Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,854
4,268
Pacific NW
✟242,497.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
One [stupid] example of evolution I've seen is a brown bear moving to the North Pole and then becoming white ones, because the brown ones stand out like a sore thumb and get eaten.

But what at the North Pole eats bears!?

The critters that were eating the bears starved and went extinct because they couldn't find them any more. :D

(Okay, I'm kidding. Last I heard, the white fur is really for warmth, not camouflage. The hairs are hollow and transparent, they don't actually have a white pigment to them.)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: AV1611VET
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
I take back my prior comment. This is the worst description of evolution I've ever seen.
Good ... because it wasn't mine.

If my memory serves me correctly, it came from an evolutionist.

I'll see if I can find it.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tone
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,854
4,268
Pacific NW
✟242,497.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Is consciousness more complex than unconsciousness?

Well, my brain isn't physically any more complex when I'm unconscious than when I'm conscious. Electronically... if you count dreaming while unconscious, I don't know that all those neurons firing off are any more complex while conscious. If you're in a coma, the electrical activity wouldn't be as complex, I suppose.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
So, you're saying that the whole video is a spoof...including the "Massive genetic study..."?
When relying on real science he got it all wrong. Try quoting specific claims. He got so much wrong that one would think that he could not tie his shoes by himself. Or that he is lying. You choose.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
So does believing in evolution result in not believing in a Creator?
No. It only involves rejecting clear myths from various holy books. There are far more Christians that accept evolution than creationists that accept it. In fact there may be more Christians that accept it than reject it worldwide. The error of reading Genesis literally appears to be mostly an American flaw.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: tyke
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
No. It only involves rejecting clear myths from various holy books. There are far more Christians that accept evolution than creationists that accept it. In fact there may be more Christians that accept it than reject it worldwide. The error of reading Genesis literally appears to be mostly an American flaw.

Was Genesis not read literally before Darwin? I thought biblical criticism is post evolutionary theory?
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,850,672
51,419
Guam
✟4,896,791.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Was Genesis not read literally before Darwin? I thought biblical criticism is post evolutionary theory?
My guess is that Nimrod planted the initial tares.

After all, the Antichrist, who is going to demonstrate evolution to the satisfaction of academia, is going to revive the Babylonian Empire.
 
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

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Was Genesis not read literally before Darwin? I thought biblical criticism is post evolutionary theory?

The idea of a non-literal Genesis pre-dates Darwin. The idea of evolution also pre-dates Darwin. Darwin's major contribution was the concept of natural selection.
 
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
My guess is that Nimrod planted the initial tares.

After all, the Antichrist, who is going to demonstrate evolution to the satisfaction of academia, is going to revive the Babylonian Empire.

This makes me wonder how many times that forbidden tree was eaten of...
 
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
The idea of a non-literal Genesis pre-dates Darwin. The idea of evolution also pre-dates Darwin. Darwin's major contribution was the concept of natural selection.

Was the Bible read literally before the idea of evolution?
 
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Not by everyone, no. Non-literal interpretations of the Bible go back thousands of years.

Who read the Bible literally before the idea of evolution...if you know?
 
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

pitabread

Well-Known Member
Jan 29, 2017
12,920
13,372
Frozen North
✟329,323.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Who read the Bible literally before the idea of evolution...if you know?

I don't know specifically who all would have read the Bible literally. I know that modern literalism appears to have its roots in American Protestantism in the late 19th century into the 20th century.

Conversely, you can find examples of non-literalism going back much further (for example, the works of Origen of Alexandira, circa 3rd century AD).
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Tone
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
I don't know specifically who all would have read the Bible literally. I know that modern literalism appears to have its roots in American Protestantism in the late 19th century into the 20th century.

Conversely, you can find examples of non-literalism going back much further (for example, the works of Origen of Alexandira, circa 3rd century AD).

Thanks for that.
 
Upvote 0

Tinker Grey

Wanderer
Supporter
Feb 6, 2002
11,214
5,606
Erewhon
Visit site
✟923,468.00
Faith
Atheist
Augustine, AD 415
Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.
 
Upvote 0

Tone

"Whenever Thou humblest me, Thou makest me great."
Supporter
Dec 24, 2018
15,128
6,906
California
✟61,140.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Private
Augustine, AD 415

"..If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?..." (Emphasis mine)

So, these things are not counted out by evolutionists?

*Or "non-christians [having]...this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience."?
 
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

Tinker Grey

Wanderer
Supporter
Feb 6, 2002
11,214
5,606
Erewhon
Visit site
✟923,468.00
Faith
Atheist
"..If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?..." (Emphasis mine)

So, these things are not counted out by evolutionists?
Not if they are a Christian that accepts evolution. I'm sure this has been pointed out to you before.

Of course the point of my post is that more than 1600 years ago, someone was decrying the literalist approach.
 
Upvote 0