100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Creation vs. Evolution. | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
As evolution is still occuring I must deduce that God is not yet done creating.(a mass in motion continues to remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside source). This is curious. You say: Evolution is still occurring. God is still doing the creating. Then the bible says: God created the world in six days, and rested on the seventh. So... what happened on the eight, ninth, three thousandth day after evolution? I would have thought that god finished his werk on the end of the sixth day. You say that is not true. You say the bible lies, or the bible says you lie. Furthermore, if the bible says you lie, then how does the bible explain the emergence of new species? This is a fine mess you got yourself into. You are damned if you say the bible is wrong, and you are damned if you say the bible is not wrong. I have one really good solution for you: Renounce your faith in the bible. I have done so, and became a liberated man. My IQ tripled, from a two-digit value to a now triple-digit value. Chicks started to notice me. The boss is giving me a raise, and my wife is pregnant again. I am hoping this time for something different... a boy. or a girl. Not another Jackall. (Jack!! Let go of Jaquie's hair this instant or I'll slap you into next Tuesday, you rotten son of Satan.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those two sides of the argument haven't been settled for thousands of years, so I bet we're not going to do it either. Brava, I love your posts. With regard to 'randomness' and 'causality' - I do want to point out that these arguments have gone on for thousands of years only because we, as a species, lacked a coherent and accurate understanding of the truth. I think within a few generations we will no longer be debating these points, and that all intelligent people with an interest in learning will easily come to the same conclusions. the problem with that is that new species are being discovered constantly,, so whatever conclusions we may come to about todays mysteries will be replaced with new mysteries,, and we will be no closer to truly explaining the complex and cooperative workings of the Universe and all the life within it,,, The fact that new species are being discovered is of no bearing whatsoever. That's like saying "you can never understand the physics behind playing billiards, because there will always be new combinations of ball positions". There are a few simple rules (the laws of motion) that explain the movements of balls on a pool table. It doesn't matter what position they are in, the rules are the same. Similarly, the continuing evolution of life follows rules. We are doing a great job of understanding those rules. Eventually our understanding will be so thorough and well established that intelligent people will no longer debate the basic principles, anymore than intelligent people debate whether F=ma works. [Insert idiotic straw man attack on F=ma by someone who confuses a more detailed, derived formula with a contradictory formula...] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The thread is called Creation vs Evolution. That is comparing apples to oranges. Creation is a theory of how life was created. Evolution is a theory of how the complexity of life increased. Two totally different things. What's next, a thread called Volvo vs Chocolate Cake? Not quite so. Evolution explains changes in the world, such changes that the bible can not explain. Accepting the bible is a direct renouncing of observable facts. Accepting evolution is a direct renouncing of an unchanging world of biology. Therefore I say unto you, that while the two things are not equal, they are still mutually exclusive. This means each person has to make a choice. The choice is something like this: "Do I accept reality as I see it and risk eternal damnation in hell because of it, or "Do I accept Jesus as my Saviour and force my kid out of getting higher education due to his inability to pass biology exams?" Granted, these are practical considerations, not highfolutin' theoretical ones. The choice between Creation and Evolution, which to accept, has so far-reaching ramifications that even the Pope vacillates on the issue at times. It is not EASY to tell billions of followers you lead that 20,000,000 expert biologists are all crazy. Never learn, never forgive. The same tooth-and-nail battle was fought out whether the EArth is round or flat. The church won by force and torturing the scientists; and then some 600 years later the Church was made to issue an official apology, and admit in the last decade of the twentieth century that the earth is round, not flat. This was particularly painful to the Roman Catholics. You see, there is such a decree in Catholicism, that the Pope, when he speaks ex cathedra, his revelations are directly channeled through him by god to the world. There were two such invocations of the papal infallibility, and the second came in 1499 by Pope Augustine the LLXCMCCIIX, that said, "Those who believe in the antipodes will die an eternal death in damnation." This sort of thing is also referred to as "Papal Bull". (I just made this up. Impressive isn't it.) