...Do you even believe in Evolution in the first palce?

KWCrazy · Jun 7, 2013

Archaeopteryx said:
No, I'm trying to understand your beliefs. You claimed that miracles are given as a reward for faith. You also claimed that faith is belief in things unproven and that it is necessary for salvation. Why would a miracle be deemed a "reward" for someone who already believes? They already believe even in the absence of miracles.

Let's look at John 14, Verse 13-14.
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Miracles happen to glorify God, not to give hard proof of His existence to a non-believer. The person of faith has already accepted God's offer of salvation, so anything revealed to him merely buoys that faith. If God stood in front of you like Jesus came to Paul on the road to Damascus and said, "Here I am, now believe," it would be easy for you to believe in Him. However, salvation requires you to come to God first in faith, saying to the Father "Here I am, and I believe." Going to Heaven is the easiest thing in the world; and the hardest. It requires you to believe in God's promise when all about you people tell you that such believe is childish and illogical.

Are you implying that the only reason you don't do those things is because you believe in a deity?

I'm saying that all morality comes from the knowledge of good an evil, which man received in Eden.

Why can't good and evil exist in a natural world?

Are dogs and cats moral or immoral?
If a stray dog steals a piece of meat from your grill before you can cook it, is that dog a thief? If a cat kills a mouse, is it a murderer? If your dog mates with a reluctant female, is it rape?

Morality is a function of knowing the difference between good and evil. Animals don't know this, and therefore there is no morality. What separates us from them is that we DO know the difference. Had we not been given that knowledge from the fall of man, we would be no more moral or less moral than our pets.

Lollerskates · Jun 7, 2013

KWCrazy said:
Interestingly, physicists and cosmologists are the least likely to buy into evolution because they realize the neccessity of causation to existence. The universe had to come from somewhere, but there is no provision in science for the spontaneous creation of matter/ energy. The catalyst had to come from somewhere beyond our understanding or from a source that physical science simply cannot study. The supernatural cannot be studied scientifically, thus it can be neither proved nor disproved. We can learn all about what is, but how it came about remains speculation.

Well put, and something with which I agree.

The physicists/engineers I know are not concerned with biological evolution; cosmic evolution is, of course, a different story. But, most physicists tend to treat cosmic evolution as something fundamentally different - usually stopping right before "primordial soup." I am in a minority of scientists that do not favor cosmic or biological evolution.

For me, there are entropic problems with biological evolution. Actually, I have the same problems with cosmic evolution, and cosmic evolution gets complicated when you get into chromodynamics (my area of study.) This is one reason why Fermilab, and the LHC are conducting tests.

But, with all of that said, you will still get looks of horrific disdain if you EVER profess your doubt about [cosmic or biological] evolution in the scientific community, much like confessing doubt about the deity of Christ in a church.

XB3LI3V3RX · Jun 7, 2013

KWCrazy said:
Let's look at John 14, Verse 13-14.
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Miracles happen to glorify God, not to give hard proof of His existence to a non-believer. The person of faith has already accepted God's offer of salvation, so anything revealed to him merely buoys that faith. If God stood in front of you like Jesus came to Paul on the road to Damascus and said, "Here I am, now believe," it would be easy for you to believe in Him. However, salvation requires you to come to God first in faith, saying to the Father "Here I am, and I believe." Going to Heaven is the easiest thing in the world; and the hardest. It requires you to believe in God's promise when all about you people tell you that such believe is childish and illogical.

I'm saying that all morality comes from the knowledge of good an evil, which man received in Eden.

Are dogs and cats moral or immoral?
If a stray dog steals a piece of meat from your grill before you can cook it, is that dog a thief? If a cat kills a mouse, is it a murderer? If your dog mates with a reluctant female, is it rape?

Morality is a function of knowing the difference between good and evil. Animals don't know this, and therefore there is no morality. What separates us from them is that we DO know the difference. Had we not been given that knowledge from the fall of man, we would be no more moral or less moral than our pets.

I've never thought of animals that way before, but it does make sense now that I think about it.

Archaeopteryx · Jun 7, 2013

KWCrazy said:
Let's look at John 14, Verse 13-14.
13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son.
14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

Miracles happen to glorify God, not to give hard proof of His existence to a non-believer. The person of faith has already accepted God's offer of salvation, so anything revealed to him merely buoys that faith. If God stood in front of you like Jesus came to Paul on the road to Damascus and said, "Here I am, now believe," it would be easy for you to believe in Him. However, salvation requires you to come to God first in faith, saying to the Father "Here I am, and I believe." Going to Heaven is the easiest thing in the world; and the hardest. It requires you to believe in God's promise when all about you people tell you that such believe is childish and illogical.

But those who already believe have no need for them, so why are miracles a reward for faith? How does the reward fit with the practice (faith)? It seems fairly redundant and unnecessary. Countless people have faith, yet so few apparently experience miracles. Why are some of the faithful being "reward" for their faith while others are not?

Are dogs and cats moral or immoral?
If a stray dog steals a piece of meat from your grill before you can cook it, is that dog a thief? If a cat kills a mouse, is it a murderer? If your dog mates with a reluctant female, is it rape?

Morality is a function of knowing the difference between good and evil. Animals don't know this, and therefore there is no morality. What separates us from them is that we DO know the difference. Had we not been given that knowledge from the fall of man, we would be no more moral or less moral than our pets.

That we know the difference doesn't point to a supernatural origin for our knowledge of that difference. Man is the moral animal.

HitchSlap · Jun 7, 2013

XB3LI3V3RX said:
I've never thought of animals that way before, but it does make sense now that I think about it.

Except that other mammals have been observed showing remorse, compassion and mourning.

HitchSlap · Jun 7, 2013

Sectio Aurea said:
A personal opinion by a medical doctor in a newspaper back in 1989 is the best you have got to oppose the ToE?

Really?

'Yeah, but it's the NYT's, and it supports my position...'

XB3LI3V3RX · Jun 7, 2013

HitchSlap said:
Except that other mammals have been observed showing remorse, compassion and mourning.

That isn't knowledge of good and evil, that just shows animals have feelings not morals.

Lollerskates · Jun 7, 2013

HitchSlap said:
Except that other mammals have been observed showing remorse, compassion and mourning.

I am curious as to how they measured the magnitude of those emotions, considering they are abstractions.

Also, I don't think the argument was about animal's lack of emotion, it was about their lack of moralitybecause they do not know the difference between good and evil as psychological constructions. Animals may feel remorse, compassion, and mourning, but it doesn't point to them necessarily knowing good and evil - as in, "why is my reaction to 'this' an act of mourning."

I really am curious about the observation of the emotions, though. Do you have an article that could get me going?

Eight Foot Manchild · Jun 7, 2013

XB3LI3V3RX said:
I dare you to demonstrate that it is.

The ToE has already met its burden of proof. It is the cornerstone theory of biology, and one of the best substantiated theories in all of science. The onus is yours to first demonstrate that you have some understanding of the topic, and then substantiate your assertion that it isn't possible.

Here are two simple steps for doing so:

1) Give a definition of the ToE as it is understood by scientists today, including a list and brief description of its mechanisms (to show that you at least know what you're talking about)
2) Give your #1 absolute best argument against it

99% of creationists can't even get past 1. Let's see if you fair any better.

Ready? Go...

KWCrazy · Jun 7, 2013

Archaeopteryx said:
Countless people have faith, yet so few apparently experience miracles.

Actually, 80% of Americans believe in miracles, and 35% claim to have experienced them. 25% say that they've been cured from an illness by prayer, and that number goes up with people who are more religious.
source

That we know the difference doesn't point to a supernatural origin for our knowledge of that difference. Man is the moral animal.

That we know the difference doesn't point to or away from the source of that knowledge. We know that we know, but not why we know. There is nothing in evolutionary biology that would explain it either. Only man knows the difference between good and evil. Only man ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Coincidence? Maybe so, maybe not. That's where faith comes in.

Strathos · Jun 7, 2013

Loudmouth said:
As Galileo put it, the Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heaven's go.

Exactly

XB3LI3V3RX said:
So many lost individuals, it's just sad that people still think evolution is possible and that God isn't real. (Which I don't even see the point of non-Christians coming to a Christian website in the first place unless you people really don't have a life.)

Evolution and God are hardly mutually exclusive, and it annoys me when people think they are (this applies to both theists and non-theists).

HitchSlap · Jun 7, 2013

XB3LI3V3RX said:
That isn't knowledge of good and evil, that just shows animals have feelings not morals.

Perhaps "good and evil" are just concepts, placeholders to describe actions.

HitchSlap · Jun 7, 2013

Strathos said:
Evolution and God are hardly mutually exclusive, and it annoys me when people think they are (this applies to both theists and non-theists).

I would accept your statement, as long as you don't assert your god to be a benevolent deity.

Mr Strawberry · Jun 7, 2013

AV1611VET said:
It would have to be, compared to what is taught in higher aceldama today.

The two are mutually exclusive.

Agreed, your fantasy world has nothing to do with knowledge, learning or education.

I didn't ask if it mattered, I essentially asked if you would obey a direct order from your boss.

If I worked in a bookstore and my boss told me to put the Bible in the fantasy fiction section would I do it? Yes. If that's what he wanted. As I said, it wouldn't matter to me.

What's that supposed to mean? Is it peer-review or isn't it?

Is what peer reviewed?

Because He didn't do it the way you were taught, He's a practical joker?

No, because he makes his creation appear the way scientists have discovered it, whereas according to 'His autobiography' He didn't do it like that at all. Blimey, what a joker!

He's your God too; you just don't know it.

Only in your head. Outside your head things work differently.

To me, God is my Saviour; but to those who die without Him, God is their Judge.

To you. Not to me. To me you are a deluded person who will go to your grave never having properly opened your eyes to the world around you. But you seem happy enough, so it doesn't really matter.

Better than on a merry-go-round ... and where do you think I get all that sand in the first place?

If you run out of sand you just stick your fingers in your ears, clamp your eyes shut and scream lalalala at the top of your voice, usually in as many threads as you can manage.

Eight Foot Manchild · Jun 7, 2013

HitchSlap said:
I would accept your statement, as long as you don't assert your god to be a benevolent deity.

That's more or less how I usually frame it. A general 'god' concept is not necessarily incompatible with the ToE, but the tri-omni god of Abrahamic theism is.

Archaeopteryx · Jun 7, 2013

KWCrazy said:
Actually, 80% of Americans believe in miracles, and 35% claim to have experienced them. 25% say that they've been cured from an illness by prayer, and that number goes up with people who are more religious.
source

And what does that show?

Even if grant that 35% of people did experience a miracle, that still means 65% didn't. Assuming that the majority of that 65% are also believers, why does their faith go unrewarded? What makes the believers who are rewarded special enough for them to be rewarded?

That we know the difference doesn't point to or away from the source of that knowledge. We know that we know, but not why we know. There is nothing in evolutionary biology that would explain it either. Only man knows the difference between good and evil. Only man ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Coincidence? Maybe so, maybe not. That's where faith comes in.

Actually, research is making strides in investigating the sources of humanity's moral sense. None of that research invokes a 'tree of knowledge of good and evil', except metaphorically perhaps.

Strathos · Jun 7, 2013

Eight Foot Manchild said:
That's more or less how I usually frame it. A general 'god' concept is not necessarily incompatible with the ToE, but the tri-omni god of Abrahamic theism is.

Obviously I disagree. But you seem to be invoking Epicurus' Problem of Evil, which could be invoked regardless of the validity of evolution.

Joshua0035 · Jun 7, 2013

Archaeopteryx said:
And what does that show?

Even if grant that 35% of people did experience a miracle, that still means 65% didn't.

It shows that they know how to live. Even on the most elementary of terms. The little engine that could, got up the hill because of the confidence that he could. If people want to admit it or not, there can be a thin line between what some call faith, positive thinking and the power of suggestion.

Joshua0035 · Jun 7, 2013

Archaeopteryx said:
Actually, research is making strides in investigating the sources of humanity's moral sense. None of that research invokes a 'tree of knowledge of good and evil', except metaphorically perhaps.

The tree of life was in the Garden in Eden 6,000 years ago. Science will confirm that the first GARDEN was 6,000 years ago in the middle east between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Adam was the FIRST to till the ground. Oh maybe before Adam people would throw some of their seeds in a mud puddle hoping they would grow. Clearly 6,000 years ago something new began. No one pretends to know or understand all of the implication of just what that new beginning was. The Bible says that a part of that new beginning was the understanding or knowledge that there is good and evil in the world that we live in. We may not be able to explain all of what that means, but we do understand a little bit about what the story is telling us. Even a child can walk away with a little bit of something.

KWCrazy · Jun 7, 2013

Archaeopteryx said:
And what does that show?

It refutes the claim, "Countless people have faith, yet so few apparently experience miracles."

Even if grant that 35% of people did experience a miracle, that still means 65% didn't.

Good math.
Assuming that the majority of that 65% are also believers, why does their faith go unrewarded?
God always answers prayer. He doesn't always say Yes.

Actually, research is making strides in investigating the sources of humanity's moral sense. None of that research invokes a 'tree of knowledge of good and evil',

How could it? Such a tree no longer exists, and such knowledge was not contained in the fruit. The knowledge was a consequence of disobediance, and the consequence of that knowledge was that man inherited a death sentance as well as a judgment on his choices of good or evil.

...Do you even believe in Evolution in the first palce?

Newbie

Junior Member

Animal Lover

Wanderer

PROUDLY PRIMATE

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Animal Lover

Junior Member

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

Newbie

No one important

PROUDLY PRIMATE

PROUDLY PRIMATE

Newbie

His Supreme Holy Correctfulness

Wanderer

No one important

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency