| Origins Theology Forum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums. |
 | | 
12th June 2008, 07:02 AM
|  | Senior Veteran
53     
| | Join Date: 1st March 2004 Location: North of England
Posts: 5,543
Blessings: 90,490
Reps: 85,783,413,037,711,568 (power: 85,783,413,037,724) | | | If anybody doubts that we can process non-linear and discontinuous thought, they should read some modern poetry...
__________________
"Call some place paradise/Kiss it goodbye"
The Eagles, the Last Resort
Liberal Christians do it in context
"Literalism is the first line of defense of a mind that wants to put itself to sleep." Walter A Davis |
12th June 2008, 12:33 PM
|  | Veteran
59   
| | Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,545
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568) | | Originally Posted by artybloke  If anybody doubts that we can process non-linear and discontinuous thought, they should read some modern poetry...
Yes, true. But people do not think it is science. |
12th June 2008, 02:35 PM
|  | Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)
51   
| | Join Date: 31st March 2006 Location: Wales
Posts: 12,367
Blessings: 27,003,753 My Mood 
Reps: 1,984,022,293,840,305,920 (power: 1,984,022,293,840,324) | | | hmmm... poetry is not science
Now there's a thought.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
When you come to the Ammonites, do not
harass them or provoke them. Deut 2:19
|
12th June 2008, 03:29 PM
| | Veteran
59
| | Join Date: 5th April 2007
Posts: 9,297
Blessings: 124,545
Reps: 44,404,246,110,554,912 (power: 44,404,246,110,568) | | Originally Posted by Assyrian hmmm... poetry is not science
Now there's a thought.
Elaboration:
Poetry could describe God very well. But scientist won't take it seriously because what's described in the poem, although acceptable, but may not be logical.
When a scientist take a particular poem seriously, then it is an example of "discontinuous thought". I would simply call it: inspiration. |
12th June 2008, 08:21 PM
|  | Junior Member
66 
| | Join Date: 2nd January 2006 Location: North Island
Posts: 132
Blessings: 90,240
Reps: 1,012 (power: 8) | | | My suspicions about evolution began when I was studying relativity and quantum mechanics. Both relativy and quantum desirbe the physical world with great precision but they are contra intuitive and seemingly implausible. The reason why it is so hard to get our heads around quantum mechanics or relativity is that our thinking process takes place in a different “space” than the actions in the world around us. Crudely put, it is like trying to stuff a three dimensional object into a two dimensional space. Information from the world around us comes into the brain from our senses where “who knows what” happens to convert a four dimensional world into a mind’s image of that world. Because our minds are working with images and not the real thing we will never fully grasp the natural world in our minds. And for this reason any real descriptions of the world around will always seem contra intuitive to our reasoning process.
The problem I have with the Theory of Evolution is that it is not at all contra intuitive. It is too plausible, too logical to be an accurate description of the natural world. It is something that exists only as images in our mind. It is a nothing more than a world view. And like some sociopath among Theories it has a sullied history associated with it. Mankind has a history of adopting world views that seem laughable in retrospect and I believe that this is just another episode of that scenario. As knowledge increases the Theory of Evolution will seem less and less relevant.
|
12th June 2008, 09:49 PM
|  | Senior Veteran
29  
 | | Join Date: 6th March 2006
Posts: 6,088
Blessings: 53,546
Reps: 18,889,155,825,852,136 (power: 18,889,155,825,864) | | Originally Posted by no1nose My suspicions about evolution began when I was studying relativity and quantum mechanics. Both relativy and quantum desirbe the physical world with great precision but they are contra intuitive and seemingly implausible. The reason why it is so hard to get our heads around quantum mechanics or relativity is that our thinking process takes place in a different “space” than the actions in the world around us. Crudely put, it is like trying to stuff a three dimensional object into a two dimensional space. Information from the world around us comes into the brain from our senses where “who knows what” happens to convert a four dimensional world into a mind’s image of that world. Because our minds are working with images and not the real thing we will never fully grasp the natural world in our minds. And for this reason any real descriptions of the world around will always seem contra intuitive to our reasoning process.
The problem I have with the Theory of Evolution is that it is not at all contra intuitive. It is too plausible, too logical to be an accurate description of the natural world. It is something that exists only as images in our mind. It is a nothing more than a world view. And like some sociopath among Theories it has a sullied history associated with it. Mankind has a history of adopting world views that seem laughable in retrospect and I believe that this is just another episode of that scenario. As knowledge increases the Theory of Evolution will seem less and less relevant.
I can't help but think your doubt of evolution stems from personal distaste rather than from any actual evidence against it. You certainly haven't presented anything of substance... just an appeal to personal incredulity which (no offense) doesn't count for much.
Doesn't the fact that we can use the evolutionary theory (it's not a worldview) to make predictions, and that it has lived up to those predictions, not attest to its veracity? Of course current evolutionary theory is likely an oversimplification of what goes on in nature (as all theories are). But surely there must be something to it since it has survived testing for so long.
__________________
"There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well." -- creation scientist Dr. Todd Wood |
12th June 2008, 10:43 PM
|  | Senior Veteran
27   
| | Join Date: 22nd May 2007 Location: Texas
Posts: 4,664
Blessings: 68,325
Reps: 2,065,776,357,046,283 (power: 2,065,776,357,055) | | Originally Posted by lemmings The idea of evolution and most of the tenets has been invented by Greek philosophers between the 3rd and 5th centauries BC.
[citation needed] |
12th June 2008, 11:42 PM
|  | Miserere mei, Domine
21  
| | Join Date: 8th June 2005 Location: Florida
Posts: 23,517
Blessings: 14,200,496
Reps: 383,611,451,375,944,256 (power: 383,611,451,375,974) | |
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Господи помилуй нас.
"I have no pleasure in any man who despises music. It is no invention of ours: it is a gift of God. I place it next to theology. Satan hates music: he knows how it drives the evil spirit out of us." -Martin Luther
|
13th June 2008, 12:10 AM
| | Senior Veteran
27
| | Join Date: 22nd May 2007 Location: Texas
Posts: 4,664
Blessings: 68,325
Reps: 2,065,776,357,046,283 (power: 2,065,776,357,055) | | Originally Posted by Melethiel
Thanks for the info. reading that now. |
13th June 2008, 12:30 AM
| | Junior Member
66
| | Join Date: 2nd January 2006 Location: North Island
Posts: 132
Blessings: 90,240
Reps: 1,012 (power: 8) | | | The theory of Evolution carries on an important human tradition - the redeemer scenario, Recently someone wrote this to me,
“Christianity plagiarized the gods of countless religions and mythologies that preceded it, from virgin births, to son of god made flesh, to turning water into wine, to dying for us and promising to return. Jesus is version XX.0 of the same, tired stories that were told thousands of years before him.
Yes, the idea of a suffering redeemer is as old as mankind. And it can be found in many cultures. There were many people before Jesus who claimed to be the Messiah and there have been many since. Entertainment in our society is so saturated with this idea of a saviour that we take the whole thing for granted. The Western movie is famous for the lone hero who rides into town to save people from a gang of villains. But there are also many adventure, war, action or drama movies feature a hero who suffers and then rescues the innocent. Often in movies a hero appears to die only to have to somehow have escaped death and reappears to everyone’s joy. The fact saviour myths existed before the time of Christ doesn’t disprove the validity of Christianity. Far from it, if anything they show that in the heart of mankind there has always been the need for a saviour.
The Gospels in the Bible are the best accounts we have of the true Messiah. But long before the Gospels were written there were detailed prophetic accounts of the saviour in the books of the Old Testament. And before this the stories of the Messiah was passed on from one generation to the next by oral traditions. Some people believe that even the Zodiac was once used to tell the story of the one who would save mankind. The twelve signs of various “Zodiacs” are found Indian, Chinese, European and Mayan cultures. From ancient times it appears that the Zodiac was the one thing that most of mankind had in common. It was certainly known to the Jews. As the ancient Jewish historian Josephus wrote that astrology was handed down from Seth the son of Adam. And archaeological excavations in Israel often find Zodiacs in the floors of synagogues.
Today the signs of the Zodiac are used to predict one’s fortunes but this may not have been its original purpose. The star pictures of the constellations may have originally served as way for nomadic people to record picture stories. Instead of paper or tablets the story was recorded using the constellations in the skies at night. As the pictures of the constellations moved across the night skies people gathered around the camp fire and heard the prophecy of a saviour who would be born of a virgin and die and rise from death. This prophecy was played out in the figures of the constellations and the names of the stars within the constellations. Unfortunately there are only fragments of this story left to us now. It is thought to have originally began with Virgo. This virgin held within one hand a star named “branch” and within the other hand a star named “seed”. This matches up with the prophetic account of Jesus being the “seed of woman” and the “branch” of Jesse. The Zodiac ends with the Leo, the lion which is portrayed in the constellations as attacking and destroying Hydra the giant serpent. The appearance of the Magi at Jesus’ birth is evidence of existence a prophetic prediction of the true messiah based on the stars that was outside Judaism.
. The fact that there were many different ancient versions is really beside the point. The important questions are:
1. Why is there the idea of a saviour in the first place?
2. Why were all the different versions so similar?
3. Why is it common for the saviour to be born of a virgin?
4. Why is the saviour rejected and killed and then raised to life?
5. Why is the savour God as a man? | | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
