Evidences for evolution
- Thread starter Ray K
- Start date
TheBear
NON-WOKED
Does God speak to you on automotive maintenance schedules, or cooking recipies?
And there it is folks.
All bets are off for any future intelligent conversation. My faith in God, which is strong, has absolutely nothing to do with what we are discussing.
It's been interesting talking to you, ThienAn. However, with those last two comments of yours, we are pretty much done talking about evolution. Have a good time on this subject, ThienAn. I'll be happy to discuss any other Christian topic with you, but not this one.
John
Upvote
0
jon1101
Well-Known Member
Human thought is the source of human knowledge (if such a thing can be had by man, but that's another debate); human logic is the method you use to differentiate between the sense and the nonsense of thought. Logic is what you use when you interpret your christian doctrine. Logic is the basis for your knowledge; and, ironically enough, your human logic is the basis for you arguments that you cannot trust human logic.
-jon
Upvote
0
LouisBooth
Well-Known Member
Just wondering..is there a time when 1+1 doesn't equal 2? I think I recall someone who has a BS in applied mathematics that you can prove that..just like the factorial of 1 is zero..mac? Like that wretch? Evolution wrong. Adaptation is right, so I'll stick with what its true name is..adaptation.
Upvote
0
You're right, I had no right to be in this thread since I never believe nor will I ever believe it. Just as my statement made you feel pointless about your posts in this thread, your statement above made me feel the same.
I don't need faith to understand gravity because I can see it. But if your best explanation is it's a "missing link". Well, then!
You put your faith wherever you want, but God will make you accountable.
Upvote
0
There is no trap, just a lack of understanding on your
part. Firstly, we do not know what God may have
done with regard to plants. We know from the
Bible that the animals CAME to Noah (start of migratory
instinct? perhaps). Genesis 6:20
We also know that Noah was to bring food with him
(this would have likely been only grasses, grains, etc).
Genesis 6:21.
God makes no provision for plant life for Noah to carry
out. The plants may have went into a state of
dormancy. It is also possble that most plants were
swept clean from the earth and tended to float as
debris.
Simplier plants would tend to be reestablished faster
and quicker after the Flood.
As for dinosaur and mammals it is likely they tended
not to live together. All the fossils have not been found.
There have been reports of the fossil record being in
areas out of order. Evolutionist Scientists have a
notorious habit of setting aside data that does not
fit their charts, etc....
As a honest scientist you do not ignore ANYTHING.
The evolutionist's mind set is established, and
EVERYTHING is viewed from that perspective.
That is not fair or honest.
Upvote
0
Catchup
Well-Known Member
Bear: How long as this "missing link" been missing? Since the beginning of time? How long will it continue to remain lost? For many...Till the end of time!
So what then, is the "Missing Link"? Is it a fabrication from the Scientific community to explain a large gaping whole in their theory? They can not or will not believe in God. So when they are confronted with an unexplainable truth...they do as all good Scientist do... they invent.
I would like to re-post the following. It may help you understand what you are talking about when you refer to the "Missing Link". For it is not truly missing. I carry its Spirit within my Soul.
The link that you are looking for...I refer to as GOD.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Evidence for design (GOD) is found in the DNA of all animals and plants. This DNA contains the information which makes life what it is. Evolution does not explain this information, because natural selection does not create information. It only modifies existing information.
If there was a designer, why does it look like evolution? This question is best answered with an example. Suppose that Stu wants to add a room onto his house. He decides to call the movers and have his old house carted away. He then contacts the architect for the original plans and asks for the new room to be added. He then contacts the builder and builds his new house. It is identical to the original, with the exception of the added room. Stu is obviously not thinking. Why did he cart his original house away? He could have added the new room to his existing house and saved time, money and his reputation.
Now lets consider creation. By changing a mere 2% of the DNA code in a chimpanzee, the designer could have created a man. Why would he start from scratch?
Science has reached a point where it can analyze the information in DNA and show that natural selection and chance do not explain the origin of complexity. Scientists who accept the naturalistic axiom are stuck with a mystery. On the other hand, those who accept intelligent design (GOD)have a viable and plausible solution.
But why take my word for it. Darwin, now there is a person who knew his stuff. What does he say about his theory....
Darwin was frustrated by the eye's complexity, even though he knew only a fraction of what scientists have now discovered about the eye. In his book, Origin of Species, he included a section entitled, "Organs of Extreme Perfection and Complication," in which he declared:
To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree........
As I said before...Science and God are not two opposing forces. If given enough time Science will prove God. No, not by their man made theories...For they will tumble like a house of cards. All that will be left is Reality and Truth. After all the theories are laid to rest.... GOD will remain... Alpha and Omega.
Hopes this helps a little.
LOVE
Upvote
0
Catchup
Well-Known Member
But scientist have discovered evidence of evolution. So did God institute a form of evolution into the process of creation? The other day when reading my Bible...I was struck by the possible meaning of this verse. It appears different than the others that talk of creation...
Genesis 1: 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so.
Let the land produce? Is that not what evolutionist claim?
But there is a danger in applying this to the human specie!
For we were not included in this phase of creation. We were made separate. We were made... in the image of God!
To believe anything else is to deny your heritage!
1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth,B and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
27So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
LOVE
I have tried my best to help and explain. If you still do not understand Creation...you can wait for the next theory to come from science...or you can pray and ask the Creator himself.
Genesis 1: 24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so.
Let the land produce? Is that not what evolutionist claim?
But there is a danger in applying this to the human specie!
For we were not included in this phase of creation. We were made separate. We were made... in the image of God!
To believe anything else is to deny your heritage!
1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth,B and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
27So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
LOVEI have tried my best to help and explain. If you still do not understand Creation...you can wait for the next theory to come from science...or you can pray and ask the Creator himself.
Upvote
0
TheBear
NON-WOKED
Originally posted by Catchup
Bear: How long as this "missing link" been missing? Since the beginning of time? How long will it continue to remain lost? For many...Till the end of time!
So what then, is the "Missing Link"? Is it a fabrication from the Scientific community to explain a large gaping whole in their theory? They can not or will not believe in God. So when they are confronted with an unexplainable truth...they do as all good Scientist do... they invent.
If the police respond to a call about someone hearing a gunshot, and they find a person slumped over dead, with their hands tied behing their back, and a bullet wound to the back of the head, do they need to find the gun before they can determine it as a murder? What if they never find the gun? Would the medical examiner be able to say, with any certainty, that the person died of a fatal gunshot wound?
See, the flaw in that logic, and the beauty of science, is that it is not built as a house of cards. It is ever willing to have any aspect overturned, in the light of new evidence. This is the strenght of science.
John
Upvote
0
I believe the fight between creation vs. evolution is a fight between the Christian faith vs. the Humanistic faith.
What philosphy one has will determine what view there going to take. We wheren't there when the beginning happened. Sinse the time of major discoveries in science the fight has been between: the possiblities of supernatural intervention, devine intervention verses naturalims, Humanistic views; the belief that we came here and the whole universe with know purpose with know devine intervention or supernatural events.
The supernatural can't be tested with science, you can't test it in the laboratory, you can't re examine it, its not possible to do that with our 5 senses.
C.S Lewis put it nicely here:
"If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought processes are mere accidents -- the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the materialists' and astronomers' as well for anybody else's. But if their thoughts -- i.e., of Materialims and Astronomy -- are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reasonfor believing the one accident should be able to give a correct account of all the other accidents" (C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing co., 1770), p. 52-53
What philosphy one has will determine what view there going to take. We wheren't there when the beginning happened. Sinse the time of major discoveries in science the fight has been between: the possiblities of supernatural intervention, devine intervention verses naturalims, Humanistic views; the belief that we came here and the whole universe with know purpose with know devine intervention or supernatural events.
The supernatural can't be tested with science, you can't test it in the laboratory, you can't re examine it, its not possible to do that with our 5 senses.
C.S Lewis put it nicely here:
"If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our thought processes are mere accidents -- the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the materialists' and astronomers' as well for anybody else's. But if their thoughts -- i.e., of Materialims and Astronomy -- are merely accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reasonfor believing the one accident should be able to give a correct account of all the other accidents" (C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing co., 1770), p. 52-53
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
1. Evolution is a scientific theory, but the ordinary definition of "theory" as "hunch," or "guess" does not apply in the world of science. There, the word "theory" means an explanation based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, which has been confirmed by verifiable fact (and the absence of incompatible fact).
I purposely took this definition from a anti-creationist site.
Three components of theory are listed here.
First is observation.....I would just like to know who exactly has EVER observed evolution in process.
Second is experimentation........NO concrete experimentation has ever been done to prove evolution. It is impossible by the very nature of the subject!
Third is reasoning.........ah, now we get to the heart of the evolutionary theory. Fallible men REASON, that since they think God cannot possibly exist, there must be another answer to why we are here. Here is what we reason, that everything evolved over billions of years, getting better and more complex after each evolutionary stage. Natural law does not support this but it is our reasoning.
Seems to me that no matter how one defines theory, it is still just an idea, yet to be proven, yet disproven at almost every turn. That is why the evolutionary theory itself is always under constant change and revision. If it were testable and observable wouldn't all scientists at least agree on WHICH specific theory of the whole theory they were going to use?
On the other hand, we have the Bible which scientists have been desperate to disprove for centuries, yet at every turn they find evidence (scientific and archaelogical) that proves the Bible is correct. Which standard should we choose?
Upvote
0
A good quote on how theorys come about. Its by an anit-creationist named Boyce Rensberger.
"At this point, it is necessary to reveal a little inside information about how scientists work, something the textbooks don't usually tell you. The fact is that scientists are not really as objective and dispasstionate in their work as they would like you to think. Most scientists first get their ideas about how the world works not through rigorously logical processes but through hunches and wilded guesses. As induviduals, they often come to believe something to be true long before they assemble the hard evidence that will convince somebody else that it is. Motivated by faith in his own ideas and a desire for acceptance by his peers, a scientist will labor for years knowing in his heart that his theory is correct but devising experiment after experiment whose results he hopes will support his position". (Boyce Rensberger, How the World Works (NY: William Morrow 1986), p. 17-18)
"At this point, it is necessary to reveal a little inside information about how scientists work, something the textbooks don't usually tell you. The fact is that scientists are not really as objective and dispasstionate in their work as they would like you to think. Most scientists first get their ideas about how the world works not through rigorously logical processes but through hunches and wilded guesses. As induviduals, they often come to believe something to be true long before they assemble the hard evidence that will convince somebody else that it is. Motivated by faith in his own ideas and a desire for acceptance by his peers, a scientist will labor for years knowing in his heart that his theory is correct but devising experiment after experiment whose results he hopes will support his position". (Boyce Rensberger, How the World Works (NY: William Morrow 1986), p. 17-18)
Upvote
0
There is more than what meets the eye happening
here. First, I believe that God allowed Satan to
destroy the earth. Check out the book of Job.
Satan is the accuser. Satan points the finger
and instigates. I can well imagine Satan saying,
"Look at YOUR CREATION. Look how evil it has
become. Destroy it and start over."
All the while Satan is thinking, [Well I tried to
contaminate the human species, but now if
God allows me I'll flood the entire world---killing
ALL men and then God will be a liar because
He can not fulfill His promise (Genesis 3:15)]
God of course says, "I will spare Noah and his family
but I will allow you to be an instument of my wrath
upon the face of the entire earth." Or God simply
allowed His protection to envelop only Noah
and his family and the world fell apart...
In either case, Satan wishes to contol, corrupt, and
counterfeit. It is Satan who wants man to believe
lies. It is Satan who distorts the truth and tries
to bury it. It is Satan who imatates CREATION as
best he can through mutation; however, God has
set boundaries and crossing species---one to another
is just one of them. Satan can manipulate ANYONE
who is NOT a child of God. That goes for scientists
and their THEORIES, too.
here. First, I believe that God allowed Satan to
destroy the earth. Check out the book of Job.
Satan is the accuser. Satan points the finger
and instigates. I can well imagine Satan saying,
"Look at YOUR CREATION. Look how evil it has
become. Destroy it and start over."
All the while Satan is thinking, [Well I tried to
contaminate the human species, but now if
God allows me I'll flood the entire world---killing
ALL men and then God will be a liar because
He can not fulfill His promise (Genesis 3:15)]
God of course says, "I will spare Noah and his family
but I will allow you to be an instument of my wrath
upon the face of the entire earth." Or God simply
allowed His protection to envelop only Noah
and his family and the world fell apart...
In either case, Satan wishes to contol, corrupt, and
counterfeit. It is Satan who wants man to believe
lies. It is Satan who distorts the truth and tries
to bury it. It is Satan who imatates CREATION as
best he can through mutation; however, God has
set boundaries and crossing species---one to another
is just one of them. Satan can manipulate ANYONE
who is NOT a child of God. That goes for scientists
and their THEORIES, too.
