Will Humanity exhaust the possibilities of Evolution, or get stuck in a niche?

How many times can you miss an opportunity to evolve (by self-punctuating)?

  • one, then you need to repent

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • two, then you need to chose which to repent

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • three, then you need to repent in general

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • four, then you need to repent both in general and specifically

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • unknown, you need to put it in the hands of the Holy Spirit

    Votes: 1 50.0%
  • you need to repent anyway, if you want to live

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    2

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,380
704
45
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
Hi there,

So there is a problem you may not have thought of: what if Man gets stuck in a niche? What if that niche keeps Man from venturing out again, that he accepts he will never exhaust Evolution (and shouldn't try?)? The point is, you have to position yourself to take advantage of most selection pressures, they don't just come to you, to respond to. The whole point of mutation is supposed to be that there is a relationship to selection pressures that remain undiscovered without it. If you are in a niche (which you could easily read as "ditch"), the selection pressures that would drive you forward, are mitigated - but on the other hand the niche could save you from death you don't have time to overcome?

MY prediction is that Man will exhaust the possibilities of Evolution, because of one thing: Mann does not respond to selection pressures that do not make exhausting possible. If Man woke up one day and "I am Evolved, I must respond to every selection pressure that is available" he would quickly exhaust himself, without being able to define a particular Evolution. I suppose that is why they have the concept "punctuated equilibrium"; my point is that the Man is able to self-punctuate equilibrium: a reality that could only be the case, if some kind of design existed - if only as a point of reference.

That then, my friends, is what Evolutionists are obliged to do: self-punctuate. If you have an opportunity to adapt a common selection pressure, for your common Man: you are obliged to do it. It was your moral duty. If you have seen such a pressure and not attempted to self-punctuate, you are sinning and required to "repent". This is because in not doing so you risk harm to the current level of Evolution, which - time being short - can only explore so much Evolution, let alone exhaust it. You really must justify your Evolution, without waiting for "pie in the sky" selection pressures, such that you can easily deflect if you maintain a strength in what is native to you (concerning Evolution).

Let the Lord strengthen who He will; let the Word of the Lord carry whom it will.
 

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,645
11,691
54
USA
✟293,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
That then, my friends, is what Evolutionists are obliged to do: self-punctuate. If you have an opportunity to adapt a common selection pressure, for your common Man: you are obliged to do it. It was your moral duty. If you have seen such a pressure and not attempted to self-punctuate, you are sinning and required to "repent". This is because in not doing so you risk harm to the current level of Evolution, which - time being short - can only explore so much Evolution, let alone exhaust it. You really must justify your Evolution, without waiting for "pie in the sky" selection pressures, such that you can easily deflect if you maintain a strength in what is native to you (concerning Evolution).

I think you're mostly on the wrong board. You misunderstandings of evolution are on topic, but this isn't the place for street preaching.

(As for the poll, I can't check any of them. I don't sin.)
 
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,953
✟174,600.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
See, that's the very kind of stuff that turns me off religion. I mean what happens in the case where over some finite period, someone has been totally honest and not in contact with anyone else .. like how I've been in the last 10 minutes? I couldn't possibly have committed any 'sin' over that period.

So this dude says I'm deceiving myself? How would he know? He couldn't even conceive of any case where someone hasn't committed any sins! What is expected of me? To make one up just to satisfy his twisted notion that I'm either a sinner, deceiving myself or I'm incapable of being truthful?
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I mean what happens in the case where over some finite period, someone has been totally honest and not in contact with anyone else .. like how I've been in the last 10 minutes? I couldn't possibly have committed any 'sin' over that period.
If you picture yourself as a tree, this should become clear to you.

Each branch produces fruit (sins); but the trunk of the tree is your sin nature, providing nourishment to the branches that produce the fruit.

So you can say your branch didn't produce any fruit in the last ten minutes, but it is still being supplied nourishment by the trunk.

Eventually you will sin, and sin again, and sin again.

There's a saying that sums this up nicely:

We aren't sinners because we sin, we sin because we're sinners.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Gottservant
Upvote 0

SelfSim

A non "-ist"
Jun 23, 2014
6,154
1,953
✟174,600.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Private
If you picture yourself as a tree, this should become clear to you.

Each branch produces fruit (sins); but the trunk of the tree is your sin nature, providing nourishment to the branches that produce the fruit.

So you can say your branch didn't produce any fruit in the last ten minutes, but it is still being supplied nourishment by the trunk.

