• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.

Darwin's Evolution?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Stormy, Jul 25, 2002.

  1. Stormy

    Stormy Senior Contributor

    Morat: Help me. You are obviously more learned in this field then I.

    Why does a human embryo go through the stages that resemble human evolution resulting in the birth of an infant? Why doesn't it just stop in its complexity? The women would then deliver a seven-pound fish? Or why does it not start as a tiny microscopic human and then continue to grow.

    The question is stupid but within it may be the answer.

    I do not believe that the genetic material that started this world was like anything that we know.
  2. LiveFreeOrDie

    LiveFreeOrDie Science Officer

    Do you have any evidence for this claim or are you just pontificating?

    Until you bring some evidence to the table, your endless "I thinks" and "I believes" have pretty much zero truth value. Anybody can sit up in their ivory tower and pontificate. Until you demonstrate that your pontifications have some relationship to reality, however, then all they amount to are your private fantasies.

    Sorry to be harsh but this thread needs to die a well-deserved death.
  3. Cantuar

    Cantuar Forever England

    Sorry, are you saying that Darwin claimed evolution would surprise God? Any backup quotes?
  4. D. Scarlatti

    D. Scarlatti Well-Known Member

    Sometimes it does. You know, when "God," in "His" infinite wisdom, decides to perform an abortion, a.k.a. a miscarriage.
  5. D. Scarlatti

    D. Scarlatti Well-Known Member


    That's deep. However I must tell you I've been known to admit my lack of knowledge on a regular basis, and on a variety of topics. I must be a walking counterexample or something.

    Makes sense. If not an asteroid per se, some other bit of interstellar detritus.

    Evolution is a fact, as far as I'm concerned. The theory of evolution refers to its mechanisms, and how life evolved over billions of years, and is currently under consideration. It's quite a big job, reconstructing the entire history of life on earth. Care to help? Random mutations do occur. Natural selection has been demonstrated. So those are facts too.

    Oh. Except theory is necessarily based upon facts, among other things. Otherwise it wouldn't deserve the appellation.

    That's beautiful. *sniff.* Is it okay for atheists to dominate creatures too? I'm not big on dominating creatures, to be honest. I think they deserve a fair shake. I pick spiders up and put them outside. It wouldn't seem fair to dominate them. I mean, it's just to easy to step on them or whatever. As for treasures, it seems to me that God must love the board of directors of Enron. God is pretty much on his own there.

    Yes yes, to what ... Oh dear ... I can hardly wait for this ... the suspense ...

    Oh no! *weep.*

    Bum ba da Da!

    No facts, no theory. Strange statements coming from someone that makes such a big deal of cause and effect.

    That's groovy, Aristotle.

    I may have said "there is no god" on several occasions, for effect. Normally however the entire concept seems pretty irrelevant, so I don't say anything about it at all. The god people are the ones always talking about god, so I would imagine the burden of proof lies with them. It doesn't make any difference to me. I wouldn't even bring it up. So if I don't say anything about god at all, am I still a human dribble?

    See what? Anything in particular I can't see?

    So how many intuitive leaps do you make to get to Christianity from that?

    What is it then?
  6. brotherhood

    brotherhood New Member

    Great thread, I signed up just to have a go at adding to this fine discussion.

    I don't think I could put the laws of nature better, even though I run a small bio-site.

    Using an analogy is a good way to compact all that information about natural selection etc that is mentioned above. If I were to compare each and every gene in your body to a "byte" of information that a computer uses in its daily operations.

    All other things being equal....consider a computer with *nothing* on it. It is useless....it has no function in its environment and more importantly, it has no use to us- the user. On top of this - "information is power". If we installed an operating system on the computer - like windows, it would become much more useful, and the data upon the computer would be utilised to become "powerful".

    However, a computer does not live. We do. The fact that the computer works means that we can use it to our advantage. Why? Because we, as humans have come to know to that by manipulating the things around us we can use this to our advantage. This is a typical trait of natural selection as mentioned in the above posts.

    Compare the working computer with a person. Computers have evolved by humans hand feeding it pre-conceived information....TELLING it how to work. Natural selection works much in the same way, over a much longer period of time- effectively using trial and error.

    At one point in time, the "goop" so to put it, was once a simple piece of genetic information that existed as a causality of a chemical reaction. Genetic mutations can be caused by things in the external environment- causing a change in the chemical composition of the "goop".

    At that point, it is not natural selection at work.....it is purely the forces of the Earth, so to speak.

    .....the only ambiguity I see is WHY would these simple substances "want" to replicate........

    Apart from that, this simple chemical "goop" was subject to the forces of its environment etc etc......and the chemical composition of it began to change as it passed from generation to generation. The characteristic of life is to reproduce and survive (as mentioned,why?), so each successive generation alongside the forces of the environment brought about more diverse genetic sequences.....and consequentially, new species.