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Those two sides of the argument haven't been settled for thousands of years, so I bet we're not going to do it either. Brava, I love your posts. With regard to 'randomness' and 'causality' - I do want to point out that these arguments have gone on for thousands of years only because we, as a species, lacked a coherent and accurate understanding of the truth. I think within a few generations we will no longer be debating these points, and that all intelligent people with an interest in learning will easily come to the same conclusions. the problem with that is that new species are being discovered constantly,, so whatever conclusions we may come to about todays mysteries will be replaced with new mysteries,, and we will be no closer to truly explaining the complex and cooperative workings of the Universe and all the life within it,,, The fact that new species are being discovered is of no bearing whatsoever. That's like saying "you can never understand the physics behind playing billiards, because there will always be new combinations of ball positions". There are a few simple rules (the laws of motion) that explain the movements of balls on a pool table. It doesn't matter what position they are in, the rules are the same. Similarly, the continuing evolution of life follows rules. We are doing a great job of understanding those rules. Eventually our understanding will be so thorough and well established that intelligent people will no longer debate the basic principles, anymore than intelligent people debate whether F=ma works. [Insert idiotic straw man attack on F=ma by someone who confuses a more detailed, derived formula with a contradictory formula...] actually, there is a finite (but large) number of combinations for ball positions because there is a finite number of balls and a finite number of points on the table neither of those factors CONTINUE to increase, so they can be figured out and this 'Insert idiotic straw man attack on F=ma by someone who confuses a more detailed, derived formula with a contradictory formula...]' is certainly a humourously ironic point of view of this particular topic EMPHASIS : CONFUSES detailed with contradictory,,,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The thread is called Creation vs Evolution. That is comparing apples to oranges. Creation is a theory of how life was created. Evolution is a theory of how the complexity of life increased. Two totally different things. What's next, a thread called Volvo vs Chocolate Cake? Not quite so. Evolution explains changes in the world, such changes that the bible can not explain. Accepting the bible is a direct renouncing of observable facts. Accepting evolution is a direct renouncing of an unchanging world of biology. Therefore I say unto you, that while the two things are not equal, they are still mutually exclusive. This means each person has to make a choice. The choice is something like this: "Do I accept reality as I see it and risk eternal damnation in hell because of it, or "Do I accept Jesus as my Saviour and force my kid out of getting higher education due to his inability to pass biology exams?" Granted, these are practical considerations, not highfolutin' theoretical ones. The choice between Creation and Evolution, which to accept, has so far-reaching ramifications that even the Pope vacillates on the issue at times. It is not EASY to tell billions of followers you lead that 20,000,000 expert biologists are all crazy. Never learn, never forgive. The same tooth-and-nail battle was fought out whether the EArth is round or flat. The church won by force and torturing the scientists; and then some 600 years later the Church was made to issue an official apology, and admit in the last decade of the twentieth century that the earth is round, not flat. This was particularly painful to the Roman Catholics. You see, there is such a decree in Catholicism, that the Pope, when he speaks ex cathedra, his revelations are directly channeled through him by god to the world. There were two such invocations of the papal infallibility, and the second came in 1499 by Pope Augustine the LLXCMCCIIX, that said, "Those who believe in the antipodes will die an eternal death in damnation." This sort of thing is also referred to as "Papal Bull". (I just made this up. Impressive isn't it.) there is a third option Do I accept reality as I see it and risk eternal damnation in hell because of it, or "Do I accept Jesus as my Saviour and force my kid out of getting higher education due to his inability to pass biology exams?" OR DO I Accept jesus as savior and explain to my child that God is the creator of the 'reality' man continues to try to understand and explain,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wux
on
Fri 03/16/12 01:53 AM
|
|
actually, there is a finite (but large) number of combinations for ball positions because there is a finite number of balls and a finite number of points on the table There is an infinite number of points on the table. Sorry. This is true. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
there is a third option Do I accept reality as I see it and risk eternal damnation in hell because of it, or "Do I accept Jesus as my Saviour and force my kid out of getting higher education due to his inability to pass biology exams?" OR DO I Accept jesus as savior and explain to my child that God is the creator of the 'reality' man continues to try to understand and explain,,,,, Yes, you can do this, MsHarmony. But the third opition applies only to the explanation. In the bible god finished creation. This means no further changes. No new things cropping up. There are new things cropping up. This is as observed thing. Not an inference, not a matter of understanding or explaining. It is a matter of direct sensing. WE see it, much the same way as a fish or a gnat would see it. Or a wolf or a cat. The fish and the gnat definitely don't form theories about the origin of new things, why they happened, how come they happened, and who made them happen. Yet they see the new things like we, humans do. This is not a valid counter-argument; you can teach your child this, as long as you teach him also that independently of explanations, the observations still contradict the teachings of the bible. Whether you want to do that, I don't know. If you don't, your kid will never finish high school biology. If you do, then your kid may (god forbid) believe you and spend all eternity in damnation. I don't wish that on anyone. So my suggestion to you, as much as to anyone else, is, to renounce the bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just don't get why people don't see the big picture,Why would this so called God create a universe that could be infinite then put life on a planet,what purpose does it serve?He/she/it just felt like doing it out of bordem?If heaven is so wonderful then why the need for everything else?
Believers need to realize God is also just a theory not a fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the bible god finished creation. This means no further changes. No new things cropping up. "To finish Creation" does not neccessarily mean that!? Especially if you follow the thought that he created a system that will continue to develop by itself... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not quite so. Evolution explains changes in the world, such changes that the bible can not explain. And the Bible doesn't refute either. Since the Bible is silent on the whole "complexity of life" debate, there are over a billion Christians who also believe in evolution. Accepting the bible is a direct renouncing of observable facts. Accepting evolution is a direct renouncing of an unchanging world of biology. No, it's not. Therefore I say unto you, that while the two things are not equal, they are still mutually exclusive. This means each person has to make a choice. The choice is something like this: "Do I accept reality as I see it and risk eternal damnation in hell because of it, or "Do I accept Jesus as my Saviour and force my kid out of getting higher education due to his inability to pass biology exams?" No, they aren't. It's the official stance of the Catholic Church that the earth is billions of years old and that evolution happened. Granted, these are practical considerations, not highfolutin' theoretical ones. The choice between Creation and Evolution, which to accept, has so far-reaching ramifications that even the Pope vacillates on the issue at times. It is not EASY to tell billions of followers you lead that 20,000,000 expert biologists are all crazy. When has the Pope vacillated on Evolution? Never learn, never forgive. The same tooth-and-nail battle was fought out whether the EArth is round or flat. The church won by force and torturing the scientists; and then some 600 years later the Church was made to issue an official apology, and admit in the last decade of the twentieth century that the earth is round, not flat. This is a complete lie. Are you trying to be funny? I can never tell, because your posts rarely make any sense to me. The first person excommunicated by the Catholic Church was excommunicated for teaching that the earth was flat. 500-1000 years BEFORE Jesus was born, it was an accepted fact that the earth was a sphere. The whole "Christians believed the earth was flat" thing was made up by an Atheist historian to embarrass Christians, it was never true. You see, Atheists have no problem lying about their ideological opponents...by the way, are you an Atheist? This was particularly painful to the Roman Catholics. You see, there is such a decree in Catholicism, that the Pope, when he speaks ex cathedra, his revelations are directly channeled through him by god to the world. There were two such invocations of the papal infallibility, and the second came in 1499 by Pope Augustine the LLXCMCCIIX, that said, "Those who believe in the antipodes will die an eternal death in damnation." This sort of thing is also referred to as "Papal Bull". (I just made this up. Impressive isn't it.) Oh, so you were just "joking". Here's a hint to avoid future confusion: Jokes should be funny. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, so you were just "joking". Here's a hint to avoid future confusion: Jokes should be funny. You're right. Jokes should be excluded from serious talk. Consider this, then, please: In 1992, it was reported in the news that the Catholic Church had turned around towards vindicating Galileo: Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist and by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who practically invented the experimental method, understood why only the sun could function as the centre of the world, as it was then known, that is to say, as a planetary system. The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world's structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture.... —Pope John Paul II, L'Osservatore Romano N. 44 (1264) - November 4, 1992 In 2000, Pope John Paul II issued a formal apology for all the mistakes committed by some Catholics in the last 2,000 years of the Catholic Church's history, including the trial of Galileo among others The Church called Galileo a heretic for opposing the official view of the Church on the accepted world view. Galileo remained a heretic. He was vinidcated only almost 400 years after his proof had been presented and accepted by his scientist peers. ---------- I predict that the theory of evolution will be accepted by the Church and by Christians everywhere in about 300 years, give or take a few years. This is the speed at which reasonable thought can enter the dogmatic minds of the religious Christians as a community. I am not making this up, and I am not joking now. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
wux
on
Fri 03/16/12 07:59 AM
|
|
In the bible god finished creation. This means no further changes. No new things cropping up. "To finish Creation" does not neccessarily mean that!? Especially if you follow the thought that he created a system that will continue to develop by itself... Curious... does the bible say anything about this? Could you please find it out for us? Like could you please let us know which passage deals with this issue in the bible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I predict that the theory of evolution will be accepted by the Church and by Christians everywhere in about 300 years, give or take a few years. This is the speed at which reasonable thought can enter the dogmatic minds of the religious Christians as a community. I am not making this up, and I am not joking now. The Catholic church already accepts the theory of evolution. How fast can the facts enter your dogmatic mind? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I heard they talked about our mamas.... LOL, I just made a happy wee wee! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
actually, there is a finite (but large) number of combinations for ball positions because there is a finite number of balls and a finite number of points on the table There is an infinite number of points on the table. Sorry. This is true. Only on an infinitely large pool table. In any finite amount of space (like a pool table or our universe), there is a finite number of points. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the bible god finished creation. This means no further changes. No new things cropping up. God finished creating the Universe in Genesis 2 and in Genesis 4, a couple new things popped up: Cain and Able. Your biblical exegesis is sorely lacking. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just don't get why people don't see the big picture,Why would this so called God create a universe that could be infinite then put life on a planet,what purpose does it serve?He/she/it just felt like doing it out of bordem?If heaven is so wonderful then why the need for everything else? Believers need to realize God is also just a theory not a fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just don't get why people don't see the big picture,Why would this so called God create a universe that could be infinite then put life on a planet,what purpose does it serve?He/she/it just felt like doing it out of bordem?If heaven is so wonderful then why the need for everything else? Believers need to realize God is also just a theory not a fact. 1) The universe is not infinite. Infinite is a concept, not a number or measurement. 2) God is timeless, knows everything and has unlimited power. We may be incapable of understanding God's motive for doing anything, that is not an argument against the existence of God. 3) Maybe life on earth is a test to see who is worthy of heaven? 4) God is a belief, not a theory. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4) God is a belief, not a theory.
ok i'll give you that but i should have typed his actions are thrown into the mix of theories on how the universe began.And once again it still didn't answer my question but i'll take he did it for his glory,i guess. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i can see where people could believe in both god and evolution, but the whole notion of a god seems fantasy to me. in the bible, it states that god created the heavens and the earth, and all things on it. it never says he stopped after that. but what would be the point of adjusting the life forms after that? they say god is perfect, and doesn't make mistakes, then why the adjustments? by the way people say god is, then he would have made a perfect world the first time, right at the start, without the need for the adjustments. one of the many reasons why i do not believe the bible, because it lacks a lot of common sense.
|
|
|
|
|
