Is Theistic-Evolution an Oxymoron?

Assyrian · Jul 16, 2011

Sum1sGruj said:
Doesn't explain it at all. Not that there is actually an explanation. And to think TE's try to tell creationists they know nothing about such things. It seems we are the only one's that see it for what it is. And that is an absolute fact.

Your denial is not an argument.

It fits perfectly to how evolutionists want to see it.

Glad you recognise the evidence fits evolution.

As far them actually fitting perfectly, that is a lie within a lie. First of all, the mechanism for common descent is unfounded, despite how people word smith and falsely portray it. Second, the gaps between the fossils they have found are ridiculously far apart. One would expect to find more., but people just settle on Dawkin's bogus statement that 'we find one, and there are two gaps'. It's a cheap answer bearing no weight.

How can you tell how many we should expect? The fact is we have found transitionals, they do fit, and they are found linking species science thought evolved from the earlier form. Each fossil fit evolution perfectly. No one unlink has been found.

And you have yet to explain the missing unlinks.

And all that is just blabbery.

Do you really not have a better response than this? Have you ever considered that your lack of an argument might have something to do with simply being wrong.

I think TE's are just a little scared because we have entered the time where the theory does not get to live by it's heralded ideas anymore, but rather has to put it's money where it's mouth is at.

Scared? Nah that's a complete figment of your imagination. Even if evolution was in question, it would simply be a thrilling new age of scientific discovery which wouldn't scare any TE, and as we have seen all the evidence fits it so it isn't even in question.

People do not realize it, but creationism is coming back in many ways. Sure, we will never be able to knock science away from how it treats religion in general., that's just how militant scientists are. But as far as evolution goes, evolutionism isn't fairing so well. It's just the big fad of heralding it that is keeping it together.

Creationism is good at rhetoric, I'll give you that. But science goes by the evidence and the evidence supports evolution.

Now unless you can address the problem of a complete lack of unlinks in the fossil record, this conversation isn't going anywhere.

Sum1sGruj · Jul 16, 2011

Assyrian said:
Your denial is not an argument.

I shouldn't have to explain it. In fact, I admit, I like seeing TE's wonder what it is that hurts their ideas so much. It's the devil's irony I guess.
A true testament of faith would be to reconcile instead of deny. That is why I have no love for TE.'s and their circular fronts.

Mikecpking · Jul 17, 2011

Sum1sGruj said:
I mean exactly what it is., exaggerated. Even the way you have posted the question just echoes 'who in their right mind would believe the fossil record is not completely true?'

The answer is, anyone who can see how exaggerated it is.

Having studied geology, and did much field work, I find your concept of 'exaggerated fossil record' hard to fathom. I know what I have seen and the fossil record is based on many millions of man hours field work and observation and record keeping. Why lie about what was found?

I'm still waiting for your explanation of how common descent is possible.
Until someone can figure that out, the fossil record is nothing but a wishful jigsaw of poorly developed ideology.

There is no ideology in geology or paleontology. The fact that the same DNA sequences are found in seaweed to humans suggests common descent.

Missing 'unlinks' are kind of irrelevant in that respect. There are billions we will never find, and evolutionists cheaply, and ridiculously, cling on to that idea. Are TE's commited to God or science? I would suggest some be very careful with that. All it does it get the blood boiling for others who want to find truth and constantly have to deal with peoples mere 'commitment' to evolution. It's a mockery to truth.

The fact is that the theories have no base whatsoever and cannot consolidate what it so endearingly flaunts as 'truth'. If you are missing a lot of pieces, all you have is an ugly guesswork of fossils. But it's thousands out of billions, not 10s out of 100s. There aren't even that many discovered fossils.
Do you know what that amounts to? A convenient lie until some miracle approaches the theories that can redeem all of their issues.
A sad thing that TE's had forgotten is the theory is prime on justifying atheists, and so in this secular world, of course it is going to be twisted, manipulated, boosted up, and curve-balled to everyone. It's quite foolish, actually, especially when the theories have real opposition to their fake masquerades.

I think you would do well to study geology and paleontology and then you can grasp what has been discovered and then you would be better qualified in your arguments. So far, I have not seen anything of substance in your refutes.

cubinity · Jul 18, 2011

I have no problem with common descent, nor with the Creation story in the Bible. I am comfortable with them co-existing.

D'Ann · Jul 18, 2011

MOD HAT ON

This thread has had a minor thread clean up. Enjoy sharing and discussing the topic, but please avoid posting to the poster or being uncharitable. I know that these discussions can be difficult, but we all strive towards a deeper understanding of our faith and the faith of others, whether we agree or not.

God's peace,

D'Ann

MOD HAT OFF

cubinity · Jul 20, 2011

Doveaman said:
Are theistic-evolutionists beliefs an oxymoron?

On the one hand, as a theist, they believe in events that are not supported by scientific evidence: virgin gives birth, water becomes wine, dead comes to life, etc., etc., etc.

On the other hand, as an evolutionist, they do not believe in events because they are not supported by scientific evidence: 900 year lifespans, global flood, talking donkeys, etc., etc., etc.

They believe in events that are not supported by scientific evidence, and they do not believe in events because they are not supported by scientific evidence.

Therefore, are theistic-evolutionists beliefs an oxymoron?

Very interesting question, Doveaman.
I wonder if anyone would like to discuss it...

FreeinChrist · Jul 21, 2011

MOD HAT

Enough! Closing this for staff review.

Edit - it is staying closed. It generated a bunch of reports!

Is Theistic-Evolution an Oxymoron?

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

More options

Sum1sGruj

Well-Known Member

More options

Mikecpking

Senior Member

More options

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.

More options

D'Ann

Catholic... Faith, Hope and the greatest is LOVE

More options

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.

More options

FreeinChrist

CF Advisory team

More options

Similar threads

Is Theistic-Evolution an Oxymoron?

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

Sum1sGruj

Well-Known Member

Mikecpking

Senior Member

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.

D'Ann

Catholic... Faith, Hope and the greatest is LOVE

cubinity

jesus is; the rest is commentary.

FreeinChrist

CF Advisory team

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency