Is evolution even a theory?

[Astrid]

Only just checked in, sorry. Genesis 1 and 2 answer all three. They did for me. Faith is a gift from God

You are confusing "answer" with "evidence".

Your teachers wanted the correct answer in math,
not just " an" answer. IF you gave a different answer,
you could yet prevail, if you show your work,
give evidemce.

 

[ruthiesea]

Only just checked in, sorry. Genesis 1 and 2 answer all three. They did for me. Faith is a gift from God

Which faith? Which god?

 

[AV1611VET]

Which faith? Which god?

You're asking a monotheist Christian?

I take it your question is rhetorical?

 

[Astrid]

Which faith? Which god?

It hardly matters. The great thing
is just to have an answer. It doesn't
have to be the right answer, or even
make sense, it just has to be an answer.

People who like to study, learn, understand
are not so easily satisfied.

 

[AV1611VET]

It hardly matters.

Motto of the United States: IN GOD WE TRUST

Motto of the United Kingdom: GOD AND MY RIGHT

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Motto of the United States: IN GOD WE TRUST

Motto of the United Kingdom: GOD AND MY RIGHT

Yet again you have made an incorrect claim about another country you know very little about. United Kingdom doesn't have a motto. Dieu et mon droit is the motto of the sovereign.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yet again you have made an incorrect claim about another country you know very little about. United Kingdom doesn't have a motto. Dieu et mon droit is the motto of the sovereign.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[Astrophile]

Only just checked in, sorry. Genesis 1 and 2 answer all three. They did for me. Faith is a gift from God

* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about evolution. They give two (very different) creationist accounts of the origin of living things.
* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about the founders of the theory of evolution.
*Genesis 1 and 2 don't mention the devil.

 

[driewerf]

* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about evolution. They give two (very different) creationist accounts of the origin of living things.
* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about the founders of the theory of evolution.
*Genesis 1 and 2 don't mention the devil.

Exactly.
So @Psalm 27; do you care to answer post n° 85

Is evolution even a theory?

The 'pre-Cambrian Bunny' would wildly revise our understanding of the development of life in the last ~550 million years. The history of complex life would need to be radically re-written from our present understanding. But, it wouldn't falsify anything to do with the actual underpinnings of...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Psalm 27]

Exactly.
So @Psalm 27; do you care to answer post n° 85

Is evolution even a theory?

The 'pre-Cambrian Bunny' would wildly revise our understanding of the development of life in the last ~550 million years. The history of complex life would need to be radically re-written from our present understanding. But, it wouldn't falsify anything to do with the actual underpinnings of...

www.christianforums.com

Have you read Genesis 1 & 2?

 

[Psalm 27]

* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about evolution. They give two (very different) creationist accounts of the origin of living things.
* Genesis 1 and 2 don't say anything about the founders of the theory of evolution.
*Genesis 1 and 2 don't mention the devil.

Maybe read them again??

 

[Psalm 27]

Which faith? Which god?

Jesus is God

 

[Psalm 27]

You are confusing "answer" with "evidence".

Your teachers wanted the correct answer in math,
not just " an" answer. IF you gave a different answer,
you could yet prevail, if you show your work,
give evidemce.

My maths teachers also wanted to see my 'working out'...work out your own salvation, with fear and trembling'

 

[Psalm 27]

We 're speaking about a scientific theory here. So I want an evidence based answer. Not a faith based answer.

To driewarf

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

 

[Psalm 27]

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

 

[Astrid]

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

Foolishness is believing by faith that which
is seen to be false.

 

[Astrid]

My maths teachers also wanted to see my 'working out'...work out your own salvation, with fear and trembling'

Since you don't want to preach
rather than discuss the topic of the
thread, perhaps you should go elsewhere
rather than be disruptive or trolling here.

 

[Juvenal]

Well, phil also wrong that Creation is more simplier. Creation would require God to hand design every single animal, from the hook worms to the zombie fungus. I always find it amazing that people think Creationism is simplier than evolution when Creationism requires God to blueprint up every single species on Earth. Maybe that's why life contains so many flaws, God subcontracted to Vishnu, thus starting the trend to outsource jobs to India.

I know this is from a couple months ago, but it encapsulates an idea that's always seemed so obvious to me. We know evolution occurs, and we know the process is sufficient for speciation, so why exactly would a speculative creator of species leave that tool sitting on the shelf?

It's like a potter making a wheel and then refusing to use it.

Or a Nascar team creating a 500-hp racing car and then running the race in their sneakers.

 

[Astrid]

I know this is from a couple months ago, but it encapsulates an idea that's always seemed so obvious to me. We know evolution occurs, and we know the process is sufficient for speciation, so why exactly would a speculative creator of species leave that tool sitting on the shelf?

It's like a potter making a wheel and then refusing to use it.

Or a Nascar team creating a 500-hp racing car and then running the race in their sneakers.

"Microevolution"

 

[2PhiloVoid]

If you want to see the evidence concerning evolution in simple and minimally technical source, try Jerry Coyne's Why Evolution Is True.

Amazon.com

I can agree that Coyne's book is useful, but similarly to what a few others here have voiced about it, I think Coyne does make some slips here and there when talking about his own scientific praxis ... so, his book is something to be careful of and it isn't just a book to buy into hook, line and sinker.

I don't, and I won't.