Upvote
0
Catchup
Well-Known Member
Bear: I am confused by your responses. Please do not take offense. But it is hard for me to discuss an issue with someone that I do not understand... Set me straight.
You have faith in God? But you have doubt that God created us as stated in the Bible? You look to science for answers instead of God? You do not realize that science will never have all the answers of creation until God is included?
I am at this point running for cover.
LOVE
You have faith in God? But you have doubt that God created us as stated in the Bible? You look to science for answers instead of God? You do not realize that science will never have all the answers of creation until God is included?
I am at this point running for cover.
LOVE
Upvote
0
Creationism is Science
Evolution is Theory
Thats what I think. It takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution so I believe it is a religion.
Evolution is Theory
Thats what I think. It takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution so I believe it is a religion.
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
Catchup
Well-Known Member
I do not lack intelligence nor logic. My beliefs are extremely strong and based on Faith and fact. Yet I am a seeker and my mind will explore all possibilities. So I posed the question to myself...What IF science found a remnant of a connecting specie between apes and humans?
My conclusion...
So that is where the Athesist originated!
(Running back again for cover)
LOVE
My conclusion...
So that is where the Athesist originated!
(Running back again for cover)
LOVE
Upvote
0
Originally posted by A Christian
There is no trap, just a lack of understanding on your
part. Firstly, we do not know what God may have
done with regard to plants.
It is not a lack of understanding on my part, but simply an imwillingness to continually concoct unfounded speculations simply for the purpose of maintaining a belief. That is what you are doing.
You used the mobility of animals in a flood as a way to expect the fossil ordering, and I gave a couple of clear examples of why that does not work. I could give more, but I think the point is made.
How do you respond? You appeal to ignorance and mystery ("we do not know what God may have done"). In other words, you are taking an intellectual copout and not considering the possibility that you might be wrong.
This is typical of creationist irrationality. All evidence that appears to support your position is trumpeted as "proof", but all evidence that contradicts your position is ignored or wiped away by invoking a miracle from God.
There is nothing scientific about that approach.
God makes no provision for plant life for Noah to carry
out. The plants may have went into a state of
dormancy. It is also possble that most plants were
swept clean from the earth and tended to float as
debris.
Simplier plants would tend to be reestablished faster
and quicker after the Flood.
Plants submerged for a year under salt water do not go into "dormancy". They die. You are simply making things up.
As for dinosaur and mammals it is likely they tended
not to live together. All the fossils have not been found.
There have been reports of the fossil record being in
areas out of order. Evolutionist Scientists have a
notorious habit of setting aside data that does not
fit their charts, etc....
You make up more stuff ("dinosaur and mammals it is likely they tended not to live together") that has no basis in fact, and then you accuse scientists of doing the very thing you are doing now for all to see ("setting aside data that does not fit their charts").
Haven't you ever read the command "Thou shalt not bear false witness"? Who are these scientists, and what data are they setting aside?
As a honest scientist you do not ignore ANYTHING.
The evolutionist's mind set is established, and
EVERYTHING is viewed from that perspective.
That is not fair or honest.
The flood theory has been studied and rejected. One primary reason is because creationists cannot develop an intelligible theory that does not rely on supernatural intervention to explain contradictory evidence.
"God did it" is not a theory, and scientists are not obligated to consider any theory that invokes God to explain data.
Upvote
0
Catchup
Well-Known Member
Ray K: Later when I have time I will try to get a handle on what you are referring to in your last post.
Though there is something that you need to understand about people who believe in God as the Creator....
We have no need and very little desire to search for the origination of life. We leave that to you, who are not satisfied with the correct answer...Goddidit!
But for right now, I am out the door to enjoy this beautiful Sabbath day.
LOVE
Though there is something that you need to understand about people who believe in God as the Creator....
We have no need and very little desire to search for the origination of life. We leave that to you, who are not satisfied with the correct answer...Goddidit!
But for right now, I am out the door to enjoy this beautiful Sabbath day.
LOVE
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
TheBear, regardless of how I feel about this thread, conversing with you has made me realize alot more about my faith to God, and where and how that faith should be placed. And for that, I thank you.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
