Hi, I'm taking a Philosophy class.....

[FaithfulServant]

Hi, this forum is always kind of intimidating so I never came in before, but I have a couple of questions. I am taking a university level Philosophy class and we are going over arguments for and against God. Okay, here are my questions...

1. My teacher told us that the definition of Evolution is that every living thing has the same genetic code for building amino acids, therefore there is a common cause. Is this the right definition? She says that everyone agrees on evolution, and tis impossible to deny it, but that what people disagree on is natural selection. Is this true?

2. How is it possible to believe in Evolution and God?

3. How is it possible to believe in Evolution, Natural Selection and God?

I looked up evolution online and it doesn't sound like the same definition she gave us in class, I walked up to her before class started and quietly (no one heard me) told her this, and she freaked out and verbally attacked me in front of everyone. She didn't like me saying that her definition might be different form the ones I find from authoritative sources.

I'd appreciate anyone and everyone responding to this thread. I am just trying to understand things, and incorporate all of this into my beliefs somehow?

Thank you so much ,

Steffani

EDIT: Oh, and is it possible to still believe that the world was really created in 7 days?

 

[WaZoO]

Evolution is a 100% undenyable fact in that gene frequencies change over time, it can be observed. Natural selection has been observed as a fact as well. Take a family of cockroaches and spray them with something that will only kill most of them, take the survivors and allow them to reproduce, the new crop of roaches will be more resistent to the spray.

The best evolution site on the net is www.talkorigins.org

What evolution is - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html
Intro to evolutionary biology - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

God and evolution can mix just fine, Genesis actually makes much more sense when you look at it figuratively. Go make a post in the origins theology section and maybe I'll outline some of my reasons to believe that God used evolution. Evolution is a very solid scientific theory, you'd have to be either ignorant or dishonest to reject it.

Actually, http://www.christianforums.com/t1133651-what-is-theistic-evolution-an-explanation.html go there, that's a pretty good essay that someone here wrote!

 

[HRE]

1. My teacher told us that the definition of Evolution is that every living thing has the same genetic code for building amino acids, therefore there is a common cause. Is this the right definition? She says that everyone agrees on evolution, and tis impossible to deny it, but that what people disagree on is natural selection. Is this true?

2. How is it possible to believe in Evolution and God?

3. How is it possible to believe in Evolution, Natural Selection and God?

I looked up evolution online and it doesn't sound like the same definition she gave us in class, I walked up to her before class started and quietly (no one heard me) told her this, and she freaked out and verbally attacked me in front of everyone. She didn't like me saying that her definition might be different form the ones I find from authoritative sources.

I'd appreciate anyone and everyone responding to this thread. I am just trying to understand things, and incorporate all of this into my beliefs somehow?

Thank you so much ,

Steffani

EDIT: Oh, and is it possible to still believe that the world was really created in 7 days?

1. Evolution explains how the diversity of life came about through genetic variation and natural selection. Nothing more.

2. Many Theitic evolutionists believe that God created the first life or that God guided evolution or set it in motion. Science is agnostic; it neither affirms or denies God.

3. See above.

4. Errr...not really. Because a 7-day creation is pretty much thoroughly disproven...along with a global flood and an exodus and a young earth.

 

[rmwilliamsll]

your first point is that there exists a common genetic code.
an interesting essay on this is at:
http://home.wxs.nl/~gkorthof/kortho41.htm

the whole site is a gold mine on the topic, liberally follow internal links.

on the question of Theistic evolution, my personal favorite essay is at:
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dlamoure/3EvoCr.htm

good luck with the class, and keep asking questions.
and dont stop reading and studying for yourself.

 

[CWLite]

Hi, this forum is always kind of intimidating so I never came in before, but I have a couple of questions. I am taking a university level Philosophy class and we are going over arguments for and against God. Okay, here are my questions...

1. My teacher told us that the definition of Evolution is that every living thing has the same genetic code for building amino acids, therefore there is a common cause. Is this the right definition? She says that everyone agrees on evolution, and tis impossible to deny it, but that what people disagree on is natural selection. Is this true?

2. How is it possible to believe in Evolution and God?

3. How is it possible to believe in Evolution, Natural Selection and God?

I looked up evolution online and it doesn't sound like the same definition she gave us in class, I walked up to her before class started and quietly (no one heard me) told her this, and she freaked out and verbally attacked me in front of everyone. She didn't like me saying that her definition might be different form the ones I find from authoritative sources.

I'd appreciate anyone and everyone responding to this thread. I am just trying to understand things, and incorporate all of this into my beliefs somehow?

Thank you so much ,

Steffani

EDIT: Oh, and is it possible to still believe that the world was really created in 7 days?

1. You can't believe in evolution and God, for evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God. God spoke this earth and everything in it into existence, and evolution takes millions of years because the DNA of living things are continuing to change.

2. I don't know too much about natural selection, but I see similarities with actual life right now. If I went to the north pole to live and my son will be more harry than I, and my grandson more so. Or you can be cold and your body will adapt and solve the problem by shivering. The human race is adaptive.

3. They can't co-exist. Both God and evolution does not acknowledge each other.

The earth was created in 6 days, the 7th day God rested. Even then, before God created the sun and moon, a day could have been million years worth. It is not important though, only that we know our origin.

Check this website out, its great for this stuff.
{edited out}

 

[Hydra009]

1. You can't believe in evolution and God, for evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God.

Neither does plate tectonics, gravity, Boyle's law, electromagnetics, etc, etc, etc. Do you think accepting any of those precludes anyone from beliving in God?

The existence of God is beyond the scope of science, therefore science makes no claims about God's existence. I can't stress this enough.

God spoke this earth and everything in it into existence, and evolution takes millions of years because the DNA of living things are continuing to change.

This false dilemma completely ignores theistic evolution, that God spoke living things into existence that are continuing to change.

2. I don't know too much about natural selection, but I see similarities with actual life right now. If I went to the north pole to live and my son will be more harry than I, and my grandson more so. Or you can be cold and your body will adapt and solve the problem by shivering. The human race is adaptive.

Your son wouldn't necessarily be harrier than you. Populations evolve, not individuals. A more accurate scenario would be if your entire town moved to the North Pole and those with more body hair were more likely to survive long enough to reproduce than those with less body hair.

3. They can't co-exist. Both God and evolution does not acknowledge each other.

Wrong again. This false dilemma is frequently propogated by YECs in an attempt to force people to choose between God and science. You can have both. Theistic evolution is always an option.

Check this website out, its great for this stuff.
{edited out}

In other words, check out a propaganda site I like.

 

[CWLite]

Here is a cool fact that I heard. In a lab somewhere, there are scientists that are shooting atoms at each other, seeing what smaller particles make up the atom. They have found that every atom is made up of Nuetrons, Protons and Electrons. Each of these are made up of a smaller particle (man, I forget what they are called). After that, the only thing they found was light, and we know that light is made up of sound. Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

 

[Dark_Lite]

1. You can't believe in evolution and God, for evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God. God spoke this earth and everything in it into existence, and evolution takes millions of years because the DNA of living things are continuing to change.

2. I don't know too much about natural selection, but I see similarities with actual life right now. If I went to the north pole to live and my son will be more harry than I, and my grandson more so. Or you can be cold and your body will adapt and solve the problem by shivering. The human race is adaptive.

3. They can't co-exist. Both God and evolution does not acknowledge each other.

The earth was created in 6 days, the 7th day God rested. Even then, before God created the sun and moon, a day could have been million years worth. It is not important though, only that we know our origin.

Check this website out, its great for this stuff.
{edited out}

Fortunately, the vast majority of Christianity disagrees.

 

[TheUndeadFish]

evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God

My car's manual does not acknowledge the existence of God. Is it now an atheistic work? Should I stop believing in the existence of my car?

I don't know too much about natural selection

Then you need to spend some time learning. What you described was not natural selection.

a day could have been million years worth

If the word "day" is figurative, why couldn't the whole creation story be figurative?

It is not important though, only that we know our origin.

I hate seeing this kind of statement. It tends to makes me think the person who says it is just trying to stop the debate because they know they can't win...

 

[herev]

Hi, welcome to CF!!!

1. You can't believe in evolution and God, for evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God. God spoke this earth and everything in it into existence, and evolution takes millions of years because the DNA of living things are continuing to change.

Well, now--since I DO believe in both, that theory is pretty well shot! And evolution does not acknowledge the existence of God, but it doesn't deny it either--it is neutral on God since it is not about whether God exists.
Yes, God spoke everything into existence, but I, and other Theistic Evolutionists believe he used evolution to make humanity.

