• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

If you routinely removed all written theory - about 'Evolution' - from culture, it would reappear?

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Gottservant, Apr 2, 2021.

  1. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    Ah.

    So you are saying, "based on the mutations between the first and last discovery of 'Evolution', the word for it would change".

    But subsequent changes in the same process, would not necessarily arrive at 'Evolution' again.
     
  2. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

    Religion enables me to hold certain words to be "true", which in addition to Evolution is a potential: either for change or greater change.

    Suggesting that what is true can only come from within science, without holding certain words to be true in the process, leaves you at square one: with respect to that which is more than true, being discovered.

    You can cut yourself short if you want, but whatever your object might be, you're only making it harder to reach (unless you are somehow forcing a greater hand from God, despite your objections to Him!).
     
  3. Shemjaza

    Shemjaza Regular Member Supporter

    +2,700
    Australia
    Atheist
    Single
    AU-Greens
    No, I'm not stating that at all.

    The scenario you were describing was after all knowledge of evolution being lost to humanity, a new culture rediscovering it. There isn't a process analogous to mutation, it's a new discovery not a variation on the older one.

    I also need to be clear, the new word for the concept of evolution would have nothing to do with the old one. It would be a results of the future scientists, their language, culture and how they assigned names for things.

    As an example, this new civilisation is likely to discover electricity too and would probably have a word for electrical potential energy. But they wouldn't call it "voltage" as it would not have been studied by some guy called Alessandro Volta in their civilisation.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
    • List
  4. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    The point is that they wouldn't come even close to 'Voltage', no matter how many times they discovered it, because as you say "it wouldn't be traceable to Volta".

    And the fact is that we shouldn't care.

    Jesus said "hypocrites strain out a gnat (something very small) and swallow a camel (something very hard to get on top of)" (gospels)
     
  5. Shemjaza

    Shemjaza Regular Member Supporter

    +2,700
    Australia
    Atheist
    Single
    AU-Greens
    They would get the concept of electrical potential energy, which is the important factor, not what some dead civilisation named it.

    I agree.

    I don't understand your point.
     
  6. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    They would name it, though, it is important not to forget that. Even if you become as competent as possible when dealing with selection pressure, there will be systemic discoveries that hinge on design: such as naming things that you have discovered.

    What Jesus said was "Hypocrites! You strain out a gnat (in this context: alternative names for 'Evolution') but you swallow a camel (in this context: mixing selection pressure with mutation)". In common parlance this is similar to "not seeing the forest for the trees". The point is, that the temptation is to attribute everything that changes to "Evolution" when what you should be looking for, is the means to strengthen survival.
     
  7. Mr Laurier

    Mr Laurier Active Member

    465
    +156
    Canada
    Atheist
    Private
    Evolution is a process. Not an ideology to "justify".

    None of the above.

    Wallace, like Darwin, discovered the mechanism, of evolution, which is sexual selection.
    Neither man discovered evolution, which was known about for centuries before.
    If neither man had been born, we would still see the same process taking place.
     
  8. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    You are misdirecting a strawman. I am not attempting to advance ideology. Be that as it may, you take the conversation backwards, by suggesting that a process on its own, is sufficiently perfect to define its own accountability. That simply is not the case.

    The whole point is that we are not to be at a loss for words, for the sake of correctly interpreting that discovery.

    Jesus correctly determined, that the use of a thing is more important than its discovery - I am merely bringing His words on the matter to light.
     
  9. Shemjaza

    Shemjaza Regular Member Supporter

    +2,700
    Australia
    Atheist
    Single
    AU-Greens
    But science and naming are human endevours. I agree that they are absolutely a product of design.

    That doesn't mean what they are studying are also the product of design.

    Evolution is a description of the result after the fact, not about the individual chances of survival and change themselves.

    Also, no one should attribute all survival to genetic advantages.

    A genetic advantage will give a statistical advantage over the whole population... the individuals may have all manner of luck and personal choices (or even divine intervention if you believe in that) to give or take their chances of survival.
     
  10. Gottservant

    Gottservant God loves your words, may men love them also Supporter

    +477
    Messianic
    They may be, they may not be.

    Stating something is a fact is not a fact - you keep saying Evolution "is fact" when the minutiae is unstated: which Evolution is fact? You can't have all of them (all the Evolutions)??

    The point is, if we are going to do this at all (interpret Evolution), we will do well to start with the Words of Jesus.

    If Jesus says "hypocrites are vulnerable to boasting" then we had better be sure that we aren't boasting about science (hypocritically).

    If Jesus says "don't think about it so much" then we had better be sure we are not unable to rest.
     
  11. Frank Robert

    Frank Robert Well-Known Member

    532
    +209
    United States
    Agnostic
    Married
    Religion and science are not at odds. It is the creationist literal interpretation of genesis that is at odds with science.

    That is a creationist misunderstanding, although it does appear that creationist organizations like AIG and DI have ulterior motives for perpetrating that misunderstanding.

    I don't have any objections to others believing there is a God but I don't know if there is a God and if there is a God that it is the Christian God.
     
  12. Mr Laurier

    Mr Laurier Active Member

    465
    +156
    Canada
    Atheist
    Private
    You seem to have no clear idea what evolution is, beyond an idea that you oppose for religious reasons.
    Please try to clarify what you think evolution is.
     
  13. Shemjaza

    Shemjaza Regular Member Supporter

    +2,700
    Australia
    Atheist
    Single
    AU-Greens
    No, naming and science are definitely human endevours and designed.

    And that is not a reason to assume what they apply to are designed or not.

    I didn't say "Evolution is a fact" I used the turn of phrase "after the fact".

    I was talking about how evolution doesn't apply to individual instances... it's about species wide statistical changes.

    And you are making mistakes about how evolution works again. There aren't multiple evolutions and individuals do not have an evolution.

    Evolution is a process. Not a possession. Not an attribute. Not a theology. Not a philosophy.

    We don't need to boast about science, it's a practical tool. Same for evolution in particular, it's just a practical way to look at the history and changes in life... it's consistent with the evidence and is useful as a tool of understanding the physical world.

    It really isn't relevant to Jesus, his teachings, or to the salvation of his followers.
     
  14. Warden_of_the_Storm

    Warden_of_the_Storm Well-Known Member

    +4,349
    United Kingdom
    Deist
    Single
    And that's just post hoc logic from you at it's finest (and no, that's not a compliment).
     
  15. Speedwell

    Speedwell Well-Known Member

    +17,431
    United States
    Other Religion
    Married
    In this forum, by common agreement, there is only one evolution being discussed: biological evolution and the scientific theory which describes it.
     
  16. Freodin

    Freodin Devout believer in a theologically different God

    +3,524
    Atheist
    Do you think a theory about Gravity would always fall down?

    A theory is a system of explanations about an observable phenomenon. It isn't the phenomenon itself.

    The map is not the territory, as the saying goes.
     
  17. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET BELIEVE IN MIRACLES Supporter

    +41,302
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    Which came first, God's eternal Word (the Map), or the territory (the Earth)?
     
  18. dlamberth

    dlamberth Senior Contributor Supporter

    +2,081
    Other Religion
    US-Others
    They came at exactly the same time. The Word is manifested through matter, it would not exist other than through matter.
     
  19. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET BELIEVE IN MIRACLES Supporter

    +41,302
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Republican
    I'm going to have to disagree here.
     
Loading...