• 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 give up: I'd rather go backwards, than forwards (in Evolution)

Jok

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2019
774
657
48
Indiana
✟49,761.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Engaged
Your future spiritual body could be nothing at all like a monkey or man whatsoever. Physical material isn’t really important, “Made in the image of God” has meaning that is distinct from physical structure. The Hebrew is close to “God imager” which means that your life is supposed to reflect the image of what God is like (through how you live your life). You reflect the image of God to people around you (like a mirror). The capacity to do that isn’t even available to monkeys. Because it’s a trait that is related to both being self aware, and to your character, it is not a biology thing.
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
You want to make me chattel, that's what bothers me.

If I said "I am only ever going to evolve", I would be a liar like you (Jesus used the same word, of false jews).

But now I say "what little evolution I have, is up to God" and you hate me, because I am not your population? Or you don't think I am??
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
If you give your Evolution up, God gives you abundantly more.

There is absolutely no incentive, to keep Evolution - at least as anything more than a ruse.

It's not wrong to harp on about a ruse, if you are using to balance an appetite, that would otherwise become destructive.
 
Upvote 0

driewerf

a day at the Zoo
Mar 7, 2010
3,434
1,961
✟267,108.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
No, populations evolve over different generations.
Let us suppose a population of 3 organisms, each carrying a slightly different version of a gene G. So organism 1 carries G1, organism 2 carries G2, organism 3 carries G3. (And assuming asexual reproduction, for simplicity)
At this moment the population is made up of 33% G1, 33% G2, 33% G3.
Organism 1 dies without offspring, organism 2 has 2 offsprings (and dies) and organism 3 has 3 offsprings (and dies).
So the genetic frequency en the next generation is; G1 0%, G2 40%, G3 60%. These frequencies have changed and G1 is not in the gene pool anymore. The population has evolved but not the individual organisms.
So let us assume a third generation; the two G2-carrieers each have 1 offspring (and die), two G3-carriers have each 2 offsprings, but of these four have a mutation, and carrie now a new variation G4. So in the third generation you have 2 G2-genes (33)%, 3 G3-genes (51%) and 1 G4 gene (17%).
Again, the poulation has evolved, because the frequency in genes has changed over the different generations, but the individual organisms have not evolved during their life time.
 
Reactions: Danieldemol
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
Simplified Evolution, is simply this: that quantum entanglements, fashioned life in primordial mud and as many as identified themselves as a particular creature developed instinct that helped them flourish - which in God was made complete, paying it forward as it were, that death not be overwhelming. The paying it forward, in principle being an Evolution of one difference, which could be repeatedly added to (the more syncopated, in the paying, the more effective the strength). Thus repeating the Creation, flourishing of the more reflourished became the norm for Creation, as was understood to be relative, to the danger of staying that way, while pursued - by predators foregoing the height of the flourishing, because they did not see the rule of man, as from God.

Why part of Creation did not see the rule of man, as from God,, is a question of the History of Sin and does not need to be treated here - suffice it to say, that as we will deal with in our current time, not every son of man, was as trustworthy as Christ.

The point being that History itself, is only meant as a rough guide, to that which we know God wants of us, in the same strength that He loved us with, but to begin with, that the greater praise be added to Him, even though He did not specifically sow for it. In this we know that God loved us, that we were able to stand without sin, before the Son of Man.

The surprise then, is that God readies us for all works, even those we do not know how to undertake, that we are able to describe our history as is convenient to us, given what we are going to do, for His Kingdom's sake - there is a History more convenient than Evolution: the History of Man, and we do well to heed it, because it frees us from sin, when otherwise, we would not know our way. Our way has to be unique to us, or we do not prosper.

Our way has to be unique to us, or we do not prosper.
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic

Yes but assuming G2, G3 and G4 see G1 reaching zero, without help, by the third generation, G2 is able to adopt an adaptation that reverts to G1 with some of its offspring and not with others, G3 and G4 are able to mate with the reverted G1 and G1 will be 33% by the fourth generation.

So it is a question of foresight, not terminality - by which you confuse yourself, that the absence is the end.

If you were committed to adopting the greatest strength you could, for the human race, you would focus on adding to the gene pool, that which is most strategically an honouring of the difference the human race makes, not the similitude.

Not judging by the similitude, strengthens the spirit, not just the testimony.
 
Upvote 0

driewerf

a day at the Zoo
Mar 7, 2010
3,434
1,961
✟267,108.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Your word salad apart, do you understand -- note understand, not necessarily accept -- that populations evolve, but individuals don't?
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
It follows, that being able to tell when an individual's likeness is going to die, is an adaptation worth having, regardless of what else you might have to sacrifice.

