Evolution's view of the moon

[lucaspa]

LOL

this is a fun thread.

I think now you are trolling. You are making comments only to disrupt, not discuss.

 

[lucaspa]

keep it to that and we can have yong-earth evolution.[/font]

Not really, since a young earth has been falsified by geology and physics. However, you notice that Darwin's quote ruins your contention that evolution is without the "hand of God".

 

[MagusAlbertus]

I think now you are trolling.

a light mood is not trolling, calling someone a racist is.

However, you notice that Darwin's quote ruins your contention that evolution is without the "hand of God".

Darwin isn't the final authority on what those who support evolution agree with.

My contention was not that evolution is without the hand of God, my contention was that anything that implies the hand of God is rejected by those with faith in evolution.

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Can someone go into the receeding moon argument please...since we know the moon dust is a bad argument?

 

[lucaspa]

Darwin isn't the final authority on what those who support evolution agree with.

We are not discussing the personal beliefs of every evolutionist. What we are discussing is what evolution is and what it isn't. If Darwin, who discovered evolution, thought that evolution took place with the hand of God, then you can't claim that evolution denies the hand of God. You can claim that some evolutionists believe that, but not that evolution says that.

Do you see the difference? Evolution itself is neutral on the issue of God. Evolutionists as people run the spectrum of worldviews concerning God. There are evolutionists who are theists, evolutionists who are agnostic, and evolutionists who are atheists. For the theists and atheists, their theism or atheism comes from someplace else other than evolution. So, if you want to say that atheism is wrong, fine. Do so. But you don't say that atheism is wrong because evolution is atheistic. That's fighting the wrong battle in the wrong place. It's a battle that theism can only lose, because now you aren't fighting atheism but evolution.

Instead, if you want to fight the atheist who says that evolution is atheism, you do it by showing that evolution is not atheism. IOW, you do it by correctly using science.

My contention was not that evolution is without the hand of God, my contention was that anything that implies the hand of God is rejected by those with faith in evolution

Please try again. I can't understand what your contention is.

 

[Henhouse]

As the OP, can I request this thread be shut down? It is no longer a respectful request for information about a specific theory.