Eventually you will sin, and sin again, and sin again.

There's a saying that sums this up nicely:

We aren't sinners because we sin, we sin because we're sinners.
All I can say is that, is that the dude who wrote that, must've been talking about what he does .. and what he is/was.
He was talking about himself.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
All I can say is that, is that the dude who wrote that, must've been talking about what he does .. and what he is/was.
He was talking about himself.
He was conveying a universal truth, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
 
Upvote 0

Phred

Junior Mint
Aug 12, 2003
5,373
998
✟22,717.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Hi there,

So there is a problem you may not have thought of: what if Man gets stuck in a niche? What if that niche keeps Man from venturing out again, that he accepts he will never exhaust Evolution (and shouldn't try?)? The point is, you have to position yourself to take advantage of most selection pressures, they don't just come to you, to respond to. The whole point of mutation is supposed to be that there is a relationship to selection pressures that remain undiscovered without it. If you are in a niche (which you could easily read as "ditch"), the selection pressures that would drive you forward, are mitigated - but on the other hand the niche could save you from death you don't have time to overcome?

MY prediction is that Man will exhaust the possibilities of Evolution, because of one thing: Mann does not respond to selection pressures that do not make exhausting possible. If Man woke up one day and "I am Evolved, I must respond to every selection pressure that is available" he would quickly exhaust himself, without being able to define a particular Evolution. I suppose that is why they have the concept "punctuated equilibrium"; my point is that the Man is able to self-punctuate equilibrium: a reality that could only be the case, if some kind of design existed - if only as a point of reference.

That then, my friends, is what Evolutionists are obliged to do: self-punctuate. If you have an opportunity to adapt a common selection pressure, for your common Man: you are obliged to do it. It was your moral duty. If you have seen such a pressure and not attempted to self-punctuate, you are sinning and required to "repent". This is because in not doing so you risk harm to the current level of Evolution, which - time being short - can only explore so much Evolution, let alone exhaust it. You really must justify your Evolution, without waiting for "pie in the sky" selection pressures, such that you can easily deflect if you maintain a strength in what is native to you (concerning Evolution).

Let the Lord strengthen who He will; let the Word of the Lord carry whom it will.
This is like saying you hate baseball. You hate everything about baseball. The tackling, the touchdowns the way players have to wear helmets.
 
Upvote 0

Hans Blaster

Rocket surgeon
Mar 11, 2017
14,645
11,691
54
USA
✟293,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
If you picture yourself as a tree, this should become clear to you.

Each branch produces fruit (sins); but the trunk of the tree is your sin nature, providing nourishment to the branches that produce the fruit.

So you can say your branch didn't produce any fruit in the last ten minutes, but it is still being supplied nourishment by the trunk.

Your analogy is horrible. Fruit doesn't form or produce fruit in a ten-minute interval, especial tree fruits. It takes weeks from flowering to fruiting

Eventually you will sin, and sin again, and sin again.

There's a saying that sums this up nicely:

We aren't sinners because we sin, we sin because we're sinners.

P1. A sin is an offense against god or god's laws.
P2. I have no reason to think any god exists.
C. I have no reason to think I have sinned.

You are likely to accept that P1 is correct or almost correct.
You can not know my mind, and therefore challenge P2.
Therefore, you have no real dispute of the conclusion.

I don't care what your 500-year old Jacobean text says, or how you interpret it. Your Jedi mind tricks don't work on me.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Phred
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Phred

Junior Mint
Aug 12, 2003
5,373
998
✟22,717.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
It came naturally to you, didn't it?
Sin means "to miss the mark." That means there has to be a mark. Someone has to set the target you're not hitting. If your god doesn't exist how can I be missing the mark it didn't set?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Sin means "to miss the mark." That means there has to be a mark. Someone has to set the target you're not hitting. If your god doesn't exist how can I be missing the mark it didn't set?
Ask Hans.

He's the one who's bragging he hits the target every time without exception.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Phred

Junior Mint
Aug 12, 2003
5,373
998
✟22,717.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Ask Hans.

He's the one who's bragging he hits the target every time without exception.
I think he's pointing out that your antiquated definition of "sin" makes less sense than a dolphin wearing a raincoat.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,665
51,418
Guam
✟4,896,428.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I think he's pointing out that your antiquated definition of "sin" makes less sense than a dolphin wearing a raincoat.
I somehow missed all that in his simple three-word sentence.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums