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.
Have you ever read the Nicene creed? All Christians are creationists and the scientific merits of creationism is largely a matter of interpretation.
Because it is theologically incorrect.
If so, can you please show us how that worked? Surely you know there are some of us that are going to expect more, right? You're skipping so many details, that at the point you leave that with us, anything could be made out of the observance. Where did it start? where did it go, as in how did it make a human?
Since the subject was evolution/proof, I have to assume that was your attempt at proof, and if you cannot expand on that with a full picture, or proof, your claims of evolution are nothing but, and completely irrelevant to the thread.
Yes that's what you have to do. We're not trying to lie to you, trick you or put something over on you. Science, on the whole, is an ethical profession, with many checks and verification of the work being done.And you are saying that's what I have to do?
I'm not "convinced" I take the theory of evolution in the same way as any other scientific theory--as the best scientific explanation of a phenomenon currently available, but provisional, like any other scientific theory. Evolution, as such, is a "fact." There is no doubt that species have changed and diversified over time. They still do. The theory of evolution is an attempt to explain how that happens. Being a scientific theory it is still provisional, but no more satisfactory explanation has yet been advanced.You've read about it, tell me what convinced you evolution is a fact. Oh that's right, you can't do that, entirely to reasonable/simple.
Me personally? Probably the math, being as I have a math background--don't know all that much about the life sciences. Evolution is said to proceed by randomly distributed variation and natural selection. This is known in mathematics as a Stochastic Process. Stochastic process - Wikipedia Stochastic processes can be demonstrated to have sufficient information processing capacity to account for the novel and complex structures produced by evolution. Mathematically, it's rock solid.Then what convinced you?
If it is theologically incorrect, then does this mean one cannot be a Christian if they don't believe all life-forms were independently created?
Evolution just is a Stochastic process, which makes me a little confused as to your version of Theistic Evolution. Maybe you could give us a little summary of what you believe God did? Because it seems from this version of Theistic Evolution that Humans could have failed to exist, which is very surprising to hear from a Christian.Me personally? Probably the math, being as I have a math background--don't know all that much about the life sciences. Evolution is said to proceed by randomly distributed variation and natural selection. This is known in mathematics as a Stochastic Process. Stochastic process - Wikipedia Stochastic processes can be demonstrated to have sufficient information processing capacity to account for the novel and complex structures produced by evolution. Mathematically, it's rock solid.
I'll decide if I want to take your word for it or not. Thus far no one has produced anything but opinions, the very place their proof falls apart.
And you are saying that's what I have to do?
You've read about it, tell me what convinced you evolution is a fact. Oh that's right, you can't do that, entirely to reasonable/simple.
Then what convinced you? You people have a great tendency to find a way to make the simple, not doable. Just tell me in spite of your excuses not to, and lets see how it goes. The rules you are making up here to prevent you from doing that aren't written in stone, or rules at all for that matter. But they are mighty important to you now since you at least think they excuse you from proving evolution.
The length doesn't matter, at this point I'll take anything I can get, and yes, do it in layman's vocabulary. You sound as if it's an unreasonable expectation to ask one do it in layman's terms when that's done all the time...what's the problem?
I'll tell you the problem, or have you by now picked up on what you are doing, making the simple impossible/not doable...again.
That whole post was you wiggling out of a simple and reasonable request, surely you see it??
Of course humans could have failed to have come into existence. So what? All that is required is a creature with sufficient self-aware intelligence to contemplate the consequences of his actions and contemplate his own mortality for "sin and death to enter the world." It doesn't have to have been an erect bipedal mammal--imagine a race of intelligent crustaceans who decorate their churches with pots of boiling water.Evolution just is a Stochastic process, which makes me a little confused as to your version of Theistic Evolution. Maybe you could give us a little summary of what you believe God did? Because it seems from this version of Theistic Evolution that Humans could have failed to exist, which is very surprising to hear from a Christian.
There is no direct evidence of intelligent design. Intelligent design is an inference drawn from evidence of intelligent manufacture.Could you also explain what you mean by "evidence for design". As far as I can see we have empirically equivalent theories, which is why creationists go right along with it and say, show me "evidence for evolution". It seems to me that it is unsolvable a posteriori, so I don't understand what the question is really asking. Especially given that design is apprehended.
Could you maybe explain what God did do in regards to the creation of the world and the life on it. Could creatures with sufficient self-aware intelligence to contemplate the consequences of his actions and contemplate his own mortality for "sin and death to enter the world" fail to exist? It all kind of sounds like you believe we are Theistic accidents or byproducts so if you could kind of lay out God's involvement it might clear things up.Of course humans could have failed to have come into existence. So what? All that is required is a creature with sufficient self-aware intelligence to contemplate the consequences of his actions and contemplate his own mortality for "sin and death to enter the world." It doesn't have to have been an erect bipedal mammal--imagine a race of intelligent crustaceans who decorate their churches with pots of boiling water.
There is no direct evidence of intelligent design. Intelligent design is an inference drawn from evidence of intelligent manufacture.
I would really like to answer your question, but I am struggling with an answer, as the question seems to put divine causality in the same category as the material causality of evolutionary mechanisms studied by science. How familiar are you with the philosophical concept of causality? Have you read Aristotle's Metaphysics, for example?Could you maybe explain what God did do in regards to the creation of the world and the life on it. Could creatures with sufficient self-aware intelligence to contemplate the consequences of his actions and contemplate his own mortality for "sin and death to enter the world" fail to exist? It all kind of sounds like you believe we are Theistic accidents or byproducts so if you could kind of lay out God's involvement it might clear things up.
from your own thread:No, he doesn't.
The evidence for evolution for Kenny'sID thread
....doesn't really look like a flipper to me. Looks more like winky little limbs, neither legs nor flippers... exactly what you'd expect for a vestigial limb. That said, It certainly isn't inconceivable by a longshot that the rear legs would themselves have undergone selection pressures to streamline/reduce at least somewhat while everything else evolved to its environment.from your own thread:
"Based on the fact that we've observed atavistic legs on whales"
but this isnt a leg. its actually a vestigial flipper:
(image from MARES Y OCEANOS: ¿Delfines terrestres?)
Yeah I think thats a good place to put it. The traditional idea of Random Mutation + Natural selection is dying out in favor of a host of mechanisms acting to narrow the improbability of acquiring something new. I haven't had a chance to look into these new mechanisms, but I remember two are gravity? and chemistry. Whatever the mechanisms are if they narrow improbability they increase teleology, and that's where I think Theistic Evolution can hold a strong place. There was a conference in England last year (iirc) that really put to rest the old way of thinking, and I remember a post discussion bringing up the idea that cells may form some sort of small mind that can play a part in evolution. I thought that was a fascinating conclusion because it indicates that Naturalism is becoming a lot more flexible. The internet will always be behind but I think there are some big changes happening in the ridgedness of Naturalism that may open some standable territory for TE.I would really like to answer your question, but I am struggling with an answer, as the question seems to put divine causality in the same category as the material causality of evolutionary mechanisms studied by science. How familiar are you with the philosophical concept of causality? Have you read Aristotle's Metaphysics, for example?
But consider this: evolution shows tendencies toward convergence; several evolutionary lines have converged on the ability to fly, for example. How do you know that intelligence is not one of those points of convergence?
If you want to learn how evolution works, there are entirely free courses on the subject:
Introduction to Genetics and Evolution | Coursera
Principles of Evolution, Ecology and Behavior | Open Yale Courses
And of course, plenty of web sites, books, and other sources for your education. Here are some recommended starting points:
Welcome to Evolution 101!
The Talk.Origins Archive: Evolution FAQs
https://www.amazon.com/What-Evolution-Science-Masters-Ernst/dp/0465044263
https://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Douglas-J-Futuyma/dp/1605356050/ref=pd_lpooutout c_sbs_14_t_0
This thread is about whether or not one needs to be a creationist (i.e. believing all life forms were independently created) in order to be a Christian. Do you believe that is the case?
Is anyone who is not a creationist doomed to go to Hell?
That belief could readily include the belief that God expressed this power through the brilliantly conceived process of evolution, in which natural selection played an important role. Having such a belief would not represent a questioning of God's power. Indeed, I would argue that extending the creation process over billions of years, rather than accomplishing it in an instant, would be a much more majestic and Godly alternative.Well my good friend faith is belief in God and his power over all creation.
How can you belive Jesus died then rose three days latter but not belive in God creating us?
So yes, if you can not belive God created all things, then you can not belive the power of God.
Perhaps you should look in the mirror when you say something like that. Personally, I don't think God intended the creation stories in Genesis to be taken as 100% accurate literal history. I certainly wouldn't teach it to others.Personally, I would think if a Christian that would naturally be familiar with even the basics of the word of God, chooses to believe something other than that, and especially if they teach it to others...they are walking on extremely dangerous ground.
People repeatedly explained why your request is unreasonable yet here you are still complaining about not getting what you want.
I guess it really is true what people say about the stubbornness of old people...
Perhaps you should look in the mirror when you say something like that. Personally, I don't think God intended the creation stories in Genesis to be taken as 100% accurate literal history. I certainly wouldn't teach it to others.
That is where the metaphysics (if you can call it that) of creationism breaks down. The notion that either the randomizing element contained in the evolutionary process or the contingency of the process as a whole constitute a barrier to telos I find to be inadequate and uninformed.Whatever the mechanisms are if they narrow improbability they increase teleology...
No, I have no "biblical" reason for thinking that evolution is accurate. The theory of evolution stands or falls on it's own merits. The Bible is about something else altogether.And your biblical reason for thinking evolution is accurate?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?