all scientist were supporters of evolution...Some overtly (and some covertly) rejected evolution as an impossible phenomena.

Today, there is a growing movement in the scientific community, which openly challenges some of the tenants of evolution as...inconsistent with accepted biological facts.

Here is a quote from "Science Digest": "Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities... Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science"

This quote doesn't even take into account scientist, like Dr. Wilder-Smith-who were former evolutionist, who turned to the belief of a creator or intelligent designer of the worlds and the inhabitants thereof.

March 12, 2006
10:17 pm
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"Scientists who utterly reject Evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities... Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science"

Or, they might not be. Or might not have been, 27 years ago when the article was published. Hard to say without the original article--the magazine is out of print now, too. But you would think if it was such a fast growing group we would have heard something from them by now.

As best I can tell, the author of that article was an engineer. Mind you SD was not a scientific journal.

So, 27 years after that SD article was published, we still don't have abody of pee reviewed scientific literature supporting creationism.

I'm listening to Wilder-Smith's (chemist) lecture now.

March 12, 2006
11:14 pm
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,

{pee reviewed scientific literature}

Is that what happens to the rejected papers???? lol

Sometimes typos can be fun.

March 12, 2006
11:17 pm
Avatar
on my way
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 29, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

YOU GUYS>>>>>>!!

Why listen to just scientists who support your own theories, or beleifs.. GET serious, go to a C hristian radio station, make a phone call. Go to a Christian books store ask, questions....at least get another perspective instead of one that just works for you. 🙂

March 12, 2006
11:19 pm
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Oh, yeah, pee reviewed--I meant to say that.

In science we have a thing called pee weview of papaaws.

A weaww witten papaaw pwinted wif good ink weaaw stiw bee weedabaaw aftaaww yeeuw pee on it in a scientific way.

March 12, 2006
11:29 pm
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Well, I keep reading the accounts of creationists--they just don't come across as convincing or...scientific.

For example I am listening to Dr. Wilder-Smith's 77 minute lecture right now. Of course the first 7 minutes was a sermon.

OMW,

Are you saying that the only place that good arguments are being advanced by creationists is on Christian radio stations? That the Creation Science Center is not sufficiently authoritative?

Science and faith are different things.

Most any person can follow scientific reasoning, if they try. For this particular subject, it's just not that hard.

March 13, 2006
12:01 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

WD,

I was going to ask you about this topic, and then found the following quote on the Center for Scientific Creation webpage. Do you agree/disagree?

"Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the law of biogenesis."

(http://www.creationscience.com.....nces4.html)

I don't know if this field is in your specialty, but I thought you might have some particular insights into it if it's not.

You said that scientists had produced structures resembling cell membranes, but I don't think you said they were actually alive.

Seeker

March 13, 2006
12:02 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"But you would think if it was such a fast growing group we would have heard something from them by now."

I'm not sure what you mean here...we've heard a ton from them, dispite the fact that many of them report feeling censored by the academic community.

Attempts to silence a scientist? How very Galileo(-who, ironically, suported creationism.)

I found a list of Doctorate Degree holding scientist who endorse the Biblical account of creation with their very names and credentials (long enough to make my head spin).

Heard something from them by now?

How about the explosion of litterature on creationism that so many of them are responsible for:

"Young-Earth Creationism
Young Earth Creationists (YEC) claim a literal interpretation of the Bible as a basis for their beliefs. They believe that the earth is 6000 to 10,000 years old, that all life was created in six literal days, that death and decay came as a result of Adam & Eve's Fall, and that geology must be interpreted in terms of Noah's Flood. However, they accept a spherical earth and heliocentric solar system. Young-Earth Creationists popularized"

"Intelligent Design Creationism
Intelligent Design Creationism descended from Paley's argument that God's design could be seen in life (Paley 1803). Modern IDC still makes appeals to the complexity of life and so varies little from the substance of Paley's argument, but the arguments have become far more technical, delving into microbiology and mathematical logic."

"Theistic Evolution
Theistic Evolution says that God creates through evolution. Theistic Evolutionists vary in beliefs about how much God intervenes in the process. It accepts most or all of modern science, but it invokes God for some things outside the realm of science, such as the creation of the human soul. This position is promoted by the Pope and taught at mainline Protestant seminaries."

"So, 27 years after that SD article was published, we still don't have abody of pee reviewed scientific literature supporting creationism"

While there has been no peer-reviewed, research published on creation generally, there has been peer-reviewed research published on Intelligent design...which has been called the bridge between science and theology.

pee reviewed...that was cute, thanks for the the laugh.

March 13, 2006
12:04 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Guest?

I'm still very interested...

What are you thoughts?

March 13, 2006
12:08 am
Avatar
Anonymous
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
100sp_Permalink sp_Print

Seek,

"What happens to the rejected papers?"

LOL I don't want to know.

Funny! I had missed that one before.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 349
Currently Online:
29
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 111118
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38715
Posts: 714564
Newest Members:
Marek, ssdchemical33, jack1palmer, SURUMANQ, petersmith98, ChristenD
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer | Do Not Sell My Personal Information