2. I don't know too much about natural selection, but I see similarities with actual life right now. If I went to the north pole to live and my son will be more harry than I, and my grandson more so. Or you can be cold and your body will adapt and solve the problem by shivering. The human race is adaptive.

some might call that evidence that at least aspects of the theory of evolution being true.

3. They can't co-exist. Both God and evolution does not acknowledge each other.

And yet, evolution exists, hence if nothing else, the existence of this thread... and you and I both agree that God exists.
For a long time, the US and China didn't acknowledge each other, but both were certainly in existence. HOwever, since God's creation testifies to evolution, I would say that God does acknowledge it

The earth was created in 6 days, the 7th day God rested. Even then, before God created the sun and moon, a day could have been million years worth. It is not important though, only that we know our origin.

Agreed we need to know our origin as Christians (of course not everyone who posts in this forum is a Christian) but the origin of life has nothing to do with evolution. God is the origin, and in my opinion, evoluion is the tool he used to develop that life

Check this website out, its great for this stuff.
{edited out}

Since you are not allowed to post links yet, please do not attempt to get around it. I will edit that part out of your post.

 

[Randall McNally]

Here is a cool fact that I heard. In a lab somewhere, there are scientists that are shooting atoms at each other, seeing what smaller particles make up the atom. They have found that every atom is made up of Nuetrons, Protons and Electrons. Each of these are made up of a smaller particle (man, I forget what they are called).

Quarks. But only protons and neutrons. Electrons are fundamental.

After that, the only thing they found was light, and we know that light is made up of sound.

I have never heard any such thing from the mouths of actual scientists. I'm not sure I've heard it from anyone before you, for that matter.

Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

It's not "made up of" anything. Sound is airborne particles whacking each other at high speed, then whacking your eardrum.

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

I hope you don't expect this to make sense to anyone else.

 

[Hydra009]

Here is a cool fact that I heard. In a lab somewhere, there are scientists that are shooting atoms at each other, seeing what smaller particles make up the atom. They have found that every atom is made up of Nuetrons, Protons and Electrons. Each of these are made up of a smaller particle (man, I forget what they are called).

That lab is called a particle accelerator. Examples of some subatomic particles that make up an atom are quarks, photons, neutrinos, and muons.

After that, the only thing they found was light, and we know that light is made up of sound.

Where'd you hear that? Light is electromagnetic radiation.

Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

Vibrating particles = sound. (or more precisely, sound is a longitudinal displacement wave that propagates through a medium)

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

Interesting. One problem though, sound doesn't exist in a vacuum.

 

[TheUndeadFish]

Here is a cool fact that I heard. In a lab somewhere, there are scientists that are shooting atoms at each other, seeing what smaller particles make up the atom. They have found that every atom is made up of Nuetrons, Protons and Electrons. Each of these are made up of a smaller particle (man, I forget what they are called). After that, the only thing they found was light, and we know that light is made up of sound. Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

I really hope you're not serious... but without any indication that you're joking I'll treat it as serious.

Protons, neutrons, and electrons are made up of Quarks. As far as I've ever heard, they haven't pinned down what exactly makes up quarks. There are various ideas and theories of course. I've never heard of quarks or anything like that being made up of only photons (light). And that doesn't made much sense as photons do not have mass while sub-atomic particles do. Furthermore, while light shares some similarities with sound (they both travel as waves), light is most definately not made up of sound. Sound is not some fundamental aspect of the universe. Sound is just air molecules bumping into each other.

 

[HRE]

Mods get the coolest smilies...

 

[herev]

Mods get the coolest smilies...

lol, do a yahoo search on smilies and free and online and etc, there are so many out there

 

[Project2501]

Hi, this forum is always kind of intimidating so I never came in before, but I have a couple of questions. I am taking a university level Philosophy class and we are going over arguments for and against God. Okay, here are my questions...

1. My teacher told us that the definition of Evolution is that every living thing has the same genetic code for building amino acids, therefore there is a common cause. Is this the right definition? She says that everyone agrees on evolution, and tis impossible to deny it, but that what people disagree on is natural selection. Is this true?

