There is no evidence againts the Theory of Evolution.

[joshua 1 9]

Then God will answer to me.

Your glass alibis will shatter like glass before the Throne and you will be speechless, you will have nothing to day.

 

[Hieronymus]

No controversy.

O, thatś why we agree. I see...

 

[Hieronymus]

Quite right it does. And one of the things science has discovered

Darwin had a thought,based on evidence for adaptability of finches.
They try to prove this idea.
Nothing is 'discovered'.
You don't have to lie for your beliefs.

 

[lesliedellow]

Actually, yes.
We have this gap in knowledge, you see.

Christian theologians have mostly learnt their lesson by now, even if creationists haven't. The trouble with trying to fit God into the gaps is that the gaps keep being filled.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Haha!
No sir.
Have a look at this:

The point seems to be: Darwin's evolution cannot handle polyfunctionality.

 

[Hieronymus]

The point seems to be: Darwin's evolution cannot handle polyfunctionality.

It can not handle DNA and the system in which it operates.

 

[lesliedellow]

Darwin had a thought,based on evidence for adaptability of finches.
They try to prove this idea.
Nothing is 'discovered'.
You don't have to lie for your beliefs.

Your keep saying that Evolution hasn't been proven beyond reasonable doubt doesn't make it so.

 

[Hieronymus]

Your keep saying that Evolution hasn't been proven beyond reasonable doubt doesn't make it so.

Itś not because i say so.

 

[lesliedellow]

It can not handle DNA and the system in which it operates.

Darwin didn't know about DNA. We do, and, with that knowledge, we have a much more complete understanding of how Evolution works than Darwin ever did.

 

[Hieronymus]

Darwin didn't know about DNA. We do, and, with that knowledge, we have a much more complete understanding of how Evolution works than Darwin ever did.

sure...

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, I have no idea that "The Shack" is?

I'll take your word for it.

 

[AV1611VET]

Ah, "the mountains of evidence" mantra...

I love their claims of having "mountains of evidence," in view of what the Bible says.

Mark 11:23 For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith.

Those mountains are where scientists worship today.

John 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

 

[bhsmte]

Your glass alibis will shatter like glass before the Throne and you will be speechless, you will have nothing to day.

And you know this how?

 

[bhsmte]

It can not handle DNA and the system in which it operates.

Really? What is your knowledge and evidence to make this claim? How about Francis Collin's opinion of the evidence for evolution and how DNA basically slammed the door on any doubt about the TOE? He is only the former head of the human genome project, geneticist and by the way; devout Christian. He and all the other scientists, must be clueless, right?

Karl Giberson: One of the things I appreciate a lot about Darrel Falk, who I think is a courageous voice in this conversation, is that he will come out and say that common ancestry is simply a fact. And that if you’re not willing to concede that the genetic evidence points to common ancestry than you’re essentially denying the field of biology the possibility of having facts at all. That’s the strong language that he uses.

Would you say that common ancestry and evolution in general is at that level? How compelling is the evidence at this point?

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming. And it is becoming more and more robust down to the details almost by the day, especially because we have this ability now to use the study of DNA as a digital record of the way Darwin’s theory has played out over the course of long periods of time.

Darwin could hardly have imagined that there would turn out to be such strong proof of his theory because he didn’t know about DNA - but we have that information. I would say we are as solid in claiming the truth of evolution as we are in claiming the truth of the germ theory. It is so profoundly well-documented in multiple different perspectives, all of which give you a consistent view with enormous explanatory power that make it the central core of biology. Trying to do biology without evolution would be like trying to do physics without mathematics

- See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/f...on-and-the-church-part-2#sthash.n4JM0gDH.dpuf

 

[SteveB28]

Sorry, but i only hear: "the evidence is conclusive", "mountains of evidence", "evolution is proven", and such things, but nobody produces any...
What they bring for this ambiguous at best or isn't evolution...
I don't know the names you gave there, but the evidence is still the same, if they explain it well to the layman or not.
So then we're back at the ABSENCE of explanatory power of naturalism for the reality of the phenomenon of life and its premises.

We have established by quoting naturalists that they CHOOSE for naturalism, even when it's not probable.
Moreover, it should have taken millions of years (also according to naturalistic models) to get where we are today, so how are you ever going to prove anything scientifically?

So, do you deny that your genome contains mutated genes (on average, several dozen of them) that were not present in either of your parents?

 

[joshua 1 9]

And you know this how?

John the Beloved wrote about this in the book of Revelation when he was exiled to the Island of Patmos. Also David talks about this: "Psalm 47:8 God reigns over the heathen: God sits on the throne of his holiness." There are many verses that talks about how they have no excuses. This is a major theme in the Bible that God rules and reigns over His Creation and that there will be a time of Judgement. But we can be assured that God is a God of absolute and perfect Justice. It should be noted that: "The dead were Judged". This is not a judgement for the living. That is a different judgement having to do with rewards. Which we will gladly throw at the feet of Jesus because apart from Him no one would be saved. No one wants to be empty handed that day with nothing to give to Jesus out of gratitude for all He does for us.

The Final Judgment
11Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it, from whose presence earth and heaven fled away, and no place was found for them.12And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds.…Rev20

"For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse". Rom1:20

"The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." 2Peter3:9

 

[Hoghead1]

The creator of all that is is unlikely to stand for reelection once every four or five years, and, if he exists, you don't get to choose which attributes he should have.

It all depends upon what you model of ultimate power is. If you believe it is a dictatorship., then you would see God as having complete and total monopolistic control over everything. I, however, believe it take far more talent to govern over a democracy. So I view God as more like a president than a king or despot. God maybe doesn't run for election every four years, true. But God deals with a universe of free beings and therefore does not coerce or force anything. God dos not choose for us, we have to choose for yourselves. God may well tolerate some real degree of rebellion. A loving parent does not dictate or force his offspring to take up a certain career, for example. If the offspring maybe goes off in a different direction from what the parent desired, then he should respect the choice of his offspring. Also, we re dealing with models of God here, how our imagination pictures God. Therefore, yes, we do have the right to choose what attributes we attribute to God. If, for example, you model of God looks pretty much that of classical theism, where God is pictured the Ruling Caesar and Unmoved Mover, then yes, I have to right, a duty. to challenge you and say I reject that model because it does not provide a loving, sensitive God at all.

 

[joshua 1 9]

So, do you deny that your genome contains mutated genes (on average, several dozen of them) that were not present in either of your parents?

You left out the key world: "beneficial". God causes good to come out of everything but in general mistakes, errors and mutations are neutral or they are negative in nature. Not beneficial. Christians believe we live in a fallen world that is in need of a Redeemer and redemption. God is in control and He is going to restore this world to His plan and purpose. Science IE the theory of evolution does not taken the fallen condition of the world into consideration. God has everything under control. He dots every i and He crosses every t. There is nothing He leaves undone and unfinished and He leaves NOTHING to chance.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming.

The evidence for common ancestor is overwhelming. He does not mention anything about mistakes, errors or mutations.

"It's also now been possible to compare our DNA with that of many other species. The evidence supporting the idea that all living things are descended from a common ancestor is truly overwhelming."

"But I have no difficulty putting that together with what I believe as a Christian because I believe that God had a plan to create creatures with whom he could have fellowship, in whom he could inspire [the] moral law, in whom he could infuse the soul, and who he would give free will as a gift for us to make decisions about our own behavior, a gift which we oftentimes utilize to do the wrong thing.


I believe God used the mechanism of evolution to achieve that goal. And while that may seem to us who are limited by this axis of time as a very long, drawn-out process, it wasn't long and drawn-out to God. And it wasn't random to God.

[He] had the plan all along of how that would turn out. There was no ambiguity about that."


Read more at http://www.beliefnet.com/News/Scien...cientific-Adventures.aspx#bQ6vYJlKyxBojMFm.99

Francis Collins has no problem reconciling the Bible with Science.
This is a point that I have repeatedly made here on this forum.

 

[Hoghead1]

You left out the key world: "beneficial". God causes good to come out of everything but in general mistakes, errors and mutations are neutral or they are negative in nature. Not beneficial. Christians believe we live in a fallen world that is in need of a Redeemer and redemption. God is in control and He is going to restore this world to His plan and purpose. Science IE the theory of evolution does not taken the fallen condition of the world into consideration. God has everything under control. He dots every i and He crosses every t. There is nothing He leaves undone and unfinished and He leaves NOTHING to chance.


That is not at all accurate. Those of us who hold with theistic evolution do in fact take sin with sufficient seriousness, probably moreso than anti-evolutionary Christians. The further up the scale you are, the more complexity you have, and that means more freedom, and that means more opportunity for things to be used as not intended to be. If a piano only had one note, nobody could ever hit a wrong one. But with 88 keys, all sorts of noise, wrong notes, and so on can happen. God is continually providing us with new-found creative possibilities to actualize beauty, but its up to us to decide how well we will actualize them. Evil occurs because we made bad decisions. Anti-evolutionary Christianity goes strongly on the notion that God dictates or predestines absolutely everything, including the Fall. Hence, God is in fact the author of all evil. In turn , that means evil written off as merely apparent, as it all serves and represents God's will. Now, I don't know any approach that would take sin with less seriousness than this one.