A chalange to belivers in Evolution

[David Gould]

Why God?

 

[AV1611VET]

If you're so interested in answers, return to the thread you abandoned and respond to the ones you've already received. Don't just post the questions again as though they'd never been answered. That's dishonest.

Dal, quite honestly I deleted that thread from my FAVES list, and now I don't know what or where it is --- and don't care.

The two sentences you quoted me from Pete are both questions. Again, ad infinitum, I won't address anything that ends in a question mark, as I don't want the limelight. You guys know where I stand on those issues, anyway.

 

[Dimitree]

Scientific laws are descriptive, not prescriptive. Unlike laws passed by legislatures, they do not say what should be. They simply describe what is.

AMEN !!!
Here is the rock of all who beleive in sciance and evolution and all that
Someone sit on a chair and watched the winds and "described" them.
Then all of you people came and sayd hey the winds blow becaouse of that reason.
So your rock are the words of someone who described something LOL
Amen !

 

[AV1611VET]

3. Why you think Mark 13:9 has anything to do with evolution is a mystery to me but Mark 10:6 only says that God created male and female, it doesn't say how He did it.

Frumious, I do apologize --- you are correct --- it's Mark 13:19 --- sorry.

 

[gluadys]

Why? Because I've made three simple statements, and I'm not going to let you:

• a) reword them
  b) change the subject with questions?

OK. No rewording. No questions.

Here are my top three favorite questions to Evolutionists:
1. Explain evolution in light of a 6000 year universe - (Genesis 1).
2. Since God pronounced His Creation "very good" in Genesis 1:31 - why the need for Evolution?
3. Since Jesus didn't believe in Evolution - (Mark 10:6; 13:9) - why should we?

1. Evolution works in a 6000 year universe the same as in a 13.7 billion year universe. It just has a shorter history, so the results are not the same. If we were to find a life-sustaining planet in this universe which originated only 6,000 years ago, we would be able to study the results of only 6,000 years of evolution. Probably, there would be few if any life-forms more complex than bacteria. (Except they wouldn't be bacteria either as those are life-forms found on earth.)

2. Because it pleased God to make a dynamic universe which changes through time and therefore has a history. Species unable to evolve with the changing times would quickly become extinct in such a creation. Without evolution such a creation would not be "very good".

3. No reason Jesus should believe in evolution when he hadn't seen the evidence for it. No reason we should not accept that evolution happens since we do see the evidence for it.

 

[rambot]

Not getting an answer isn't really an admission that nothing is to be said.
In this case, not getting an answer is directly related to the absurdity of the question being asked.

"Why is "is" is?"

 

[gluadys]

AMEN !!!
Here is the rock of all who beleive in sciance and evolution and all that
Someone sit on a chair and watched the winds and "described" them.
Then all of you people came and sayd hey the winds blow becaouse of that reason.
So your rock are the words of someone who described something LOL
Amen !

I take it you don't waste time listening to a weather report. After all, it is only someone describing the way the wind blows.

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

Dal, quite honestly I deleted that thread from my FAVES list, and now I don't know what or where it is --- and don't care.

The two sentences you quoted me from Pete are both questions. Again, ad infinitum, I won't address anything that ends in a question mark, as I don't want the limelight. You guys know where I stand on those issues, anyway.

If you won't answer a question, you don't deserve an answer to your questions, is that not reasonable?

This is a debate forum, play by the rules or go away. We are not here for your entertainment and you are not entertaining us.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

I am simply asking YOU to address my points. I wish to discuss nothing. I promise you, I won't rebut anything you say. Just say SOMETHING.

OK:

1. Explain evolution in light of a 6000 year universe - (Genesis 1).​

This is what is known as a complex question. A very famous example of such a question, is 'Have you stopped beating your wife?'

The problem about that kind of question is that you might have to agree to to certain things to which you simply cannot agree if you want to give a proper answer. So, you cannot answer with either yes or no to the question 'Have you stopped beating your wife?' if you simply have not ever beaten your wife.

Likewise with your question. In order to "[e]xplain evolution in light of a 6000 year universe" I would have to actually believe in a 6000 year universe first.

I don't however.

2. Since God pronounced His Creation "very good" in Genesis 1:31 - why the need for Evolution?​

See above.

But there is some more: Firstly, a misunderstanding of evolution. Things do not get better or something. You simply must have heard someone say that by now.

And secondly, in any way you toss it or turn it, evolution happens. Regardless of whether you hold to some superfast creationist hyperevolution ("kinds" --> species), or the normal scientific type does not matter. The question remains. And if there is really some kind of incompatibilty between evolution and "Gods"pronouncements in Genesis - which is implied by the rhetorical slant of your question - then that incompatibilty will not be solved in favor of Genesis without paying a high price wrt intellectual integrity.

3. Since Jesus didn't believe in Evolution - (Mark 10:6; 13:9) - why should we?​

It is the most reasonable conclusion in light of evidence.

 

[Dimitree]

I take it you don't waste time listening to a weather report. After all, it is only someone describing the way the wind blows.

Ye..sss ... ?

I take it you listen to horoscope prediction as someone describes the stars and your birth date for your future

 

[kangitanka]

Here are my top three favorite questions to Evolutionists:
1. Explain evolution in light of a 6000 year universe - (Genesis 1).

Nobody needs to explain evolution "in light of" a 6,000 year old universe, since our universe does not fit your age description.
The evidence points to a much much much older universe. It also points to a much much much older earth.
No, Im not rewording your statement, Im demonstrating the fallacy of your question.
So, there we go. #1 is taken care of.
Let's move on to #2, shall we?

2. Since God pronounced His Creation "very good" in Genesis 1:31 - why the need for Evolution?

Two points-
1- If this question is directed at an atheist or at anybody who does not believe in the bible, it is non-sensical. Bringing "God" into a conversation with non-believers falls on deaf ears. And of course, you know why...Because- read this carefully- they dont believe in your god!

2- Last time I played billiards, I looked upon the racked up balls and thought how nice they looked, so orderly, so..."good"...to use your term. So, the set up was "good" (or even "very good"), and yet the initial configuration was not the point. Likewise, although things may have been "very good" in Genesis, that in and of itself does not indicate that things couldnt (or shouldnt) change.
Alright. #1 and #2....answered. On to #3-

3. Since Jesus didn't believe in Evolution - (Mark 10:6; 13:9) - why should we?

Several points
1- Most people who accept evolutionary theory dont "believe" in it. You may "believe" in your god, but those who accept evolutionary theory do not "believe" in evolutionary theory. It would be more correct to say that they accept evolutionary theory as the current best model that explains the diversity of species on this planet. In the future, be more careful how you word your questions.

2- You are taking Mark 10:6 completely out of context. Jesus isnt discussing science, he is discussing a law concerning marital states. Misrepresenting the NT you claim to believe in is bad form.

3- Mark 13:19 only says that goddidit. Im not sure how this is supposed to be a theological blow against evolutionary theory.

4- Mark 10:6 says absolutely nothing about evolution or the lack thereof. Jesus is only indicating that humans have always been "male and female".

5- Finally, the evidence at hand points to evolutionary theory as being the best current model explaining the diversity of species on this planet. Even if Jesus was quoted in the gospels as saying "Evolutionary theory is WRONG!", evolutionary theory would STILL be the best current model explaining the diversity of species.



So there you go. Several people have answered your questions. I didnt reword any of them. I dont believe I twisted anything around or misrepresented your statements, and I havent turned around and asked you any questions.

There you go. Now be happy and quit complaining about how nobody will answer you

 

[AV1611VET]

There you go. Now be happy and quit complaining about how nobody will answer you

Well, I promised I wasn't going to rebut anything, didn't I?

Grrrrr --- me and my big mouth! --- LOL

 

[gluadys]

Ye..sss ... ?

I take it you listen to horoscope prediction as someone describes the stars and your birth date for your future

Well, that happens to be a very good example of the difference between descriptive and prescriptive.

You see, when I was young and foolish, I did invest several years in the study of astrology. So I know that astrology does not just describe the position of the planets, luminaries and stars at the time of your birth. It also describes what you should expect of a person when the stars are in that position, and what that person should expect at various points in their life.

The scientific study of the stars does not lead to "shoulds". It describes the stars and the doings of stars and what happens to stars. It does not end up with a prescription for either the stars or for people watching them.

Astology is prescriptive. It assumes that the stars prescribe what sort of person you are, how you will behave and what will happen to you.

Astonomy is descriptive. It just describes how stars behave.

 

[Dannager]

Well, that happens to be a very good example of the difference between descriptive and prescriptive.

You see, when I was young and foolish, I did invest several years in the study of astrology. So I know that astrology does not just describe the position of the planets, luminaries and stars at the time of your birth. It also describes what you should expect of a person when the stars are in that position, and what that person should expect at various points in their life.

The scientific study of the stars does not lead to "shoulds". It describes the stars and the doings of stars and what happens to stars. It does not end up with a prescription for either the stars or for people watching them.

Astology is prescriptive. It assumes that the stars prescribe what sort of person you are, how you will behave and what will happen to you.

Astonomy is descriptive. It just describes how stars behave.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to gluadys again.

 

[Hydra009]

No thanks, Hydra.

I made 3 simple statements, now it's your turn to verbally shine.

Have at it, please.

Already addressed. My post would simply be redundant.

 

[I_Love_Cheese]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to gluadys again.

Already gave her what I could, Happy to see her here.

 

[kangitanka]

Well, I promised I wasn't going to rebut anything, didn't I?
Grrrrr --- me and my big mouth! --- LOL

Hehe...yes you did.
However, I give you permission to rebut my statements. After all, what is debate without point and counterpoint?

Im not here to "prove" you wrong. Im here to learn and to understand the different sides of any given debate. The only thing I expect is rational, reasonable and (where applicable) logical statements.

So if you see an statement of mine that you can rebut, have at it!

I promise to address your rebutals (or concede, whichever) without simply asking questions. All I ask is that you understand that your possible questions may generate questions of clarification on my part. If that is acceptable to you, then let's debate

 

[Brimshack]

I can beat ANY evolution or materialistic theory just with one question

WHY ?

To cut things short please take some time to ask the question WHY to your belives and post something when you are shure that you can't ask the question WHY anymore

Okay

Why?

 

[kangitanka]

I can beat ANY evolution or materialistic theory just with one question
WHY ?
To cut things short please take some time to ask the question WHY to your belives and post something when you are shure that you can't ask the question WHY anymore

I can beat any theological theory with just one question
HOW?
To cut things short, please take some time to ask the question HOW to your beliefs and post something when you are sure that you can't ask the question HOW anymore.


You, Dimitree, have exemplified philosophy in your question. Good job.

My question, however, exemplifies science. Once you have traced "HOW" back to the origin I will be in the audience when you collect your Nobel Prize (and the monetary prize that goes along with it).

I expect a cut, of course, because I gave you the only sensible question...."How?"

 

[kangitanka]

I can beat ANY evolution or materialistic theory just with one question
WHY ?
To cut things short please take some time to ask the question WHY to your belives and post something when you are shure that you can't ask the question WHY anymore

Have you ever had that moment of insight when, despite your best arguments, your best debating, your best rationanlizations, you have had that moment of insight that just blows all the rest away?

I just had one.

Let us, for the moment, assume God exists. God= Omnnipotent. God=Omniscient. God=Omnipresent. God=Eternal

Good enough for a rough beginning of the description of God?

I hope so, because Omnisicience and Omnipotence, by themselves, are hard enough to fathom.

Now, let me turn your question around on you...
Given the attributes of God (if you accept the omnimax theories of God).....
WHY?
Why did God create the universe?
Why did God create the earth?
Why did God create life?
And (most importantly) WHY did God create humans?

Answer me this and we will have a true debate, because all of your answers will fall flat and make no sense at all.