    It is not the genes that are "initiating" this increasing genetic diversity- it is the forces of the external environment moulding us into what we are now. That is the "essentiallity" of it for me. The information, be it a byte or a gene, is merely being passed on as water would do flowing down a river.

    It is just an analogy....something for perspective :)

    Plato's cave comes to mind. As does games theory. I'll elaborate about those before I lose my train of thought completely....

    Plato's Cave
    I'll not write it out, so if you haven't heard of this philosophy, its easily found on the net.

    But all in all, we as humans are attempting to "step out of our skin" and look back on ourselves. I think many people find it hard to grasp that we as people, as impersonal as it may sound, are simply a chain of reactions, both in regards to time and causality......the fact that we are intelligently aware that we can change our environment, learn from it, and own an imagination is more of an ego trip in the real world and a fascinating area of science in the scientific world ;)

    For me, to round up what I've read here, the title should not be "Darwin's Evolution".......something more like "do you believe in Science or God". Sorry, might be the old cliche, but I think this is where the discussion was inevitably going to lead to !

    Games Theory
    Here is something controversial for you. Civilization and religion came hand in hand. Religion talks about th past, while civilization, intelligence, learning etc are all about survival and living for the future.

    Science came with civilization - the ability to create tools to further our observations about the environment we live in. With time, we have came to the conclusion that studying our past can give us a better understanding of the future

    "We have the power within ourselves to begin the world all over again"

    Anyway, with science came the theory of natural selection, the world is flat etc....all of which has increasingly been incorporated into our lives as common knowledge, and implemented in the form of "social reform" and technological change.

    Religion, -in my opinion-, is diminishing over time. Religion came with civlization as a means of order....at a time when our species would probably not be capable of having, or even comprehending this discussed thread.

    Essentially, religion (and government) gave us an "order" that makes us work for the common cause. In modern terms....that is the human race combined. Why? Because we as people have come to know that by helping one another (while at the same time surviving) via altruistic and selfish traits, we can survive and preserve ourselves, our family and race over the long term.

    In light of this, science, either consciously or unconsciously, it would seem, has more impetus in our society today due to the fact that gaining a better understanding of it will help us and our species survive. Hear about that 2019 asteroid? Science to the rescue maybe- and how long have we known about asteroids....

    This point here about science and religion is that, in compliance with the laws of natural selection, it "seems" like we as a society use science more than religion as a tool of survival. The fact that you write here and ask illustrates this. Something to do with karma I believe..........maybe an area of biology that is not covered all to well yet ;)

    Anyway, I know I've totally went off topic most likely.....but I hope it adds to the discussion- i'll check back and hope you all have the answer to the final question ;)
  7. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    The embryo doesn't go through those stages. That so-called theory was called "recapitulation," which was a fraud perpetrated by evolutionist Ernst Haeckel. He doctored some pictures to make it look like this is what happens to an embryo during development.

    It was debunked around 1920, but (obviously) people (evolutionists and creationists alike) still seem to think it's true. Unfortunately, while it's not as fraudulent as what Haeckel did, the "art of evolution" lives on today, only in the form of persuasive drawings of so-called transitionals.
  8. npetreley

    npetreley pumpkin sailor

    STILL waiting for your brilliant exegesis.

    99,999,999 bottles of beer on the wall, 99,999,999 bottles of beer...
  9. Jerry Smith

    Jerry Smith Fish out of water

    I feel I must make a small correction here. Embryos do go through stages that resemble embryonic development in their ancestors (though not all of them.)

    This is not the same thing as recapitulation. Strict Recapitulation was wrong (the idea was that embryos go through stages that recapitulate the adult form of all stages of evolution), but it was not a fraud. Haekel's drawings were the fraud. That was exposed early on.

    Yet there are still features of embryonic development that do appear to be the result of developmental mechanisms that are consistent with evolution.

    If anyone has questions about Haeckel, http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/embryos/Haeckel.html is a good resource. A good resource for questions about ontogeny and its relationship to evolution, see: http://talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section2.html#ontogeny

    Have a great day.
  10. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    Yep, miscarriages are corrections for babies that aren't forming correctly.  God sets up a degree of freedom in nature, and also sets up corrections for it, in His infinite wisdom.

    Abortions are a murderous act to get rid of a life that the mother deems inconvienent.  Big difference there fella.
  11. Joe V.

    Joe V. Rabbit Worshipper

    Okay, this is one that's been nagging at me for a long time. Where exactly in the Bible does it say, "Thou shall not commit abortions"? I always hear this from Christians, but they never cite a source for it. Why is this?

    - Joe
  12. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    You want a source, how about the one about not commiting murder? Somewhere in Exodus I believe. And then there is that little bit about God forming us in the womb and knowing us before He does that, etc...
  13. Joe V.

