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.
How is it dogmatic. I have acknowledged that evolution happens but have drawn a line on what has been verified and what hasn't. That my friend is science and a balance view. The inquisitive is what it says, I investigate things and dont just take it as true because someone says it is even if they have a few letters after their name.Under your name is the descriptor "inquisitive". Given your statement above, how do you justify that picture you paint of yourself?
I think "dogmatic" more appropriate.
How is it dogmatic. I have acknowledged that evolution happens but have drawn a line on what has been verified and what hasn't. That my friend is science and a balance view. The inquisitive is what it says, I investigate things and dont just take it as true because someone says it is even if they have a few letters after their name.
God created the new world from the dust of the Ancient World that he destroyed because of man's sinfulnessI watched this and am pretty convinced about the ancient world of giants
It doesn't need much discernment to believe that this man is telling the truth
Ooh, good, another "Cern is going to bring about Armageddon" person! That never gets old. Now do the one about NASA hiding Nibiru from everyone's telescopes...God created the new world from the dust of the Ancient World that he destroyed because of man's sinfulness
and it looks like it wont be too long before He destroys this next one for the same reasons
What with the 3rd World War on the go and CERN that is about to open us up to the bottomless pit there'll be
little for us to argue about here soon
A seed has all the genetics needed to grow that big cedar tree already there. Its starts a sprout and then grows into a big tree. But the genetics didn't mutate themselves into existence from something that is a copying error and causes a fitness loss and not a increase in complexity.So you admit that sprouts can grow from redwood seeds, but giant redwood trees cannot, since we've never seen it happen?
No as I said Inquisitive doesn't just say oh its true because on the face of it it seems true. Inquisitive looks beyond that and investigates what is really going on. So when we look at evolution we can verify through scientific tests that micro evolution which allows a species to make small changes such as a birds and the size of its beak and or an animals hair color ect. But this has limits because mutations are basically an error and change to what is already good. They incur a fitness cost and not an addition of fitness. There is no evidence for increasing complexity through adaptive evolution.There's a word for such thinking, and it's not "inquisitive."
It depends on what you mean by evolution. There are those who believe that God set in motion evolution by planting all the necessary information of life to start with. There are those who believe God created everything as it is in the beginning and life stemmed from this. There is a limited amount of evolution within species which may produce variations of existing things. In both these scenarios God is needed and life wasn't produced on its own accord without God. Then there is Darwinian evolution which doesn't require God. Everything stems from a self creating mechanism of nature.The arguments that go back and forth in most of these evolution threads are just people mining others peoples work and presenting it as being the proof of one side or another. If someone tries to use science to disprove the God of the bible, they are doing it wrong, science makes no statement about the non existence of God of the bible. If you try to use science to prove the God of the bible exists you are also doing it wrong, because science makes no statement about God existing. So either side in that point is on a fools errand.
Evolution doesn't disprove a God of any kind, because science cannot demonstrate that a God of some sort is not behind it. Neither can science prove God, because any evidence may suggest some sort of intelligence exists, it cannot demonstrate what or who that intelligence is. For all we know, it actually is ALLAH, or an advanced race of aliens, or countless other forms of intelligence, that created or set in motion the things we have before us to look at and study.
The bible is compatible with science, the only thing that trips people up is thinking certain interpretations must be correct, absolute, and without flaw, you are doing it wrong.
It depends on what you mean by evolution. There are those who believe that God set in motion evolution by planting all the necessary information of life to start with. There are those who believe God created everything as it is in the beginning and life stemmed from this. There is a limited amount of evolution within species which may produce variations of existing things. In both these scenarios God is needed and life wasn't produced on its own accord without God. Then there is Darwinian evolution which doesn't require God. Everything stems from a self creating mechanism of nature.
Then there may be some variations of these like you say life was planted here by aliens or whatever. But even in this scenario people acknowledge that life had to have a kick start. It didn't just form on its own from some chance occurrence of chemicals. Though you have to be careful because evolution doesn't like mixing with abiogenesis. Though its not an automatic assumption but many atheists will support Darwinian evolution. So belief can be mixed in there as well which can influence a persons views.
No. I don't think that is correct.
I don't believe that God created man and gave him the brain of a stupid ape like beast, and then allowed him to slowly evolve into a man over the course of 200,000 years. I also don't think most Christians believe that either.
Evolution theory is a bunch of nonsense. Its proponents use broad definitions which give their arguments flexibility, and this enables them to avoid any meaningful debate which would prove ToE fallacy. Its really the art of deception, not science.
In the beginning, God created H. erectus, an ape like creature who was no more inteligent than a Chimp, he lived in trees and lived like a dumb beast. God allowed him to slowly evolve, over millions of years, into one form, and into another, and another, until finally he evolved into man.
Evolutionists that say God is not needed because of Darwinian evolution cannot actually say that God is not behind the creation of that mechanism.
It is up to those who claim that God is behind the creation to provide evidence that this is the case. Without such evidence, there is no reason to accept their claim as true.
What makes you think anything is stopping me? Furthermore, why do you assume I haven't seen it before? I earned my science degree, how about you?
I paid thousands of dollars to fed this stuff. Then found out, most of the theory is wrong, completely unsupported or on shaky ground.
It's dogmatic because the evidences against it are never presented.
Much of the so called evidence can be used by either side of the discussion.
This video will dispute most of the "evidences" in your link, using the same evidence.
Search the Cambrian explosion and you'll find both sides use it to support their position.
Indoctrination is teaching one view and purposely withhold any information the contradicts it.
Yes, I agree for the most part, I chose to believe that the God of the bible exists, I actually do not need to prove it in order to have that faith. I am not lacking in the understanding that science continually discovers new things, whether it be evolution of any kind or life on other planets, or things we haven't even scratched the surface of. None of those discoveries will threaten my faith because my faith isn't about anything but me and how I go along with life. If someone tells me that my faith is to something that does not exist, then the burden of proof is on them whether they like it or not.
Ooh, good, another "Cern is going to bring about Armageddon" person! That never gets old. Now do the one about NASA hiding Nibiru from everyone's telescopes...
Yes I agree and they will also miss the point of faith.My point still stands, doesn't matter what type of evolution you point to. If you say God is needed, you will not be able to use science to say that the God you believe in is actually the absolute source. Evolutionists that say God is not needed because of Darwinian evolution cannot actually say that God is not behind the creation of that mechanism.
If either try, they miss the point of science in the first place.
If you want scientists to consider God as being a part of how nature operates, then you need to supply the evidence. That's how it works. We don't have to disprove claims that have no evidence backing them.
Yes I agree and they will also miss the point of faith.
You missed my point, I don't actually expect God being a part of the equation when I study things of science, I do not need to fill in the gaps with the God I choose to believe in and never stated that I do. Evolutionary theory is what it is, if it is correct, then I don't worry that somehow the God I believe in no longer is needed.
I have a personal faith, if you want me to believe my personal faith is to nothing, then yes, that IS up to you to demonstrate. I have had atheists state that my faith is to nothing, at that point, then, the burden of proof is on them, because I do not need nor expect them to be convinced of my personal faith. Moving the goal posts as is often accused, goes both ways.
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?