Infinite monkey theorem vs first life

[the iconoclast]

I was merely trying to point out that this is off topic for the thread at large and private person to person are discussions are discouraged on open threads.

I'm fine, iconoclast, I note you have a tendency to start in depth discussions, but wander off before any real clarity can be achieved.

Hey hey

Well point it out to your friend then.

Please excuse me, I get distracted a lot by your friends. There's always one who wants to engage me. I'm popular.

You should meet me in real life, you would love me. I'm blond, long hair, 6 foot and smile a lot.

What clarity do you want from me, what do you want from me?

Cheers

 

[46AND2]

Hey hey 46and2

Lets start with this one. Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator?

Cheers

That's a theology question, and also does not address my question.

 

[the iconoclast]

That's a theology question, and also does not address my question.

Hey hey my dear

46and2 - "What is it that you would accept as evidence for evolution? Is there anything"

What i would accept as evidence would be for you to show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator.

You wanted to know. I gave you what i need. So do it friend?

Or is there a reason you have lost motivation all of a sudden?

Cheers and dont be shy. Play the ball where it lands.

Also @Shemjaza is not impressed.

 

[loveofourlord]

Hey hey

Fair enough. Alistair Crowley instantly came to mind, I would advise dropping it as some of us are in the know and such spelling could misrepresent you. However it is up to you what you do. God bless



Heads up brother. Please do not ignore questions, as it may look suspect.

Have you performed/witnessed this process yourself or do you accept an authority on such a matter?

What does this have to with a problem that gets fixed sooner or later? How does this problem get fixed - a solution would assume a conscious element reasoned?



What is like throwing a million dice in the air in sets of 6?



So we come to the concept of random in a process (.e.g a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end.)

The end is usually desirable and has intention. A process must follow the sequence in order to get a result.

How would you prove/show that random steps or actions - in a process - can be benefical and advantageous?



It would appear that the core here is positive mutations that are beneficial. Could you provide an example of a positive mutation that are beneficial?



Maybe I will, maybe I won't. It won't stop me trying my dear.



So it can be excused because of the same old 'pratts'?

I stuff up regularly and can let some choice words slip out of my mouth too. I would advise not using the word 'Pratt' as it looks inelegant.



How basic of an understanding does one need to refute evolution?

How would you justify your faith in evolution?



I disagree that my behaviour was rude or condescending, I want to support my fellow creationists and I made a statement not to back down and to press evolutionists.

The use of Pratt Would seem rude.



This may seem rude and condescending.



Well let's see if I can change your perception. Lets get into.

Ps
I have no intention to be an enemy to you.

Cheers

PRATT is simply, "Points Refuted A Thousand Times"

and the fact you have to ask what kind of how basic a understanding is needed makes my point. When a creationist comes on talking about abiogenesis, or calling evolution just a theory, or the classic, "Why are there still monkey's" or other forms of questions that are illformed it's easy to just dismiss them. One of the biggest issue creationists have is they argue against things that arn't actually part of evolution, or a very twisted understanding of it.

And I ignored the disengenous question whose only purpose is to play a gotcha game of, "You must see something yourself to know it's real." I've looked at the research I've read a ton up on evolution and how it works, I've seen many of the evidence myself, playing gotcha games isn't something I'm going to accept, and consider them just rude and not conducent to proper conversations.

And you can call it what you want, but if your going to play a game of whose rude, then you were.

 

[46AND2]

Hey hey my dear

46and2 - "What is it that you would accept as evidence for evolution? Is there anything"

What i would accept as evidence would be for you to show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator.

You wanted to know. I gave you what i need. So do it friend?

Or is there a reason you have lost motivation all of a sudden?

Cheers and dont be shy. Play the ball where it lands.

Also @Shemjaza is not impressed.

I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?

If so, then literally anything and everything is compatible with the concept of such a being. Shame on you for limiting his power.

 

[the iconoclast]

I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?


If so, then literally anything and everything is compatible with the concept of such a being.

Hey hey

I need more than what you have given to be convinced.

Please give me a detailed explanation as to how this compatibility is possible?

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

Don't be shy, you say it's possible so convince me?

Cheers

 

[the iconoclast]

PRATT is simply, "Points Refuted A Thousand Times"

Hey hey my dear

I love simple.

Just checked, what do you know it is and also it can mean - Parley's Rails, Trails and Tunnels (Salt Lake City, UT). It can also mean Previously Refuted a Thousand Times.

Where i come from it usually means idiot, un-cool, not liked. That person is such a prat. ... A person that chatters or utters childishly or foolishly. British slang, derived from the word prattle.

Please forgive me for this mistake as I was not familiar with such terminology. Some of us may not be familiar with such terminology.

I noticed you are selective with what you want to address. I too will be selective with what I want address.

It would appear when pressed, the evolutionists crumble.

I have a word for scientific faith - Sciencism

God bless you my brother in Christ and I mean you no harm. I love you

Ps there were no gotcha questions. Just questions you refuse to address or cannot address.

Also I noticed you could not provide examples or references and ignored some important discussion points

 

[46AND2]

Hey hey

I need more than what you have given to be convinced.

Please give me a detailed explanation as to how this compatibility is possible?

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

Don't be shy, you say it's possible so convince me?

Cheers

I see, so what you really want to know is how it can be compatible with your interpretation of Genesis. It can't. They are mutually exclusive. But you know that. So you should have just said that there is no evidence which you would accept.

BTW, it is possible. I just did it. Everything within the creation of an omnipotent creator is compatible with the concept of that creator. It is necessarily so.

 

[46AND2]

Don't be shy, you say it's possible so convince me?

Cheers

Also, please quote where I said it was possible...prior to post 349, of course.

 

[the iconoclast]

I see, so what you really want to know is how it can be compatible with your interpretation of Genesis. It can't.

Hey hey

That was not what I asked, now you are assuming things and have got yourself distracted. I'll try again

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

If you are stumped, ask me things?

It can't. They are mutually exclusive.

What is my interpretation of Genesis and how is it mutually exclusive?

But you know that.

I know what I believe. I want to know what you have got, remember you engaged me and wanted this discussion. What have you got?

So you should have just said that there is no evidence which you would accept.

I gave you an answer. I know what I would accept and what I would reject. I gave you something, Where do we go from here?

BTW, it is possible. I just did it. Everything within the creation of an omnipotent creator is compatible with that creator. It is necessarily so.

How is it possible? Show me using references and examples or am I just supposed to take your word for it and not ask questions?

Would you just accept statements without question and explanation?

Also, please quote where I said it was possible...prior to post 349, of course.

46and2 - "I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?"

Was that yes meant as a no,? Why did you say yes here?

Cheers

 

[Jonathan Walkerin]

If you eliminate any other possibility, and the reality is that there is no other possibility, then an all powerful, all wise Creator is the only option. Billions of people believe as I do, including Christians, Deists, Muslims, and Jews.

If we just go with this why would there not be multiple all powerful all wise deities like a billion Hindu believe ( since you seem to think numbers matter) ? The logic and evidence or lack of is just the same for those.

 

[the iconoclast]

Hey @Shemjaza, @Jonathan Walkerin has gone off topic.

I think he needs you to reprimand him - just like when you tried to reprimand me.

What's going on?!?

 

[46AND2]

Hey hey

That was not what I asked, now you are assuming things and have got yourself distracted. I'll try again

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

I met your original requirements. Unless you don't agree that your god could have done anything he wanted? If that is the case, perhaps you should tell me how you disagree with my response.

Since I met your requirements, why are you now saying it is not enough?

If you are stumped, ask me things?

I'm not stumped. I fulfilled your request, now you are moving the goal posts.

What is my interpretation of Genesis and how is it mutually exclusive?

