• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Evolution Promotes Brutality

Astrophile

Newbie
Aug 30, 2013
2,338
1,559
77
England
✟256,526.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Widowed
As far as anarchy, it is also easy to say "if I came from nothing then all rules are just made by someone else. What gives them the right to say what is right and wrong if we are all here by chance anyway. So I will make my rules and there is no one who can tell me I'm wrong. I can do what I want, when I want, take what I want.. what ever, Who do I have to answer to? And when I die there is no penalty to pay.
I accept what moral philosophers say because they have studied these matters and know more about right and wrong than I do, just as I accept what professional scientists say because they know more about science than I do.

It is creationists like you who reject the findings of science and claim to know better than scientists.

I wonder what you think about moral philosophers and theories of right and wrong. Do you have the same attitude to them that you have to scientists?
 
  • Like
Reactions: poggytyke
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I accept what moral philosophers say because they have studied these matters and know more about right and wrong than I do, just as I accept what professional scientists say because they know more about science than I do.

It is creationists like you who reject the findings of science and claim to know better than scientists.

I wonder what you think about moral philosophers and theories of right and wrong. Do you have the same attitude to them that you have to scientists?
You think science has become Lord? You think the Lord or the Universe went away?

You propose we are now to go to the Tree of Knowledge to know good from evil, right form wrong?

Humm. Isiah 5:20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

Heissonear

Geochemist and Stratigrapher
Site Supporter
Dec 21, 2011
4,962
982
Lake Conroe
✟201,642.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Omnipotent, AV1611, basically means can do anything. Although teh church fathers did describe God this way, they also did place some definite limitations on God. In Aquinas, God could not experience any negative emotion, violate the laws of geometry, or change. I consider omnipotence is major theological mistake. If God has any kind of character, then certain things are off limits for God to do, for example. An interesting question to think about here is this: If God is omnipotent, can God make a stone so heavy he can't lift it when he wants to? I raise that question because reflecting on it shows the absurdity of omnipotence.
To you it is a word with only conceptual premise.

What you lack is its reality in your midst.

He has watched every breath and step you have taken, and all your thoughts; even what you did when you were 12 years old were like a minute ago to Him.

You are the one who acts like this us not so. You are the one that needs to wake up.

It is an incredible life He has. He is wonderous, including why He chose Apparent Age to make Adam, Eve, and this physical Realm. A God full of purpose in all His ways.

And you stiff arm Him before others, and act like He is nowhere to be found. It appears your faith is non-existent at this point in time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
62
✟107,801.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
There are many true Christians who have accepted that life on Earth evolved over millions of years.

In particular, lifeforms have been around for over 200 million years which have continuously lived by biting and devouring other lifeforms.

Has God allowed brutality to be the means for many lifeforms to exist for such a long period of time?

I don't think so. How about you?
Yes! Evolutionary creationism is Gods way to achieve his plan for the evolutionary worlds of time and space.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
62
✟107,801.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Since when?

Do you have a single reference for this claim?
Yea, it's a common term among evolutionist. Where have you been????

Survival of the fittest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest


Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from an evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

Herbert Spencer first used the phrase – after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species – in his Principles of Biology (1864), in which he drew parallels between his own economic theories and Darwin's biological ones, writing, "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."[1]

Darwin responded positively to Alfred Russel Wallace's suggestion of using Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" as an alternative to "natural selection", and adopted the phrase in The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication published in 1868.[1][2] In On the Origin of Species, he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition published in 1869,[3][4] intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment".[5][6]
 
Upvote 0

pgp_protector

Noted strange person
Dec 17, 2003
51,897
17,800
57
Earth For Now
Visit site
✟463,083.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Yea, it's a common term among evolutionist. Where have you been????

Survival of the fittest

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survival_of_the_fittest


Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from an evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."

Herbert Spencer first used the phrase – after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species – in his Principles of Biology (1864), in which he drew parallels between his own economic theories and Darwin's biological ones, writing, "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."[1]

Darwin responded positively to Alfred Russel Wallace's suggestion of using Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" as an alternative to "natural selection", and adopted the phrase in The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication published in 1868.[1][2] In On the Origin of Species, he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition published in 1869,[3][4] intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment".[5][6]
No where does that call for the savage killing as a requirement though, as you stated it does.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
62
✟107,801.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
No where does that call for the savage killing as a requirement though, as you stated it does.
No, I didn't say that, besides, the term "savage" is a value judgment made by a mind conscious of values. To a bear in the forest, ripping your limbs off is just dinner.
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Omnipotent, AV1611, basically means can do anything. Although teh church fathers did describe God this way, they also did place some definite limitations on God. In Aquinas, God could not experience any negative emotion, violate the laws of geometry, or change. I consider omnipotence is major theological mistake. If God has any kind of character, then certain things are off limits for God to do, for example. An interesting question to think about here is this: If God is omnipotent, can God make a stone so heavy he can't lift it when he wants to? I raise that question because reflecting on it shows the absurdity of omnipotence.
Omnipotence surely means "all powerful" and therefore can do anything. No man can place limitations on God. Omnipotence is not a theological mistake. The question about making a stone He cannot lift ( or another I have heard is can He make a round square)....Those questions are absurd themselves. It's like asking if you can push yourself over or lift yourself up. They do nothing to diminish or negate, the awesome power of God, His Omnipotence.

Can you give me a negative emotion the God cannot feel? He has been described as feeling sadness and anger, wrath and disappointment....
 
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
You seem to be forgetting something, Moses was fictional.
Well, right there, I'm done. I cannot argue if the foundation of my argument is on Biblical truth and you believe it is fiction.
In any event, in those times, if you could read and write, you were much more intelligent than "goat herders" are made out to be.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Well, right there, I'm done. I cannot argue if the foundation of my argument is on Biblical truth and you believe it is fiction.
In any event, in those times, if you could read and write, you were much more intelligent than "goat herders" are made out to be.

If your argument is based upon "Biblical truth" you should be able to demonstrate that. The fact that there was no Biblical Exodus from Egypt pretty much debunks the existence of Moses. He was a literary character and that is all.
 
Upvote 0

46AND2

Forty six and two are just ahead of me...
Sep 5, 2012
5,807
2,210
Vancouver, WA
✟109,603.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Omnipotence surely means "all powerful" and therefore can do anything. No man can place limitations on God. Omnipotence is not a theological mistake. The question about making a stone He cannot lift ( or another I have heard is can He make a round square)....Those questions are absurd themselves. It's like asking if you can push yourself over or lift yourself up. They do nothing to diminish or negate, the awesome power of God, His Omnipotence.

Can you give me a negative emotion the God cannot feel? He has been described as feeling sadness and anger, wrath and disappointment....

Emotion is a reaction to stimuli. If a god is omniscient, what could possibly stimulate emotion for it?
 
Upvote 0

Not_By_Chance

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 25, 2015
813
176
71
✟84,806.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,629
12,069
✟230,471.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
How do you know? If you were open minded, you might consider other research that comes to a different conclusion:-
http://patternsofevidence.com/
Sorry, but is that a link to a movie? Show me something valid and I will have an open mind. Show me a movie made by unreasonable people and I will laugh.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
62
✟107,801.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Omnipotence surely means "all powerful" and therefore can do anything. No man can place limitations on God. Omnipotence is not a theological mistake. The question about making a stone He cannot lift ( or another I have heard is can He make a round square)....Those questions are absurd themselves. It's like asking if you can push yourself over or lift yourself up. They do nothing to diminish or negate, the awesome power of God, His Omnipotence.

Can you give me a negative emotion the God cannot feel? He has been described as feeling sadness and anger, wrath and disappointment....
God does not, will not, cannot do the ungodlike thing. God is a being not a formula.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
You think science has become Lord? You think the Lord or the Universe went away?

Where did he say that?

You propose we are now to go to the Tree of Knowledge to know good from evil, right form wrong?

According
to your own mythology, that ship already sailed.
 
Upvote 0

TLK Valentine

I've already read the books you want burned.
Apr 15, 2012
64,493
30,322
Behind the 8-ball, but ahead of the curve.
✟541,572.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

JacksBratt

Searching for Truth
Site Supporter
Jul 5, 2014
16,294
6,495
63
✟596,843.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Well, as long as we're considering movies as evidence...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120794/
The Patterns of Evidence is not a fictional movie or a movie based on a true story. It is a documentary of a man who searches for evidence of the exodus.

His most productive source and the gentleman how helps him unlock the problem is .... an atheist.

I found the conclusion very telling. The curators and Egyptian historians etc, hear the new found information, data and results of the search, they agree with it but state... they won't change anything that has been presented as truth for so many years, no matter that it is in fact incorrect and new information shows that it is false.

Mark 8:18King James Version (KJV)
18 Having eyes, see ye not? and having ears, hear ye not? and do ye not remember?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,143
Visit site
✟98,025.00
Faith
Agnostic
Read the entire reply. I copied a portion from Wikipedia on Abiogenesis on how life started without a Creator, which directly leads to the Evolution of life on Earth. No Creator needed.

We are discussing evolution, not abiogenesis.

There is an entire science domain which explains the physical realm and life in Earth without the need for a God to explain why things hallen of a need for God to make things happen. Natural processes have caused all things arpund us to come about. This is a Naturalist point of view of existence.

That is who I was growing up and in college. To a Naturalist the things within the Bible are mythical and a person who would believe in the multitude of supernatural myths promoted in the Bible were mentally off are pretty ignorant to the times. People making the sun stand still and walking through rivers that part are mythical fabrications of cultures of the past, to Naturalists. In our day and age Naturalism is prevailing.

Evolution is viewed as a fact to Naturalists, but may I state the main evidence to prove Evolution is entirely missing.

If one stays open and honest in heart, in who they are, God can change anybody.

Can you show a single successful supernatural explanation that is being used in science or medicine? Evolution seems like the least of your worries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0