- Nov 21, 2008
- 53,335
- 11,894
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- SDA
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I like a similar one: what do you call alternative medicine that works?There is an old joke: What do you call creationists that understand the theory of evolution?
Answer: Evolutionists.
Funnily enough every atom of you body heavier than iron originated in a dying star. The rest is just collapsed gas.But rocks, dust, gas, and sunlight will never turn into a horse ...
Funnily enough every atom of you body heavier than iron originated in a dying star. The rest is just collapsed gas.
How many planets have been checked vs how many planets there are?Notice how that is "not" happening on other planets
The atoms, molecules, proteins, systems and structures in your body already existed billions of years ago and when you were conceived became the building blocks of your body.dust/rocks/gas - sunlight... turns into a rabbit because it is "just THAT talented
What you label as "logical and obvious" is nothing more than your ignorance at the display. It's one more data point (in a very big data collection) that you'd better don't look at creationists for science or knowledge.hmmm.. logical... obvious.BobRyan said: ↑
Everyone agrees that a man can turn a rabbit into dust into a single day. That is a given.
So then clearly - an infinite being with infinite power and wisdom can turn dust into a rabbit in a single day.
But rocks, dust, gas, and sunlight will never turn into a horse ... nor even be able to turn a bacteria into a horse ... in all of time. They don't "have that as a property of matter" and they don't have the ability to "acquire the skill over time"
=====================
Atheists will argue that no such being "exists".
Creationists will argue that "no such rock exists"
What you label as "logical and obvious" is nothing more than you ignorance .
And that argument was built upon a unrealistic assumptions ànd a straw man argument of what the ToE is. I show so in this thread:Stating the obvious that all can agree with - without too much effortsuch insightful content... here is the deal... the point I made was so glaringly obvious that "it is left as an exercise for the reader" to choose between "trusty rock" vs infinite being as the "cause" for going from the barren earth state (that we all know existed no matter the stories you may prefer) - and the current state.
And those that cannot follow that argument are free to struggle with the details as long as they wish. I have no objection.
dust/rocks/gas - sunlight... turns into a rabbit because it is "just THAT talented"
or.... infinitely wise and powerful creator makes that happen.
(Notice how that is "not" happening on other planets)
The atoms, molecules, proteins, systems and structures in your body already existed billions of years ago .
I hope that all the christians will reject this post, because otherwise it would be prime example of how christianity is anti-science, anti knowledge and anti education.Honestly, I don't care who studies what. Scientists used to be clever enough to study a wide range of fields. A specialist is someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing.
Also, science is not God, in spite of the inflated egos that demand to be treated as if they are gods. Are seriously trying to tell me that OOL researchers do not believe in evolution and evolutionists (mostly) believe in abiogenesis?
Or both.So then HOW all that "end result" happens given the "barren Earth" starting point boils down to either "properties of matter" (the talented rock for atheists) or an infinitely wise and powerful being (for Creationists)
Yes, you had better avoid T.E. if you're only going to make a straw man out of it. There are too many real theistic evolutionists around this forum to expect to get away with it.There is the third category of T.E. where they would start with bacteria instead of barren Earth -- and they would ad hoc insert God at some unpredictable steps all along the way - places that I cannot predict so I don't deal with that -other- group in the two scenarios.
That is a story some folks like to tell - I get that.
The point is that no matter the stories or the side of the fence one is on... ALL options have a point in the past where earth is lifeless and barren. No matter if you are evolutionist or creationist or atheist or ....
And all options have the current state (No matter if you are evolutionist or creationist or atheist or ....)
Again if this is where people struggle then "it is left as an exercise for the reader" to work that out.
==================================
Second point that all agree with is that "the current state exists". (No matter if you are evolutionist or creationist or atheist or ....)
So then HOW all that "end result" happens given the "barren Earth" starting point boils down to either "properties of matter" (the talented rock for atheists) or an infinitely wise and powerful being (for Creationists)
There is the third category of T.E. where they would start with bacteria instead of barren Earth -- and they would ad hoc insert God at some unpredictable steps all along the way - places that I cannot predict so I don't deal with that -other- group in the two scenarios.
Yes, you had better avoid T.E.
The only people who struggle with this are those who attempt to cannon weld the Bible to history.Again if this is where people struggle
Not true. There is the Earth through properties of matter and the myriad of different creation myths of which God willing it so is one of (such as how the gods An, Enlil, Enki, and Ninhursanga created the Sumerians and comfortable conditions for the animals to live and procreate).So then HOW all that "end result" happens given the "barren Earth" starting point boils down to either "properties of matter" (the talented rock for atheists) or an infinitely wise and powerful being (for Creationists)
We can demonstrate with math and science how dust rocks and gas becomes a rabbit. How is your explanation using an infinitely wise and powerful creator coming along?dust/rocks/gas - sunlight... turns into a rabbit because it is "just THAT talented"
or.... infinitely wise and powerful creator makes that happen.
(Notice how that is "not" happening on other planets)
You are not paying attention. We can all agree that at one time there was no life on Earth and then later there was. That was an abiogenesis event, even if you do not like the name. We know that life appeared therefore evolution is possible. It is really that simple. Your strawman fails.All that is needed is life? All? It is the most mystifying and astounding thing in the universe. And no, I do not accept that evolution occurs just because things are alive. Just the fact that creatures do indeed reproduce is astonishing. To have viable creature, a male and a female had to form at the same time in the same place and somehow know that it was necessary to mate. I won't go on. It's pointless.
Wisdom is knowing that you know nothing, or did you never hear that because it's not from a Christian? It's Socrates, btwHonestly, I don't care who studies what. Scientists used to be clever enough to study a wide range of fields. A specialist is someone who knows more and more about less and less until he knows everything about nothing.
Also, science is not God, in spite of the inflated egos that demand to be treated as if they are gods. Are seriously trying to tell me that OOL researchers do not believe in evolution and evolutionists (mostly) believe in abiogenesis?
Sad thing is, I recall my youth leader, back when I was basically expected to go to church (because it helped?), talking about YEC aspects with the firmament and such. Even then, when I was still a baby skeptic, I was fairly incredulous about such a thing being how things were rather than, you know, the science that suggests the earth is 4 billion years old and the water cycle took time to get settled from early earth state.The Bible was never meant to be a science book. It describes other phenomena, like the hydrological cycle, in clearly metaphorical terms (Job 38:37, for example), but I don't see anyone going around insisting that there's a big conspiracy to cover up that rain really comes from bottles in the sky and not clouds.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?