Is the theory of evolution moral and ethical

[Armoured]

You are quite right saying scientists never prove anything.
More and more - week after week - discoveries are being made that contradicts their claims
They need to go back to the drawing board and that is - GOD'S DRAWING BOARD

Uh-huh. And you have citations for this claim, I suppose?

 

[Armoured]

Regardless of all your argument, the truth is that Man didn't evolve from an ape beast, and this is merely a myth created by evolutionists. Sure, maybe they actually believe it, but its still a myth. You do realize that the scriptures warn that a time would come when people would turn away from truth, and instead turn aside unto myths? ITs not too late to turn back to truth.

If logic and reason won't persuade you from a dogmatic position, there's not a lot else to say. You are, of course, welcome to believe what you like. Just stop thinking others should share those beliefs without a convincing argument.

 

[Poster0]

Someone possibly needs to point out to you that science is conducted in laboratories, not courts of law!

Get over it already.

 

[Poster0]

If logic and reason won't persuade you from a dogmatic position, there's not a lot else to say. You are, of course, welcome to believe what you like. Just stop thinking others should share those beliefs without a convincing argument.

You do realize that Gods knowledge is spiritually discerned, and needs no scientific evidence, don't you?

 

[Armoured]

If science cannot prove ANYTHING why do you atheists make such asinine statements that it does?

As explained previously, generally, they don't, but if they do, a. as a short hand, b. because they are ignorant about how the scientific theory works. Why you feel this is limited to atheists I'm not sure.

 

[Armoured]

You do realize that Gods knowledge is spiritually discerned, and needs no scientific evidence, don't you?

Indeed I do.

And, as such, why are you upset about scientific evidence?

You're the one drawing inferences about what evolution means for the existence of God. Evolutionary theory makes no such claims, nor does science generally.

 

[Armoured]

Unlike with ToE, we have more than enough evidence to proclaim without reservation, that the earth is indeed not flat, but round. Lets examine how this argument was started. It was because ToE posters keep trying to discredit the opposition by arguing about words. Just like when they say that using the term prehistoric ape is not correct, even though they themselves have offered ape bones as evidence that man supposedly evolved from apes.

There's plenty of evidence the Earth is round. That still doesn't prove it.

We could all be simulations in an alien supercomputer, meaning the Earth doesn't exist at all. The Earth could be flat as a pancake, and NASA and pilots generally are lying to you. No, I'm noy claiming either of these are true, but the fact they are possible, however unlikely, means it isn't proven the Earth is round.

 

[Poster0]

Indeed I do.

And, as such, why are you upset about scientific evidence?

You're the one drawing inferences about what evolution means for the existence of God. Evolutionary theory makes no such claims, nor does science generally.

Evolution theory is wrong on so many levels. It divides Christians over a theory. It hinders our fellowship in the spirit. That alone is a reason to reject it as useless.

 

[JonFromMinnesota]

If I thought there was any chance of you looking at it and believing I would but you have a closed mind I wont waste my time. All you have to do is join The New Scientist and Archaeological News if you are serious about learning

Cite something that backs up your claims.
First, The New Scientist is a non peer reviewed magazine and is not respected anywhere. In fact here is an interesting criticism it received : "a sensationalist bent and a lack of basic knowledge by its writers" was making the magazine's coverage sufficiently unreliable "to constitute a real threat to the public understanding of science". In particular, Egan found himself "gobsmacked by the level of scientific illiteracy"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Scientist

Basically that says your source is garbage.

 

[SteveB28]

You are quite right saying scientists never prove anything.
More and more - week after week - discoveries are being made that contradicts their claims
They need to go back to the drawing board and that is - GOD'S DRAWING BOARD

The only "contradictions" that are made to findings in science are made by other findings in science!

 

[Ada Lovelace]

That's not very helpful. I disempower myself by coming to this website, you are correct about that. The apostles taught us to avoid debates and to be of one mind, and one judgment. You acknowledge that this discussion causes me distress, and you actually feed it more with your reply. If you want to side with an atheist who believes that we evolved from apes, rather than to edify a brother in distress, then that's your choice. If I came to your church is that how you would treat me? You are right that I must make my own choices though, and I must choose to avoid people because I don't think its good for me to be around Christians who debate everything instead of following Paul's command. If

I was sincerely attempting to edify and motivate you with scriptural advice and to treat you with kindness out of concern for the distress you've expressed about this discussion. I'm sorry that I wasn't helpful to you. Christians need to be unified about our love for Christ and our efforts to organize our lives and treat one another in accordance to his teachings. We can still honor his primary command to love one another, and yet be in disagreement with one another, sometimes passionately so. Christians have had a diversity of fervently maintained hermeneutical, personal, and political beliefs for millennia, and as long as we are able to be respectful to one another I think debate can be healthy and enriching. The problem is that too often discussions turn into wars of words because people treat them like battles to be won instead of a conversation to be had and see everyone with an opposing perspective as an opponent. Christians who accept evolution simply interpret the Bible differently, but love it and center their lives around it just as much as you do. And when we agree with atheists and those of other faiths on matters of science that's not an act of betrayal against you.

If you came to my church it's doubtful the topic of evolution would arise unless you initiated it.

 

[SteveB28]

Regardless of all your argument, the truth is that Man didn't evolve from an ape beast, and this is merely a myth created by evolutionists. Sure, maybe they actually believe it, but its still a myth. You do realize that the scriptures warn that a time would come when people would turn away from truth, and instead turn aside unto myths? ITs not too late to turn back to truth.

How do you account for the identical ERV insertion locations in humans and chimpanzees?

 

[SteveB28]

Evolution theory is wrong on so many levels. It divides Christians over a theory. It hinders our fellowship in the spirit. That alone is a reason to reject it as useless.

Science isn't concerned with your 'spirit'. It's about knowledge, about a search for the truth. And, as the dogmatic frequently find, the truth is sometimes very unpalatable.

I'm sure Cardinal Bellarmine found it a very bitter pill to swallow when he had to face up to the fact that Copernicus and Gallileo were right, that the earth orbited the sun. Because it offended his beliefs, just as evolutionary theory does yours. But that's the thing about the truth - it remains the truth, no matter how much anyone would wish it doesn't.

 

[SteveB28]

If I thought there was any chance of you looking at it and believing I would but you have a closed mind I wont waste my time. All you have to do is join The New Scientist and Archaeological News if you are serious about learning

And yet another, for whom the irony of their own statement will be completely lost.

 

[loveofourlord]

Didn't a lot of scientists say that our DNA was mostly junk. Even when we started to find function they still wanted to believe it was mostly junk. That was because having so much junk help supported their theory. It would show remnants of an evolutionary past and make our genetics more easier to explain in evolutionary terms because it wasn't so complex. In fact ID predicted that the junk wouldn't be junk and that God wouldn't design something with so much useless info.

Now we are finding that there is a lot more function in our DNA and some dont like this as it makes it harder to explain how evolution could evolve such a complex codes of life from a chance and random process which is basically a copying error of something that is already complex and good in the first place. Instead of having a few thousand steps to explain they now have a few million to explain how some rare beneficial mutations built something in a blind step-wise process.

There is alot of our junk DNA, and it's not because we don't know what it does, it's because we KNOW what it does, extra areas that just code nothing, or used to code things but no longer like all the genes we have for scent we no longer use, broken genes, and so on.

 

[As I was saying]

This might be part of the problem here. Scientific terminology and legal terminology are not the same.

That must mean that science does not deal in facts, only theories. Again, it is so ridiculous that so many atheists demand they are right and everyone else is wrong. If what they are talking about does not deal in facts, how do they know? All they can say is it is assumed, but they don't. Most of the time they say it is proven.

Like the fossil record they claim it proves evolution but if science doesn't deal in facts, how can it prove evolution?

 

[As I was saying]

Someone possibly needs to point out to you that science is conducted in laboratories, not courts of law!

I don't conduct lectures in a court of law but I and my students know when I am talking about facts and when I am giving opinions.

 

[As I was saying]

Any atheist, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Muslim, or Jew that claims science ever "proves" anything, is making the same foolish claim that you are.

I have never claimed that science proves anything. I leave that up to the atheists who are adamant that they know everything and we know nothing and that the fossil record proves evolution.

 

[As I was saying]

Did you happen to notice how often the word EVIDENCE is used in those excerpts? Not "proof", EVIDENCE!

Learn the difference.

And did you notice that it says "The fossil record refers to the collection of physical and research evidence that paleontologists and geologists have used to prove the veracity of evolutionary theory.

There is that dreaded word again...prove the veracity of evolutionary theory.

Learn the difference.

 

[SteveB28]

I have never claimed that science proves anything. I leave that up to the atheists who are adamant that they know everything and we know nothing and that the fossil record proves evolution.

And you are still as wrong as when you first made that claim. But please continue with your nonsense. It is amusing.