You believe that god created the first humans in their present form and we are all descended from them, correct? That concept, and the evolution of humans, cannot both be true.

I know what I believe. I want to know what you have got, remember you engaged me and wanted this discussion. What have you got?

What do you mean what have I got? I asked you a question, which you seem to want me to answer for you.

I gave you an answer. I know what I would accept and what I would reject. I gave you something, Where do we go from here?

No, you gave me a question. A question that I answered even though it was a theological question, and not anything about evidence, which is what I asked for. But it was an easy question.

How is it possible? Show me using references and examples or am I just supposed to take your word for it and not ask questions?

Would you just accept statements without question and explanation?

Do you disagree that god can do whatever he wants? That is consistent with your theology, correct?

46and2 - "I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?"

Was that yes meant as a no,? Why did you say yes here?

Cheers

"...all powerful, yes?" as in... "...all powerful, correct?"

 

[loveofourlord]

Hey hey my dear

I love simple.

Just checked, what do you know it is and also it can mean - Parley's Rails, Trails and Tunnels (Salt Lake City, UT). It can also mean Previously Refuted a Thousand Times.

Where i come from it usually means idiot, un-cool, not liked. That person is such a prat. ... A person that chatters or utters childishly or foolishly. British slang, derived from the word prattle.

Please forgive me for this mistake as I was not familiar with such terminology. Some of us may not be familiar with such terminology.

I noticed you are selective with what you want to address. I too will be selective with what I want address.

It would appear when pressed, the evolutionists crumble.

I have a word for scientific faith - Sciencism

God bless you my brother in Christ and I mean you no harm. I love you

Ps there were no gotcha questions. Just questions you refuse to address or cannot address.

Also I noticed you could not provide examples or references and ignored some important discussion points

hey now I thought you wanted to be civil, lets avoid snide and rude remarks when there is a bit of a gish gallop going on here, though to be fair it's a bit on both our sides, so lets from now on try to keep it to one point at a time, easier to keep things from getting missed, or miss construed. I will focus on one for now.

I refused to answer a poorly formed question, and yes it's a gotcha question, because asking have I performed them myself acts to try to pretend that some how invalidates my points, because with that you can throw out the entire bible and all of our knowledge, so lets not play the little childish games of, "Well were you dere." civil discourse is best without such childish games. Lets stick to the facts and information we have. I refuse to answer a question whose premise I don't accept.

Lets stick with your random processes for the moment as it's a interesting assuming I'm reading what you mean right :>

What I was refering to with the dice is that relates to antibiotic resistance. The bacteria are throwing the dice for many things within them that have beneficial or neutral effects. Some like I said might have thinner walls, or thicker ones, some might have a different coating on the outside thats chemically different.

So you have antibiotic A that binds to b chemical in the bacteria wall allowing it to enter and harm it. With the mutations that the bactreria has naturally it may avoid problems a number of ways, maybe the pathway is too small in some bacteria so the antibiotic can't enter, others have the chemical difference that makes it harder or impossible for the antibiotic to enter protecting it. These are naturally in various populations of the bacteria, the whole process is random, and nothing is controlling it, but the selective pressure of a antibiotic kills all the bacteria that arn't resistant to it, which many times is all of them, others it just weakens them for a time and takes a bit to kill *hence why you take antibiotics even after you stop feeling ill, as you want to be sure you get them all* This is how it works within evolution on this level, it's all about random process of mutations which is a fact and undeniable, being worked upon by outside forces.

The mutations are neutral, or potentially harmful untill you apply the pressure that makes them beneficial.

white fur in some areas makes the rabbit stand out meaning that it's harmful, others it might be neutral, but if climate changes and the area the rabbits are gets colder and more snow the white fur benefits.

Remember evolution is both random, and non random. Random in that the mutations that occur are random and no gaurantee a mutation will happen that will be useful in time, but the pressures that force rapid changes isn't.

 

[the iconoclast]

hey now I thought you wanted to be civil, lets avoid snide and rude remarks when there is a bit of a gish gallop going on here, though to be fair it's a bit on both our sides, so lets from now on try to keep it to one point at a time, easier to keep things from getting missed, or miss construed. I will focus on one for now.

Hey hey my dear

No need for concern. We will agree to disagree here.

I refused to answer a poorly formed question, and yes it's a gotcha question, because asking have I performed them myself acts to try to pretend that some how invalidates my points,

I disagree but with the most respect and with no hard feelings.

because with that you can throw out the entire bible and all of our knowledge, so lets not play the little childish games of, "Well were you dere."

What?

civil discourse is best without such childish games. Lets stick to the facts and information we have. I refuse to answer a question whose premise I don't accept.

You also refuse to defend your position and provide examples to back them up. Lets leave it here brother. I love you and hope nothing but the best for you.

God bless you and your family. Keep the faith and stay strong. Even though we disagree on evolution it will not affect our salvation through Christ.

Cheers and if you believe I have been rude or caused offense. Please forgive me as that was not my intention.

You and I have a bond greater than anything on this Earth and our reward is waiting for us.

 

[the iconoclast]

I met your original requirements.

Hey hey my dear

I disagree if we speak of my requirements. We may have only met your requirements and how much you have thought about the issue. You may be happy with your minimal reuqirements, i on the other hand am disappointed.

But if this substandard effort is all you can work with then I will play the ball where it lands.

Unless you don't agree that your god could have done anything he wanted?

Your and my God CAN do anything He wants but the next question is what does He do and what does He not do.

From scripture.

God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

God can do what he pleases but in doing so, He does not lie. Just because He can do and act in any manner - He pleases and they are most likely infinite - there is certainty in the way He acts and what He has done.

I can practically do what I want - with limits of what's practical. In theory - I could go out and take all your possessions. I could wait for my friend to leave his house, get his spare keys and take his possessions. I choose not too.

My question to you - when we examine your bare requirements - is it possible that the God of Abraham created the world through evolution?

If not, why not?

If that is the case, perhaps you should tell me how you disagree with my response.

Well let's check your previous reply and see the context of this particular section.

46and2 - "I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?


If so, then literally anything and everything is compatible with the concept of such a being."

Icnoclass - "I need more than what you have given to be convinced.

Please give me a detailed explanation as to how this compatibility is possible?

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

Don't be shy, you say it's possible so convince me?"

46and2 - "I see, so what you really want to know is how it can be compatible with your interpretation of Genesis. It can't."

Icnoclass - "That was not what I asked, now you are assuming things and have got yourself distracted. I'll try again

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

If you are stumped, ask me things?

46and2 - "If that is the case, perhaps you should tell me how you disagree with my response."

Check it out - I record all our conversations for continuity and reference. I disagree with the effort you put in but, if that's what you got then I'll play ball.

It shows how little you have investigated - considering the scientific method should be systematic. It shows a bias.

What you think?

Edit
Ps ignore this section as I assumed yes meant you believe God and evolution are compatible

Since I met your requirements, why are you now saying it is not enough?"

As explained, you met your own requirements. You are not ready for me, I'm ready for you my dear

I'm not stumped. I fulfilled your request, now you are moving the goal posts.

Please don't do yourself a discourtesy.

Goal post moving means to change the criterion (goal) of a process or competition while it is still in progress, in such a way that the new goal offers one side an intentional advantage or disadvantage.

Show me how I commited this fallacy you accuse me of?

All I have done So far is remarked at how little effort you have put in - which is of great interest to me and something I am noting.

You believe that god created the first humans in their present form and we are all descended from them, correct?

I believe this.

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
That concept, and the evolution of humans, cannot both be true.

Now here's where things get interesting. There is a 6th day creation - within the fists - but Adam seems to be created after the fists.

It is possible that Adam is separate from the 6th day creation and that there were 2 seperate human creations.

Which creation do I descend from? I dont know.

I come from God and give Him the praise.

What say you?