That's a pretty bad definition. The definition of evolution is allele variation in the gene pool over time. For each gene, there are different versions of that gene that do slightly different things, and lead to variation in the population. This variation results in differences in the members of the population determining their breeding success. As a result of their phenotypes (expression of the genes) some will breed better than others, and their alleles will become more dominant. This is natural selection, and it is undeniable because it is an observed fact like gravity or electromagnetics. The thing that some people disagree on is how far these changes can go. Many creationists for example suggest that the changes are limited, however they never give a defining line, ot her than make statements like "dogs will never become cats" which is not useful, because nobody says that will happen anyway. they never give a reason why dogs and cats cannot have a common ancestor. The first bit of your definition alludes to this - similarities in the genetic code as a whole (not just the coding parts) suggest common ancestry. It is not merely similarities though, but the ordering and properties of those similarities. I could explain, but this reply would get rather long.

2. How is it possible to believe in Evolution and God?

3. How is it possible to believe in Evolution, Natural Selection and God?

simple, evolution is the mechanism through which God created, and Evolution is a part of the functioning of the world, just like gravity. If we say that God did not want evolution, there are other methods of DNA coding which could have stopped evolution from happening.

I looked up evolution online and it doesn't sound like the same definition she gave us in class, I walked up to her before class started and quietly (no one heard me) told her this, and she freaked out and verbally attacked me in front of everyone. She didn't like me saying that her definition might be different form the ones I find from authoritative sources.

well I agree with you, her definition is wrong, and I think it was very unprofessional of her to "freak out infront of the class" I suggest that the best thing to do, is to find an authoritative book by scientists, a big one is Douglas Futuyma "Evolutionary Biology"

I'd appreciate anyone and everyone responding to this thread. I am just trying to understand things, and incorporate all of this into my beliefs somehow?

Thank you so much ,

Steffani

EDIT: Oh, and is it possible to still believe that the world was really created in 7 days?

yes, but that creates theological problems. All the evidence suggests that the universe is very old, and the earth is also very old, and that life is very old and shares common ancestry. So there is no scientific argument that the Earth is young. Groups like AIG and ICR disagree of course, but their science tends to border on the atrocious. Hypothetically it all could have been made yesterday, but with the appearance of age. This is what some believe (only not yesterday, they believe it was made 6000 years ago), however the problem with those arguments is that it makes God into a liar, since He says one thing in his book, and another thing in His creation.

 

[Project2501]

Here is a cool fact that I heard. In a lab somewhere,

CERN probably. or Fermilab. there are lots of atom smashers though.

there are scientists that are shooting atoms at each other,

generally protons or electrons, and not whole atoms.

seeing what smaller particles make up the atom.

and alot of other things too.

They have found that every atom is made up of Nuetrons, Protons and Electrons.

These were found witout the aid of CERN.

Each of these are made up of a smaller particle (man, I forget what they are called).

Quarks.

After that, the only thing they found was light,

not really. This might be a bit difficult to grasp though, but what you see there is the conversion of energy to matter. the particles are not made of light, as such.

and we know that light is made up of sound.

no, this is wrong. Sound is the result of compression waves in matter and has nothing to do with light.

Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

sound is made up of compression waves of matter, vibrating longitudinally. This is really old and basic stuff, and I am suprised that you can find information on CERN that you cannot find information on sound. Since it is so readily findable, I will not explain it, but just give a link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

no, you need matter before you can have sound.

 

[P4g4nite]

After that, the only thing they found was light, and we know that light is made up of sound. Nobody yet can say (I have yet to hear) what sound is made up of.

God spoke, and there was light, and then everything else. Sound is the power of creation.

Backs slowly away from CW towards the door...

 

[JAL]

I think this thread occurs twice, so I will just copy and paste my earlier comments.

Let’s assume for the moment that the universe is indeed old (13 billion years according to most scientists) and the earth is likewise old (4 billion years) and that modern man has been around for a long while (say 50,000 years, with the dinosaurs long dead before Adam hit the scene). Is there a way to reconcile these figures with a literal reading of Genesis? Certainly. In the Bible, the term “father” means “any ancestor.” For example Abraham is our father. As a result, the biblical genealogies are totally ambiguous as to how many generations existed between Adam and Christ. Most Bible scholars maintain that it was Hebrew writing style to omit generations in the tally. (Had God deviated from this style, all the textual critics would only deny the Bible’s authenticity even more). This takes care of the alleged 50,000 years worth of mankind.