    Joe V. Rabbit Worshipper

    I see, but no specific verses saying that abortion is wrong. Why not? It's obviously a divisive issue for us, and my understanding is that problems with abortion did not become significant until the 20th century. What did they think about abortion hundreds of years ago? Did not God, in all his infinite wisdom, foresee this little problem? Can you specifically cite any verse at all about abortion? I suppose we're getting off-topic here. Perhaps I should start a new thread for this one.

    - Joe
  14. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    Gen 1:28, 9:1,7; 35:11 - the Lord commands us to be fruitful ("fertile") and multiply. We cooperate with the Creator's love.

    Gen. 28:3 - Isaac's prayer over Jacob shows that fertility and procreation are considered blessings from God.

    Gen. 38:8-10 - Onan is killed by God for practicing contraception (withdrawal) and spilling his semen on the ground.

    Gen. 38:11-26 - Judah (like Onan) also rejected God's command to keep up the family lineage, but he was not killed.

    Deut. 25:7-10 - penalty for refusing to keep up lineage is not death, like Onan received. Onan was killed for wasting seed.

    Gen. 38:9 - also, the usage of the graphic word "seed," uncharacteristic for Hebrew writing, highlights the reason for death.

    Exodus 23:25-26; Deut. 7:13-14 - God promises blessings which include no miscarriages or barrenness. The family reflects the Blessed Trinity.

    Lev.18:22-23;20:13 - wasting seed with non-generative sexual acts warrants death. Many Protestant churches reject this teaching.

    Lev. 21:17,20 - crushed testicles are called a defect and a blemish before God. Deliberate sterilization is intrinsically evil.

    Deut. 23:1 - whoever has crushed testicles or is castrated cannot enter the assembly. Contraception is objectively sinful.

    Deut. 25:11-12 - punishment for potential damage to testicles. Hence, vasectomies are gravely contrary to the natural law.

    1 Chron. 25:5 - God exalts His people by blessing with many children. Contraception = not your will God, but my will be done.

    Psalm 127:3-5 - children are a gift of favor from God and blessed is a full quiver. We must be open to God's gift of life.

    Hosea 9:11; Jer. 18:21 - God punishes Israel by preventing pregnancy. Contraception is a curse.

    Mal. 2:14 - Marriage is not a contract. It is a covenant - a supernatural exchange of persons with children as the fruit of the union.

    Mal. 2:15 - What does God desire? Godly offspring. Contraception = God may want an eternal being created, but I say no.

    Matt. 19:5-6 - Jesus said a husband and wife shall become one. They are no longer two, but one, as God is three persons, yet one.

    Matt. 19:6; Eph. 5:31 - contraception prevents God's ability to "join" together. God's love for the Church is selfless and sacrificial.

    Acts 5:1-11 - Ananias and Sapphira were slain because they withheld part of a gift. Fertility is a gift from God and cannot be withheld.

    Rom.1:26-27 - sexual acts without the possibility of procreation is sinful. Self-giving love is life-giving love.

    1 Cor. 6:19-20 - the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit; thus, we must glorify God in our bodies.

    1 Cor. 7:5 - natural family planning (NFP). Do not refuse each other except perhaps by agreement for a season, naturally.

    Gal. 6:7-8 - God is not mocked for what a man sows. If to the flesh, corruption. If to the Spirit, eternal life.

    Eph. 5:25 - husbands love your wives as Christ loved the Church - by giving his entire body and holding nothing back.

    Eph. 5:29-31; Phil. 3:2 - mutilating the flesh (e.g. surgery to prevent conception) is sinful. Some Protestant churches reject this teaching.

    1 Tim. 2:15 - childbearing is considered a "work" through which women may be saved by God's grace.

    Rev. 9:21; 21:8; 22:15; Gal. 5:20- sorcery = "pharmakeia" = includes abortifacient potions such as birth control pills = mortally sinful.
  15. bonobo

    bonobo New Member

    And then there is Exodus 21:22 (NASB)

    If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide.

    Or, more drastically, the King James Version:

    If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

    The death of the unborn child is not even considered as mischief!
  16. Jerry Smith

    Jerry Smith Fish out of water

    Another interpretation was that Onan was killed not for practicing contraception, and not for refusing to impregnate his sister-in-law, but instead for deviously practicing contraception so that it would appear that he was doing his "duty" without actually giving his brother the benefit of his seed.
  17. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    Thats why we have to look at the whole picture and not interpret for ourselves. :)
  18. Joe V.

    Joe V. Rabbit Worshipper

    s0uljah, you did not provide one verse that backed you up. Not one. Quite a few you provided equate to, "Every Sperm is Sacred" (and now I get that Monty Python song). I'll take a look at the Exodus verse to see the full context of that passage. Thanks.

    - Joe
  19. Chris†opher Paul

    Chris†opher Paul Based on a True Story

    How so?  Those verses talked about the sacredness of life, even before conception.  You can't see how that applies to abortion? 
  20. RufusAtticus

    RufusAtticus PopGen Grad Student


    If life is sacred, when does it begin?