My Theistic Evolution [really hard] Challenge for Cosmic Evolutionists

[VirOptimus]

The cosmic evolution model of the universe consists of seven progressive steps, from the Big Bang to today.

Here is Harvard's interpretation of the seven progressive steps:

1. Particulate
2. Galactic
3. Stellar
4. Planetary
5. Chemical
6. Biological
7. Cultural

Put each act of creation in Genesis 1, from the earth on the first day to Eve on the sixth day, into their corresponding progressive steps.

Science and myth dont go hand in hand.

This is (as usual) a useless "challange".

You should really learn what a myth entails and what it means.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

He has a space in his name.

Ah, of course - well spotted!

 

[AV1611VET]

You should really learn what a myth entails and what it means.

And you should learn how reading comprehension exercises work.

Here's a very easy reading comprehension exercise:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.

What did Humpty Dumpty sit on?

1. a wall
2. a chair

Are you going to tell me you can't answer this because you don't believe Humpty Dumpty was real?

 

[VirOptimus]

And you should learn how reading comprehension exercises work.

Here's a very easy reading comprehension exercise:

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.

What did Humpty Dumpty sit on?

1. a wall
2. a chair

Are you going to tell me you can't answer this because you don't believe Humpty Dumpty was real?

Yes, in physical reality (i.e. science) Humpty Dumpty didnt sit on a wall.

But that is not my point, and if you understood the concept of myth you would understand.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, in physical reality (i.e. science) Humpty Dumpty didnt sit on a wall.

Then may I offer you a bit of advice?

Don't take science to reading comprehension class and attempt to use it, or you'll fail -- and deservedly so.

Science can take a hike in reading comprehension class.

But that is not my point, and if you understood the concept of myth you would understand.

Myth, legend, truth, old wives' tale, urban legend, cartoon, figment of one's imagination, parable, reading comprehension test, challenge ... take your pick.

But whatever you call it, please answer it.

No one's asking you to believe it -- just answer it.

 

[VirOptimus]

Then may I offer you a bit of advice?

Don't take science to reading comprehension class and attempt to use it, or you'll fail -- and deservedly so.

Science can take a hike in reading comprehension class.Myth, legend, truth, old wives' tale, urban legend, cartoon, figment of one's imagination, parable, reading comprehension test, challenge ... take your pick.

But whatever you call it, please answer it.

No one's asking you to believe it -- just answer it.

I understand just fine.

Your "challange" is pointless and will not get the answer you think it should get.

I certainly dont care about Genesis but I do know that its a myth, and myths may or may not be true, but they are never scientific as they are not about "truth" and "science" as we think of it in modern western society.

 

[AV1611VET]

Your "challange" is pointless.

Oh, I think I can come up with one or two points my church would understand.

 

[VirOptimus]

Oh, I think I can come up with one or two points my church would understand.

Then maybe you should make your "points" there instead?

 

[AV1611VET]

Then maybe you should make your "points" there instead?

I consider my apple challenge thread and my raisin bread challenge thread to be the two best points I've ever made here.

I even combined them HERE

Notice how the intellectuals treated those points as well?

 

[VirOptimus]

I consider my apple challenge thread and my raisin bread challenge thread to be the two best points I've ever made here.

I even combined them HERE

Notice how the intellectuals treated those points as well?

I know you do.

But take it from me, the "points" you think you do are not profound or even original. Its just semantic arguments that prove nothing and make no real theological or scientific point.

 

[Astrophile]

But mostly it's called a bronze age writing because most of the OT was written during the bronze age.

Was it? First, I thought that the Stone, Bronze and Iron ages were divisions of the time before the existence of written historical records, whereas the Bible itself is a written record and therefore must come after these prehistoric time divisions.

Second, as I understand it, the whole of the Old Testament was written during the 1st millennium BC, whereas the Bronze Age ended before 1100 BC. Therefore the Bible is an Iron-Age document rather than a Bronze-Age one.

 

[Speedwell]

Second, as I understand it, the whole of the Old Testament was written during the 1st millennium BC, whereas the Bronze Age ended before 1100 BC. Therefore the Bible is an Iron-Age document rather than a Bronze-Age one.

True. But the traditional--and the Creationist--view is that the first five books, including the Garden story, were written by Moses, which would put it mid 2nd millennium. In any case, the Garden story is thought to be much older than the final, post-exilic redaction.
So, strictly accurate or not, calling it a "Bronze-age creation story" does well enough for a derogatory epithet.

 

[quatona]

I consider my apple challenge thread and my raisin bread challenge thread to be the two best points I've ever made here.

That is telling more about you than about the quality of these threads.

 

[AV1611VET]

That is telling more about you than about the quality of these threads.

All good, I hope!

Can you think of any two points better than those?

 

[quatona]

All good, I hope!

Uuhm...

Can you think of any two points better than those?

I don´t even see how they are points.
If you actually had points you would make them, instead of trying to keep us busy with loaded "challenges".

 

[mzungu]

Here's one for you AV:
All matter including living things are made up of atoms.
Question: At what point are the atoms alive since they (atoms) remain unchanged and are the same whether they are part of a rock or part of you?

 

[AV1611VET]

Question: At what point are the atoms alive since they (atoms) remain unchanged and are the same whether they are part of a rock or part of you?

I don't think atoms are alive.

I think life is a gestalt.

In other words, their wholes are greater than the sum of their parts.

This is why God breathed into us the breath of life and we became gestalts having more than just bodies, but souls and spirits as well.

 

[mzungu]

I don't think atoms are alive.

I think life is a gestalt.

In other words, their wholes are greater than the sum of their parts.

This is why God breathed into us the breath of life and we became gestalts having more than just bodies, but souls and spirits as well.

So centipedes, snails, dandelions, grapevines, bacteria , and jellyfish all have souls too?

 

[AV1611VET]

So centipedes, snails, dandelions, grapevines, bacteria , and jellyfish all have souls too?

I doubt it.

It could be they have something besides a soul or spirit that animates them.

Something that the Scriptures are silent on.

Such as some type of vital energy or something.

Who knows?

ETA: I just checked and, according to a Roman Catholic site, animals have souls, but not like ours. Interesting ... very interesting indeed.

 

[[serious]]

The cosmic evolution model of the universe consists of seven progressive steps, from the Big Bang to today.

Here is Harvard's interpretation of the seven progressive steps:

1. Particulate
2. Galactic
3. Stellar
4. Planetary
5. Chemical
6. Biological
7. Cultural

Put each act of creation in Genesis 1, from the earth on the first day to Eve on the sixth day, into their corresponding progressive steps.

I think the usual way goes along these lines:

Particulate
Galactic
Stellar
Planetary
Chemical
1:1-10

Biological
1:11-31

Cultural
4:1 on