Creation vs. Evolution = Faith vs. Reason?

AE;

I appreciate you replying to this post. I can't keep up with writing short novels here...


Let me ask you sincerely, what reason could conclude for you that "magic" exists? Because I'm going to say that there is nothing that would prove magic to you.

In other words, if you and a lot of other people saw angels in the skies, you would NOT say that it's supernatural, but you would argue that maybe it's what everyone ate, or something in the air that caused you to halucinate; or an optical illusion. If your dead grandparent comes back to life after prayer only, no medical assistance, you would argue a natural process and that he would be alive anyway, regardless of others praying for him. That's interesting, becuase people from long time ago, and even now, say "show me a miracle and i'll believe" - only to rationalize any and every miracle observed to merely an overall impossible natural process.

Simply put, you choose to offer a "possible" natural explanation and believe it is sufficient to disprove a supernatural conclusion, despite the lack of direct, observed evidence supporting your possibility. there are miracles where you could barely put a a straw man of explanations together, but that's all your explanations would be, straw men. I really urge you to take it at face value: there are events that not only can we NOT rationalize to a natural process, but they go against every known natural process.

what has more explanatory power:
1. I don't know.
2. The Bible's explanation - i.e. a supported, observed, documented, possible, plausible, logical, reasonable explanation of the miracle just observed. The Bible "predicts" such events - we are to expect it. Evolution does not.

Really, to you, what evidence would conclude to the existence of the supernatural?

We're talking about two different observations. One is the observation of the process as a whole (bomb goes off), the other is the observation of detail in an already "wholly" observed process (neutrons interacting).

Though fusion may not be directly observed, the process of fusion is observed. The original state and the altered state are both observed also. It would be like seeing a monkey turn into a human over a period of time.This is not the case with evolution. It does not explain observed events, only infer from the product of such an event.
Forensic detectives have observed that bullets can kill people, that certain sequences of events occur and have a known outcome (like men kill other men with guns when angry and careless). It would be like observing evolution take place, from beginning to end, then analyzing certain fossils and organisms, then draw the conclusion that evolution took place instead of arriving from a space shuttle.


The issue is that both creation and evolution are "unobservable" accounts.

__________________
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man

The Bible does not "predict" or "explain" anything. The Bible can be (and has been) interpreted to make anything supported, observed, documented, possible, plausible, "logical" or "reasonable." When the Bible can be made to say so many different things, depending on who is reading it and how they are feeling at the time, it cannot rule anything out. Therefore it cannot explain anything.

No problem Myk. There's no hurry. I've been participating here for two years already. I don't think I'm going anywhere any time soon.

Arthur C. Clarke once said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." The point is that "magic" has been used historically as a place holder explanation for things we don't understand. The concept is born out of a lack of comprehension and is sustained by ignorance.

What we are really talking about here is the supernatural affecting the natural. Something that by definition does not exist in the natural universe yet retains the ability to affect it.

This is where it gets interesting. According to theist's belief in god, this entity is an omnimax entity. This means that god should have the power to to know anything and do anything. If we were able to observe something that we would believe to be utterly impossible like arranging every star in the universe to spell out a message "Hey Earth, it's God. I created this universe and I am in control. Signed Yahweh" (complete with a picture of buddy Christ giving a thumbs up pose) then I'll be compelled to believe.

The problem is that "magic" comes in the form of shady people making miraculous claims that are personal, subjective, untestable, and unrepeatable. If god has the ability and desire to interfere enough to cause these rinky-dink miracles why doesn't he just wield this omnimax power to do something big, testable, repeatable, and observable to everyone.

The only "magic" I've even witnessed is either some person trying to trick others or some person not comprehending what they are dealing with.

If god really exists he should know exactly what would convince everyone. According to various bibles he's had no problem interfering before.

You mentioned a good one. Have a medical team pronounce a person dead, wait a day, then bring them back to life through prayer. I'd like to see that. The problem is that "miracles" seem to be limited to subjective, untestable, and unrepeatable events that happen when nobody is there to verify it. It doesn't pass the smell test.


If something is not observed, not testable, and not repeatable then we have to reason. History has shown us that whenever something lacks a natural explanation concluding god is the reason is wrong. What makes lightning strike? If you don't know then god is throwing bolts from heaven. What makes the sun go across the sky? If you don't know then a god is pulling it in a golden chariot. What makes volcanoes erupt? If you don't know throw a virgin in to appease whatever god may be causing it. What cause humans to exist? If you don't know then god made it from a pile of dust. See a pattern?

Isaac Asimov said; "To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today."

We now call it the god of the gaps argument. Whenever we don't understand something we explain it away with god. All I want is for people to simple admit that we don't know and leave it at that. In a perfect world everyone would be trying to find out, IMHO.

You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Let's put some of these events in a lab. Let's make them testable and repeatable. Then we can talk.

You see? If you didn't know why lightning struck what would have more explanatory power; I don't know or god did it? Does that mean god did it is the right answer? No. This is because the explanation isn't tempered with reason nor is it based on any kind of evidence.

I'm not sure what you mean here.

Kind of. We can observe the sun and, based on other evidence, understand what is going on at the center of it. We aren't observing fusion taking place. Not even in a bomb. We see the product of fusion. The same is true of the TofE but more so. We may not observe "macro" evolution but we can observe the process ('micro'evolution) and we can observe the product. Not only this but we have many transitional organisms and fossils and genetic evidence to back it all up. It's a well supported theory.

Biological evolution isn't something that happened (past tense). It's happening now. We observe it now. This is why most theists have no problem with "micro"evolution. When you take what we observe now, combine it with multiple lines of evidence from multiple other scientific disciplines, and try to explain it you come to the Theory of Evolution. It's simply the best explanation that fits the evidence. This is what it all comes down to. Explanatory power is nothing without evidence to back it up.

That's where you are woefully incorrect Myk. Creation is not only unobservable but un-evidenced. There is simply nothing to support the notion that some supernatural entity made humans magically from dust. On the other hand the Theory of Evolution is based on current observation and multiple lines of evidence from multiple scientific disciplines. There is no comparison.

__________________

You are wrong, my friend. The Bible does predict and explain quite a few things. Take a literal reading of the Bible with common sense and you will see that it's not what you think. Skim through it and you might not understand. If all you do is read websites that quote verses individually, without context or Biblical meaning, then you are missing the point.
Do you really think that there are THAT MANY STUPID PEOPLE believing in the Bible? There are scientists, lawyers, doctors, and many more that understand the message pretty clearly.
People make the Bible say different things, but the Bible itself only says one thing. People love to compromise, to find excuses and to have it their way - it comes at a cost. Take any book and you can read into it whatever you want. But you take the book literally and within it's context, it makes sense, you see a unified message, and it's logical.

You don't know the Bible and you underestimate it. Please read it with an open mind, realizing that a LOT of people see SENSE in it, and it makes sense to them. Ask yourself why and be open minded.

__________________
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise they became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man