What do you mean what have I got?

What have you got? You know what effort are you willing to put into this. So far what you got, seems to be slight. You haven't given this any though or attention in the past, have you?

I asked you a question, which you seem to want me to answer for you.

I answered your question with a question. To stimulate thought and get you moving. You know the Socratic method?!?.

For as much as you atheists prize reason, you don't seem to use it much or be aware of it when you encounter it.

No, you gave me a question.

Is that not allowed?

A question that I answered even though it was a theological question,

Congratulations to you for answering a theogical reply. You asked me what i needed to belief in evolution and I gave you what I wanted.

You want to play ball with me.

and not anything about evidence, which is what I asked for. But it was an easy question.

evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

My evidence relates to the Word of God. For you to convince me you must show how evolution is compatible with the God of Abraham, which you still haven't even touched - I haven't read the rest of the reply so please excuse me if you have done so.

My reply meets these requirements. What you think?

Plus I want a different conversation from you, less ordinary and not mundane. The substance of my replies still relate to evolution.

Evolution is random, meaningless or intent. Which one is it or is there another word that best fits?

Check this out.

The belief is space is infinite. If space is infinite then we have infinite possibilities, no matter how unlikely. 10 to The power of a trillion is still a speck to infinity. A trillion to the power of trillion is still a speck against infinity.

Why is it impossible for the God of Abraham to exist when we consider this?

Do you disagree that god can do whatever he wants?

Please see previous reply that relates to this.

You seem to have ignored this section. I will repeat it in hope that you arent being deliberate.

How is it possible? Show me using references and examples or am I just supposed to take your word for it and not ask questions?

Would you just accept statements without question and explanation?

You still won't give me an explanation. This is very suspect!

That is consistent with your theology, correct?

Yes and no. Now you have read my reply, is it consistent?

"...all powerful, yes?" as in... "...all powerful, correct?"

I see. So from your point of view, God could not have created life through evolution?

If not explain why, if so explain why.

Cheers

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Please consider my request for your future participation.

OK.

 

[loveofourlord]

Hey hey my dear

No need for concern. We will agree to disagree here.



I disagree but with the most respect and with no hard feelings.



What?



You also refuse to defend your position and provide examples to back them up. Lets leave it here brother. I love you and hope nothing but the best for you.

God bless you and your family. Keep the faith and stay strong. Even though we disagree on evolution it will not affect our salvation through Christ.

Cheers and if you believe I have been rude or caused offense. Please forgive me as that was not my intention.

You and I have a bond greater than anything on this Earth and our reward is waiting for us.

And you've refused to respond to my actual point, guess not interested in actual conversations, you talk about being civil and refuse to respond to the points I make, I'm not a massive expert on the examples, I don't study every single article on them, but I can tell you how it works. But if your going to play games and not respond and then pretend you've won, I won't play.

 

[46AND2]

Hey hey my dear

I disagree if we speak of my requirements. We may have only met your requirements and how much you have thought about the issue. You may be happy with your minimal reuqirements, i on the other hand am disappointed.

But if this substandard effort is all you can work with then I will play the ball where it lands.

No. I literally fulfilled your requirements, which were:

"Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator?"

Perhaps you should have put more thought into your response to my original question.

If god can do anything he wants, he can create nature in which humans are formed through evolution. Boom. Compatible. Simple as that. Don't blame me for your substandard response to my question.

It is not my fault you set the bar so low.

Your and my God CAN do anything He wants but the next question is what does He do and what does He not do.

See? As I told you. What you REALLY meant was: how is evolution compatible with your interpretation of the Bible.

From scripture.

God is not human, that he should lie, not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill?

So that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us.

God can do what he pleases but in doing so, He does not lie. Just because He can do and act in any manner - He pleases and they are most likely infinite - there is certainty in the way He acts and what He has done.

I can practically do what I want - with limits of what's practical. In theory - I could go out and take all your possessions. I could wait for my friend to leave his house, get his spare keys and take his possessions. I choose not too.

My question to you - when we examine your bare requirements - is it possible that the God of Abraham created the world through evolution?

1. How do you know god cannot lie? Isn't "I can't lie" exactly what a liar would tell you?
2. This is irrelevant, anyway, since we are not talking about whether god lied or not. You are assuming that your interpretation (which differs from that of many other Christians) of what he said on the matter (if anything) is correct. So the question is not whether god lied or not, but whether or not you can demonstrate what he did or did not do.
3. Finally, evolution has nothing to do with the creation of the world.

If not, why not?

Evolution deals with how life has changed over time. It has nothing to do with how the world was created.

Well let's check your previous reply and see the context of this particular section.

46and2 - "I assume your (since there are many) concept of god includes him being all powerful, yes?


If so, then literally anything and everything is compatible with the concept of such a being."

Icnoclass - "I need more than what you have given to be convinced.

Please give me a detailed explanation as to how this compatibility is possible?

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

Don't be shy, you say it's possible so convince me?"

46and2 - "I see, so what you really want to know is how it can be compatible with your interpretation of Genesis. It can't."

Icnoclass - "That was not what I asked, now you are assuming things and have got yourself distracted. I'll try again

Show me how the the Theory of Evolution is compatible with concept of The God of Abraham as Creator - with more detail and explanation.

If you are stumped, ask me things?

46and2 - "If that is the case, perhaps you should tell me how you disagree with my response."

Check it out - I record all our conversations for continuity and reference. I disagree with the effort you put in but, if that's what you got then I'll play ball.

Again, not my fault you didn't give me a thoughtful response. Ask a simple question, get a simple answer.

If you would really like to address my question, you can offer what kind of evolutionary evidence might cause you to reconsider your interpretation of the Bible?

It shows how little you have investigated - considering the scientific method should be systematic. It shows a bias.

What you think?

Edit
Ps ignore this section as I assumed yes meant you believe God and evolution are compatible

1. On the contrary, I have put a lot of thought and investigation into the subject over the years.
2. I don't believe that god exists. However, if I were to become convinced that he does, it would only convince me that both he and evolution are true.

As explained, you met your own requirements. You are not ready for me, I'm ready for you my dear




Please don't do yourself a discourtesy.

Goal post moving means to change the criterion (goal) of a process or competition while it is still in progress, in such a way that the new goal offers one side an intentional advantage or disadvantage.

Show me how I commited this fallacy you accuse me of?

All I have done So far is remarked at how little effort you have put in - which is of great interest to me and something I am noting.

I made the statement that (paraphrasing) according to your presumed theology, god has the power to create the world however he sees fit. If this is so, then it is obviously possible for him to create a world in which humans arise through evolution.

Is there any part of that paragraph which you disagree with? If not, then I have shown you how evolution is compatible with the god you believe in.

You then told me that this is not enough to convince you, despite the fact that you said this was what I had to do. Now you are requesting more.

That is moving the goal post.

I believe this.

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.
That concept, and the evolution of humans, cannot both be true.

Now here's where things get interesting. There is a 6th day creation - within the fists - but Adam seems to be created after the fists.

It is possible that Adam is separate from the 6th day creation and that there were 2 seperate human creations.

Which creation do I descend from? I dont know.

I come from God and give Him the praise.

What say you?

I say you complained when I suggested that what you really meant with your question was for me to show you how evolution is compatible with your interpretation of the Bible. And now you are demonstrating that I was correct.

What have you got? You know what effort are you willing to put into this. So far what you got, seems to be slight. You haven't given this any though or attention in the past, have you?

Your question did not require much effort. Instead of blaming me for my response, perhaps consider that your question was shallow, instead.

I answered your question with a question. To stimulate thought and get you moving. You know the Socratic method?!?.

For as much as you atheists prize reason, you don't seem to use it much or be aware of it when you encounter it.






Is that not allowed?

Your question was not stimulating. It was trivially simple. It also, despite your claims, did not address my question.

Congratulations to you for answering a theogical reply. You asked me what i needed to belief in evolution and I gave you what I wanted.

And I gave you what you claimed was what you needed. Only now, that isn't good enough anymore.

You want to play ball with me.



evidence - the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

My evidence relates to the Word of God.

Your belief about what god said or did is not evidence, it is a claim.

For you to convince me you must show how evolution is compatible with the God of Abraham, which you still haven't even touched - I haven't read the rest of the reply so please excuse me if you have done so.

Where did I ever suggest that I was trying to convince you of anything? I simply asked you what evidence, if any, would you accept for evolution. If you would finally like to answer that question, consider the bolded question I presented above.

And please don't give me any complaint about me moving the goal post. It is the same question, since any evidence for evolution that you might accept (the original wording) would necessarily cause you to reconsider your interpretation of the Bible.

My reply meets these requirements. What you think?

Plus I want a different conversation from you, less ordinary and not mundane. The substance of my replies still relate to evolution.

Great, then answer my question. I don't need you to stimulate me. I just would like you to think about what would it take for you to consider that you could be wrong. What scientific finding, if anything, could cause you to think that Christians who accept evolution might be right in their interpretation?

Evolution is random, meaningless or intent. Which one is it or is there another word that best fits?

Is evolution intentional or meaningless? Is that your question? Not sure what you are trying to say here.

However, evolution is not random.

Check this out.

The belief is space is infinite.

No, it isn't. That is but one hypothesis.

If space is infinite then we have infinite possibilities, no matter how unlikely. 10 to The power of a trillion is still a speck to infinity. A trillion to the power of trillion is still a speck against infinity.

Why is it impossible for the God of Abraham to exist when we consider this?

When did I ever say it was impossible? I clearly have no way to support that claim, so I wouldn't make it.

However, I do have a counter question: God is believed to be infinite. What possible meaning could a human lifespan have to an infinite being? Not only is that lifetime a speck to infinity, it is infinitely small and inconsequential to infinity. It is infinitely more insignificant than a nano-second is to you.

Please see previous reply that relates to this.

You seem to have ignored this section. I will repeat it in hope that you arent being deliberate.

How is it possible?

Even your Bible says that anything is possible with God. If that is true, how can it NOT be possible?

Show me using references and examples or am I just supposed to take your word for it and not ask questions?

Would you just accept statements without question and explanation?

You still won't give me an explanation. This is very suspect!

NO. I asked you what evidence you would accept. I did this so that I would not poke blindly around through the massive evidence for evolution, only to have you handwave it away.

It is not my job to answer my question for you. You give me what kind of evidence you would require to make you consider that you might be wrong about evolution.

Yes and no. Now you have read my reply, is it consistent?

Consistently evasive of my original question. Yes.

I see. So from your point of view, God could not have created life through evolution?

If not explain why, if so explain why.

Cheers

I don't believe in god. That's my point of view. Why would I speculate on what a being I don't believe exists can or cannot do?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

The belief is space is infinite. If space is infinite then we have infinite possibilities, no matter how unlikely. 10 to The power of a trillion is still a speck to infinity. A trillion to the power of trillion is still a speck against infinity.

Why is it impossible for the God of Abraham to exist when we consider this?

If space is infinite and its contents are also infinite, every possible arrangement of the contents of some particular volume will occur an infinite number of times. This doesn't mean everything conceivable will happen; only what is possible according to the rules or laws that govern the arrangement of the contents.

So if the God of Abraham is possible because some extent of space exists, i.e. it is dependent on space (as suggested by your hypothetical), we might expect, all else being equal, an infinite space to contain an infinite number of Gods of Abraham - unless, of course, the God of Abraham is an obligate singleton; in that case, an infinite space would not be necessary but would guarantee that the God of Abraham existed.

If the existence of the God of Abraham is not dependent on the existence of some extent of space, then the question seems incoherent.