The pitfall is that only ever having a race of throwbacks (throwbacks to previous generations), is that the genome becomes inflexible - if the genome is inflexible, the throwbacks threaten the survival of the species, from the inside.

Lesser variation, then, turns out to be the greatest strength - since throwbacks are still able to adapt what is new, albeit in slighter measure.
 
Upvote 0

driewerf

a day at the Zoo
Mar 7, 2010
3,434
1,961
✟267,108.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Do you understand -- note understand, not necessarily accept -- the phrase "populations evolve, but individuals don't"?
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,042
7,404
31
Wales
✟425,081.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Simplified Evolution, is simply this:

No, Gottservant, that isn't evolution. That's what you think evolution is but it isn't.

Seriously, I ask this question every time one of your threads pop up: why do you not want to learn about what the theory of evolution actually says and what evolution actually is?
And are you taking your medicine on the regular?
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
Do you understand -- note understand, not necessarily accept -- the phrase "populations evolve, but individuals don't"?

Do you accept, that individuals become populations? And that populations become strong individuals?
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Site Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,468
Tarnaveni
✟841,659.00
Country
Romania
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

What’s the story here? Do you mean you don’t like it if things are inherently changeable as opposed to being fixed and static?
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
Do you understand -- note understand, not necessarily accept -- the phrase "populations evolve, but individuals don't"?

I think the problem here is that you are claiming populations know something that individuals do not.

If Evolution cannot be applied by the individual, it cannot be a prerogative.

I have faith. If I believe that faith is important, I treat it as a prerogative - that means I try to treat it consistently, from one instance of believing it, to the next.

If Evolution is not a prerogative, you can generalise it all you like, but it will not ultimately bear any fruit.
 
Upvote 0

Gottservant

God loves your words, may men love them also
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2006
11,383
704
46
✟276,687.00
Faith
Messianic
What’s the story here? Do you mean you don’t like it if things are inherently changeable as opposed to being fixed and static?

I have identified, that throwbacks and innovation are a different phenomenon, than Evolution.

Evolution, requires capitulation to taller and taller orders - whereas throwing back and innovating can appear with a commitment of "one".

Wanting to make Evolution something great, then, is a furphy - whereas lots of little Evolutions confirm what has already become instinct.

This is phenomenologically hard.

In future, don't bother communicating Evolution to other individuals, that can't evolve; don't bother keeping a history of Evolution that never changes, without testing not changing on something that believes in Evolution; don't bother adapting to something better than Evolution, when you make everything that evolves, more like a difference that doesn't matter.
 
Upvote 0

Tom 1

Optimistic sceptic
Site Supporter
Nov 13, 2017
12,212
12,468
Tarnaveni
✟841,659.00
Country
Romania
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married

Are you talking about evolution in thought and understanding about some issue, or evolution as in ToE?
 
Upvote 0

Laurence Niles

New Member
Jul 26, 2020
2
0
53
Lancaster
✟1,207.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Divorced
Can you please detail your understanding of evolution?
Evolution is purported to be change in allele frequency over time. However the question is was there enough time time for all the changes to have occurred?

A Christian who holds the Bible as true would not accept deep time as it flys in the face of Creation by Him.

If deep time is not true then the Theory of Evolution is not true. That is to say the gradual change in allele frequency cannot be the case.

This leaves the fact of evolution. Things do change over time- but not quick enough to fit within a Biblical time frame. So to my mind the scientists should be looking for a theory of the diversity of life on Earth that would work within a Biblical time frame.

I don’t expect scientists to understand how He did it but if the truly do have a spirit of inquiry they could explore how with greater vigour.

YIC
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
That's just it. The "biblical" time frame has been off the table for 200 years. There is absolutely no evidence for it.
 
Upvote 0

driewerf

a day at the Zoo
Mar 7, 2010
3,434
1,961
✟267,108.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Why should the scientists not simply look at the evidence? Investigate the physical world and make their conclusions based on the gathered evidence?
 
Reactions: Danieldemol
Upvote 0

Laurence Niles

New Member
Jul 26, 2020
2
0
53
Lancaster
✟1,207.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Divorced
That's just it. The "biblical" time frame has been off the table for 200 years. There is absolutely no evidence for it.
I actually do agree with you. There is no evidence for a short time frame. But does an absence of evidence mean evidence of absence (sorry, I know that’s a facile response)?

What am I really saying?

Hebrew 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

I have faith that we have ToE at least somewhat wrong. Wishful thinking? Perhaps, possibly, definitely?

But belief in Him has it’s very foundation in Hope.

YIC
 
Upvote 0