• 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.

If Evolution, why care?

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
cryptobranchus said:
One last post for the night. If (more like when) the world is destroyed then all of our knowledge is destroyed with it, so why defend knowledge when the knowledge will not last?
Sounds like a good incentive not to destroy the world, wouldn't you agree?
 
Upvote 0

meebs

The dev!l loves rock and roll
Aug 17, 2004
16,883
143
Alpha Quadrant
Visit site
✟17,879.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
cryptobranchus said:
To jellybrain,

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (Genesis 1:1)

Oh snaps!

By the way, if you don't take the above verse literally then what from the Bible is literal?
That God created the heavens and the earth - Gen 1:1!! ^_^

And thats it. doesnt matter how, that he just created it - so thats where i take the bible seriously. But the creation story is just a myth, made up by less knowledgable people. Just like in the future, our knowledge of evolution may change. :idea: thats if scientists find out if things are different.
 
Upvote 0
Sep 15, 2004
15
0
✟125.00
Faith
Christian
Just like in the future, our knowledge of evolution may change. thats if scientists find out if things are different.




So what if scientist find out things are different and evolution can't happen?



What about when most scientists believed in a literal 6 day creation? Would you have believed in a literal 6 day creation because the scientist did?



That would mean that you would believe in something that was “true” at the time, and then you would have to change your beliefs once scientists decide that the model (or theory) was wrong. Then if the theory changes again, so would your beliefs (unless you decide that the scientist are wrong), and also if the theory keeps changing then you are continually proven wrong.



What would you say if they could prove a literal 6 day creation? I wouldn’t believe in a literal six day creation just because the “scientist” at the time thought that it was true. Just because “scientist” believe in something doesn’t mean it’s true.



Back again to my other question. If all knowledge will eventually pass away (with the destruction of the planet or the human race) why should you care if the next generation will have it? I have read many posts that say because it will benefit the next generation, but the next generation will die. So what if there is a cure for cancer and aids (if there is no afterlife)? They will die anyway and turn into worm food. Why have kids? They will turn into worm food. Knowledge (if there is no afterlife) will eventually die.



Also this is not Apologetics because apologetics is the branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines or it is a formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system. Right now I am not trying to defend the Christian faith. I am trying to raise questions in non-Christians.
 
Upvote 0

notto

Legend
May 31, 2002
11,130
664
55
Visit site
✟29,869.00
Faith
United Ch. of Christ
cryptobranchus said:
Also this is not Apologetics because apologetics is the branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines or it is a formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system. Right now I am not trying to defend the Christian faith. I am trying to raise questions in non-Christians.
Your questions have nothing to do with science or evolution and the answers to your questions won't be found there. You are discussing theology and philosophy. Why don't you take it to the proper board (start with apologetics).

Evolution is not equal to atheism.
Disproving evolution will not prove 6 day Creation.
Science cannot prove or disprove God.

You should be able to realize that your discussion and questions are based on a set of false premises
 
Upvote 0

Ondoher

Veteran
Sep 17, 2004
1,812
52
✟2,246.00
Faith
Atheist
cryptobranchus said:
So what if scientist find out things are different and evolution can't happen?
[/QUOTE ]
And what if they find out the sun really revolves around the earth? And what if germs really don't cause disease? Somethings that science knows, it knows with a great deal of certainty, despite beign technically provisional.


cryptobranchus said:

What about when most scientists believed in a literal 6 day creation? Would you have believed in a literal 6 day creation because the scientist did?
Young-earth, literal creationism was abandoned because the data did not support it. It was only ever accepted for theological reasons.



cryptobranchus said:
That would mean that you would believe in something that was “true” at the time, and then you would have to change your beliefs once scientists decide that the model (or theory) was wrong. Then if the theory changes again, so would your beliefs (unless you decide that the scientist are wrong), and also if the theory keeps changing then you are continually proven wrong.
Sometimes, science is wrong. Newton was wrong about the causes of gravity. There is nothing wrong with being wrong. It is far worse to cling to dogma in the face of overwhelming challenge.


cryptobranchus said:
What would you say if they could prove a literal 6 day creation? I wouldn’t believe in a literal six day creation just because the “scientist” at the time thought that it was true. Just because “scientist” believe in something doesn’t mean it’s true.
I, personally, don't agree with every scientific theory proposed. For instance, I favor Out-of-Africa over Multiregionalism. I like inflationary cosmology, but am not prepared to say I believe it. What convinces is a good argument supported by sound data, not the whim of a high-preist of science.


cryptobranchus said:
Back again to my other question. If all knowledge will eventually pass away (with the destruction of the planet or the human race) why should you care if the next generation will have it? I have read many posts that say because it will benefit the next generation, but the next generation will die. So what if there is a cure for cancer and aids (if there is no afterlife)? They will die anyway and turn into worm food. Why have kids? They will turn into worm food. Knowledge (if there is no afterlife) will eventually die.
Life is enjoyable as it is lived. I can only hope my children have a life full of joy, and if lucky, peace and prosperity. I do not need to live forever, I can appreciate the short time I have, and try to make the best of it.

The threat of creationists further degrading our educational system is a real one, and one that I, and many other people, take seriously. Our ecconomy depends more and more on good, solid, scientific education. Creationism threatens that.


cryptobranchus said:
Also this is not Apologetics because apologetics is t
cryptobranchus said:
he branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines or it is a formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system. Right now I am not trying to defend the Christian faith. I am trying to raise questions in non-Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
cryptobranchus said:




So what if scientist find out things are different and evolution can't happen?


Then they would quickly set out to find the things that did happen.



What about when most scientists believed in a literal 6 day creation? Would you have believed in a literal 6 day creation because the scientist did?

If they could explain the how and why behind it...



That would mean that you would believe in something that was “true” at the time, and then you would have to change your beliefs once scientists decide that the model (or theory) was wrong. Then if the theory changes again, so would your beliefs (unless you decide that the scientist are wrong), and also if the theory keeps changing then you are continually proven wrong.

It's called "learning."



What would you say if they could prove a literal 6 day creation? I wouldn’t believe in a literal six day creation just because the “scientist” at the time thought that it was true. Just because “scientist” believe in something doesn’t mean it’s true.

It's not an issue of "belief," it what the available evidence points to.
Scientists "believed" in 6 day creation because there was nothing available to indicate otherwise.
(Not to mention a powerful socio-political institution pressuring them not to find anything that indicated otherwise...)

Now, we have evidence which simply should not be there if literal 6-day creation were true. And all the belief on the planet is not going to make that evidence go away.



Back again to my other question. If all knowledge will eventually pass away (with the destruction of the planet or the human race) why should you care if the next generation will have it?

IOW, why should we care about our children? Very odd question...
In any case, it seems highly unlikely that the destruction of the human race will occur with the next generation.

I have read many posts that say because it will benefit the next generation, but the next generation will die.

So they pass it all on to the next generation after that...

So what if there is a cure for cancer and aids (if there is no afterlife)? They will die anyway and turn into worm food. Why have kids? They will turn into worm food. Knowledge (if there is no afterlife) will eventually die.

So why bother to do anything?
Is this some strange sect of Christian Nihilism I'm not familiar with?



Also this is not Apologetics because apologetics is t
he branch of theology that is concerned with defending or proving the truth of Christian doctrines or it is a formal argumentation in defense of something, such as a position or system. Right now I am not trying to defend the Christian faith. I am trying to raise questions in non-Christians.
Now I would like to raise a question for you: Are you so indispensible to the universe that you cannot imagine it functioning without you in it?
 
Upvote 0

Lonnie

Well-Known Member
Nov 17, 2003
601
10
US
✟25,204.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Others
"Then they would quickly set out to find the things that did happen." ~Nathan Poe
Or would they...

"IOW, why should we care about our children? Very odd question...
In any case, it seems highly unlikely that the destruction of the human race will occur with the next generation." ~ Nathan Poe

That does not awnser the question that cryptobranchus asked.
 
Upvote 0

meebs

The dev!l loves rock and roll
Aug 17, 2004
16,883
143
Alpha Quadrant
Visit site
✟17,879.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
cryptobranchus said:
So what if scientist find out things are different and evolution can't happen?



What about when most scientists believed in a literal 6 day creation? Would you have believed in a literal 6 day creation because the scientist did?



That would mean that you would believe in something that was “true” at the time, and then you would have to change your beliefs once scientists decide that the model (or theory) was wrong. Then if the theory changes again, so would your beliefs (unless you decide that the scientist are wrong), and also if the theory keeps changing then you are continually proven wrong.



What would you say if they could prove a literal 6 day creation? I wouldn’t believe in a literal six day creation just because the “scientist” at the time thought that it was true. Just because “scientist” believe in something doesn’t mean it’s true.
Lucky for me: im studying to be a scientist! Focusing on biology and the earth sciences. So i will be studying all this. I look at everything from a critical point of view, which will make me a good scientist (hopefully, if i do it right). If things are different to evolution, i will probably look at the world around me. Think of my own theorys and work out which one is possible - i will read scientists theorys - then gather up thier evidence (and mine if i have any) and draw up a conclusion. If it somehow did manage to fit in with the 6 day creation (which i doubt) then i would beleive. However - it seems that evolution is the one that makes the most sense (and also the scientist view of how the earth was formed) at the time being!

So no, i dont beleive something that a scientist tells me, I happen to look at the theory that makes most sense to me. then draw my own conclusions. Like nathan poe says, its called learning. Hopfully a thing i will do all my life, amongst other stuff.

(some scientists say there is no God, i happen to disagree with that! also if a scientists said to me jump of a cliff, cos he beleives it is safe, i wouldnt, drawing up from evidence, that people die rather nastily when they do that :sick: .)

I am no sheep!! ^_^ or lemming.
 
Upvote 0

Nathan Poe

Well-Known Member
Sep 21, 2002
32,198
1,693
51
United States
✟41,319.00
Faith
Agnostic
Politics
US-Democrat
Lonnie said:
"Then they would quickly set out to find the things that did happen." ~Nathan Poe
Or would they...
Of course they would; why wouldn't they?

Oh, that's right, it's a giant Satanic Conspiracy foisted by the big bad scientists.

One of many, in fact. It turns out that television technology is also a hoax. There really are little men inside your TV after all...

"IOW, why should we care about our children? Very odd question...
In any case, it seems highly unlikely that the destruction of the human race will occur with the next generation." ~ Nathan Poe

That does not awnser the question that cryptobranchus asked.
Actually, it does.

You construct a skyscraper. Someday it will be demolished. Was it a waste of time?

You bake a cake. It will be eaten and excreted. Why bother?

You buy a car. Someday it will go to the junkyard. What was the point?

Shall we only direct our efforts to the things we think are permanent? Shall we assume some things are permanent for no other reson than to justify our efforts?
I think not.
 
Upvote 0