The Bias Of Evolution

[Mechanical Bliss]

4th April 2003 at 10:18 PM Follower of Christ said this in Post #39


I am saying that evolution is merely ''theory'' and thats all

A scientific theory is not the same as what is meant when one uses the word according to its colloquial definition.

The existence of atoms and subatomic particles is "merely theory".

A scientific theory is an explanation of facts logically deduced based upon those facts as the most probable explanation.

 

[Follower of Christ]

4th April 2003 at 11:40 PM Mechanical Bliss said this in Post #41




A scientific theory is not the same as what is meant when one uses the word according to its colloquial definition.

The existence of atoms and subatomic particles is "merely theory".

A scientific theory is an explanation of facts logically deduced based upon those facts as the most probable explanation.

I know. and ''most probable explaination'' will probably be the accepted explaination from now on.

Sometimes, I wish I had just left the bible study at ''once in a while''.

 

[euphoric]

5th April 2003 at 03:16 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #38You're joking, right??

Yeah, you caught me, I just like to draw pretty pictures for fun. 

No, I'm not joking.  That's a diagram of the layers of the Grand Canyon, including several nonconformities that cannot exist in a young earth model.  So did you want to tackle this or shall we put it in the "stuff YECs ignore cause they can't even begin to explain it" category?

-brett

 

[Arikay]

Im not sure, but If I understand Followers possition correct, I think he views this evidence as false evidence purposly put there by god to test peoples faith in the bible.

but im not quite sure.

 

[Freodin]

5th April 2003 at 03:54 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #35



What kind of pseudo-philosophical, hocus-pokus tripe is that ?

It is a try for an explanation why science does not need God to work - and why even you accept that, as your behaviour shows, if not your words.

A scientific view of the world is "If A, then B" - and not "If A, then, so God wills, B"

You act this way. You act this way every time you use your computer, drive a car, eat, walk or sleep. You accept that God is not directly needed for the operation of all this.

That was point 1.

But it is possible that you don´t accept that - I cannot know your mind. Perhaps you do believe that all this - I used the purely physical reaction of hitting a certain key and getting a corresponding result as an example - is only possible by a direct involvement of God.
Perhaps you do believe that you would not get a "G" if God did not want it, that your car would not start, that you could not stand upright, that your digestion system would not work - if God would not actively want it.

That lead me to the conclusion of point 2.

So what does happen when you press the "G" key? Is it a purely naturalistic process - that may be based on some God-given laws, but now works quite well without his direct involvement, or is a direct action of God necessary to bring the letter "G" to your screen?

If you accept the first, then you have understood the scientific method.
If you believe the second - how does that not make God react to your action?

 

[Arikay]

I like the second, Cool, I get to control god, this is fun.

 

[Cantuar]

It Takes the Lord to open up reality to someone,I'll leave it at that,and pray.

Do you mean to say that instead of the scientific method, you advocate prayer? How would that work, for example, in figuring out which microorganism is the cause of SARS and the best way to fight it? (and before you start on about how that doesn't involve evolution, I can assure you that viral mutations, especially under the conditions prevailing in China and Hong Kong, are a very good example of exactly that.)

 

[Follower of Christ]

For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers,

all things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
(Colossians 1:16-17 MKJV)

 

[Nathan Poe]

5th April 2003 at 10:33 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #48

For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers,

all things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
(Colossians 1:16-17 MKJV)

So I take it you've given up discussing science?

 

[lucaspa]

5th April 2003 at 10:33 AM Follower of Christ said this in Post #48

For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers,

all things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and by Him all things consist.
(Colossians 1:16-17 MKJV)

So how does science contradict this?

 

[lucaspa]

4th April 2003 at 05:01 AM Freedom777 said this in Post #11

Heres my stand. God created science so than how can i exclude him from what he has created. If i am going to be able to come to the right conclusions about a perticular science, God has to be in the equation,otherwise i will come to the wrong conclusion.You can not separate God from science any more than you can separate water from orange juice because if you did it would no longer be orange juice now would it? Thats My position.

Creationism isn't about "God in science" but about a particular way God created.  Evolution is also viewed by Christians as a way God created.

"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." 

Now, in the Fontispiece to Origin Darwin quoted Butler:
"The only distinct meaning of the word 'natural' is stated, fixed, or settled; since what is natural as much requires and presupposes an intelligent agent to render it so, i.e., to effect it continually or at stated times, as what is supernatural or miraculous does to effect it for once."  Butler:  Analogy of Revealed Religion

Now, there is nothing in science to tell you Butler is wrong. There's nothing to say he is right, either.  But the important thing is there is no way to show him wrong.

So, yes, God is always "in" science in the sense that Christians believe that none of the material processes studied by science will work without the presence and continuous support of God.

But creationism isn't this.  Creationism is a particular material process.  And science says that this process is wrong.

 

[lucaspa]

4th April 2003 at 02:13 PM Freedom777 said this in Post #25

Two world veiws as to what foundation you use to determine the evidence around ya.Mans opinions or Gods opinions Either way their both relgious.

Definition of religion."n, SYN,-belief, creed, doctrine, dogma, faith, persuasion, tenet; consistancy, fidelity, loyalty.

One foundation or the other, thats the Creation/Evolution ussue.

Nice try, Freedom.  But it doesn't work since the guys who falsified creationism were ministers.

And it's not "Man's opinions or Gods opinions" but a few men's interpretation of the Bible (man's opinions) vs the evidence God left in His Creation.

It's creationists vs God.  No wonder creationism loses.

 

[Follower of Christ]

''Nice try, Freedom. But it doesn't work since the guys who falsified creationism were ministers.''


foc: I wonder which one it will be who FALSIFIES evolution ??




''And it's not "Man's opinions or Gods opinions" but a few men's interpretation of the Bible (man's opinions) vs the evidence God left in His Creation.''

foc: Yes, mans opinions (evolution) and Gods word ( 6 days)
Now PROVE to me that doesnt show 6 exact days. And please dont give me your ''knowledge'' of The hebrew language (yom), I have enough Hebrew material to sink that ship.



''It's creationists vs God. No wonder creationism loses.''


foc: Actually, it will be those standing AGAINST His word who will lose.

 

[Arikay]

Ok dokey FoC.

 

[Cantuar]

So has anybody managed to come up with any information about the origin and best treatment of SARS by praying about it yet? Millions of people around the world are going to be quite interested. Should we call off the CDC investigations and wait for the prayers to be answered? Or exactly how does this God-based science work?

 

[Follower of Christ]

5th April 2003 at 10:30 PM Cantuar said this in Post #55

So has anybody managed to come up with any information about the origin and best treatment of SARS by praying about it yet? Millions of people around the world are going to be quite interested. Should we call off the CDC investigations and wait for the prayers to be answered? Or exactly how does this God-based science work?

It was arrogance as that which caused the fall of man to begin with.

You tell me why God should even bother to stop SARS when folks have an attitude like yours?

 

[Arikay]

Easy, if you live, its because you prayed a lot. If you die, it must have been the work of satan, or you must have iratated god in some way.

Nothing like bringing medicine back to the dark ages.

 

[Follower of Christ]

5th April 2003 at 10:58 PM Arikay said this in Post #57

Easy, if you live, its because you prayed a lot. If you die, it must have been the work of satan, or you must have iratated god in some way.

Nothing like bringing medicine back to the dark ages.

Thanks for your enlightenment...