Genesis tells us the origin of what is visible – visible to ancient man who lacked telescopes to see distant galaxies. It doesn’t have much to say about the universe as a whole. Perhaps the whole universe is mentioned in verse 1, “In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.” Several days later He made “the stars” which speaks not of the whole universe but of those stars visible to ancient man, presumably our own galaxy alone. Thus our galaxy was not the first of all galaxies.

Were the six days 24-hour periods? The absence of a natural sun until the fourth of these six days allows for any possible length of daylight. It need not be 24-hour periods. God designated six days only to establish the paradigm/calendar of working six consecutive daylights and then resting on the seventh daylight (the Sabbath). Now since there was no sun at the outset, what is the meaning of the phrase repeated for each of the six days, “And there was evening, and the morning, the [next] day”? Evening/darkness simply contrasts with morning/day where day is the shining of a sun into a locale. Christ’s face as Sun illuminated our entire galaxy:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep…And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.[This is Christ's face shining into the galax - see 2Cor 4:4-6]. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day (Gen 1:2-5).



This was the first galactic day of six. These six galactic days filled the entire galaxy with Christ’s light and thus have absolutely nothing to do with the earth’s local 24-hour daylights furnished by the sun newly created on the fourth galactic day (1:16-19). Each time that Christ suspended the shining of His face, and He did it gradually to create an evening-effect, a galactic night ensued. Thus in each case we have evening, and then morning, the next day (the next galactic day). And since it was His prerogative to decide when to shine, there is no telling how long these galactic days were. The first one could have been a billion years for all we know, the second one a million years – all was entirely up to Him. After all, these six days were totally artificial fabrications serving no useful purpose other than to set up a paradigm/calendar of working six days followed by resting on the seventh day. As a result of this flexible timescale, Genesis cannot be construed as contradicting the age of the earth or the age of universe. (Presumably Christ made His galactic Light invisible to the earth’s creatures once the sun was in place on the fourth galactic day). Christ's Light also nourished the plants until our created sun was in place.

Now regarding the fossil record. Evolutionists claim that all the genetic evidence points to a common ancestor from which all species evolved. This is based largely on the commonalities among fossilized genetic materials. This may be true but does not disprove biblical creation because God could have formed all the main species from a single hand-held cluster of uniform genetic material (and in this sense from a single common “ancestor”). He did this forming not all at once but over the course of six galactic days, fashinoning Adam and Eve on the sixth day. Of course evolution/adaptation may have ensued after biblical creation assuming God programmed the DNA to adapt/evolve automatically to dangerous environments. Thus we are not faced with a mutually exclusive choice, “either creation or evolution.” A certain measure of both is possibly more realistic.

Why would God take so long for creation? One possible reason, among many, is that animals have free will, and free will is sometimes unpredictable even by God, as many theologians today admit (these theologians are called "open theists"). Hence God may have taken time to tweak/fine-tune the natural order to make sure that animal behavior would be in accordance with His plans for Adam and Eve. This tweaking of the natural order would help to explain anomalies such as vestigial organs. (Adam was the first "man" in the biblical sense, but there may have been many man-like species preceding him).
I am not totally convinced of evolution, but I see enough evidence to support it to warrant accepting it as a possibility. But I still take Genesis literally even though a huge percentage of Christians have migrated to a non-literal reading. Even if evolution can be shown, there is no way to prove that God’s hand isn’t behind it, manipulating the DNA invisibly. Here's one problem with evolution. If it takes a thousand microevolutions to transform an ape into a man, there should be a thousand “missing links” in the fossil record – and this would be true for each evolved species! The fossil record shows the opposite, namely many species but comparitively few candidates for transitional forms.

What now of the order of the fossil record? One will have difficulty using a global flood to account for the fossil record. There is simply too much scientific, geological, and archaeological evidence against it. Hugh Ross’ website links to an article that argues for a local flood based on the literal reading of the Hebrew texts involving Noah. Such a small flood would have no serious impact on the geologic column and thus cannot be significantly challenged by scientists. Moses laid out in Genesis an order of creation, starting with fruit-bearing plants, that seems compatible with the fossil record. Some evolutionists debate whether birds arrived early or late. If birds arrived late, the fossil evidence could be a challenge to Moses' account. If birds arrived early, Moses' account seems acceptable.

 

[P4g4nite]

JAL, I'd just like to know, when you have talking animals, parting seas, people raising from the dead and the skyman is binging entire universes into existance with a word....Why do you even try to fuse it with modern scientific understanding?