Neo-Darwinian evolution is in trouble INSIDE the scientific community

[Obliquinaut]

Everything that begins to exist has a cause.

The universe began to exist.

Therefore, the universe has a cause.

What caused universe to begin?

THis is a very good question and usually addressed in any first-year philosophy class when they go over Aquinas' Arguments for the Existence of God.

Invariably they get to the "First Uncaused Cause". It starts exactly as you stated that all things which exist must have a cause.

But here's where it breaks down: that claim, while integral to the argument for God's existence, fails because God must not be part of that claim. It is a case of "Special Pleading". Simply saying God exists eternally because He's God is not compelling.

It is as compelling as saying that the Universe has always existed (say in an eternal cycle of big bang-inflation-deflation-Big Bang-Inflation-Deflation-Big Bang---....etc.)

The point being that if you propose an ETERNAL GOD then why must other things be denied "eternal" versions?

 

[Ronald]

Then you're doing an absolutely terrible job of it. You repeat ludicrous falsehoods about science and you make up fantasies about the motives of those who disagree with you. It's hard to imagine a better way of convincing outsiders that Christianity has nothing to do with truth.

Actually, come to think of it, you are right. I haven't specifically spread the gospel at all. I went over my posts found I talked about Jesus, salvation, faith, shared some scriptures and interpretation of doctrines, prophecies about Judgment Day, etc. but mostly I discussed the OP. I didn't narrow it down what exactly is the gospel in one passage of scriptures: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time ..." 1 Cor. 15:3-6 If you believe that, you will be saved. Of course three sentences alone won't do it. Faith comes by the WORD and so you have to hear it or read and learn who He is, what He did and what He offers freely, eternal life.
But back to your insult. It has some truth to it. I am not an evangelist. Not everyone is gifted in that area and so it is a spiritual gift: "It was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service ..." Eph. 4:11
But there are other spiritual gifts, mine I believe deals with exhortation and prophecy. I've always been drawn to prophecy and I'm always warning people about the end times.
And so my efforts aren't evangelical in nature, they weren't intended to lead you to the altar today, they are just warnings of what is to come. Do you think the Jews of the Old Testament liked the prophets who rebuked them for their sinful ways and foretold of their coming punishment/judgment? No they didn't like them at all, they tried to kill them too or shut them up.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually, come to think of it, you are right. I haven't specifically spread the gospel at all. I went over my posts found I talked about Jesus, salvation, faith, shared some scriptures and interpretation of doctrines, prophecies about Judgment Day, etc. but mostly I discussed the OP. I didn't narrow it down what exactly is the gospel in one passage of scriptures: "For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time ..." 1 Cor. 15:3-6 If you believe that, you will be saved. Of course three sentences alone won't do it. Faith comes by the WORD and so you have to hear it or read and learn who He is, what He did and what He offers freely, eternal life.
But back to your insult. It has some truth to it. I am not an evangelist. Not everyone is gifted in that area and so it is a spiritual gift: "It was He who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God's people for works of service ..." Eph. 4:11
But there are other spiritual gifts, mine I believe deals with exhortation and prophecy. I've always been drawn to prophecy and I'm always warning people about the end times.
And so my efforts aren't evangelical in nature, they weren't intended to lead you to the altar today, they are just warnings of what is to come. Do you think the Jews of the Old Testament liked the prophets who rebuked them for their sinful ways and foretold of their coming punishment/judgment? No they didn't like them at all, they tried to kill them too or shut them up.

There was no insult by sfs. It can be argued that you are doing more harm than good to Christianity with your demands of a literal interpretation of Genesis.

Perhaps you should try to learn why we know that there was no flood. The science behind that is easier to understand. Which is why it was known long before Darwin's time that the Earth was old.

Would you like to discuss that?

 

[Ronald]

Worldwide most Christians accept the fact of evolution.

No, statistics confirm that half of the body of Christ believe in theistic evolution, mostly Catholics I would think since the Pope believes it as well -- I don't know, maybe Mary and Saints he prayed to told him? But half of us believe the God created everything in a finished form as Genesis literally claims. So out of 2.3 billion, half are confused, but that won't effect their salvation, since it is not based on these kind of pre-requisite qualifications. You can have faith in Jesus without ever reading the Old Testament, I started out that way because I could not digest some of those stories at first.

 

[Ronald]

I don't know whether you know about the Jewish rebellion against Rome in 66-73 AD, and the destruction of the temple and the sacking of Jerusalem in August 70 AD. The rebellion was described by Josephus in his book The Jewish War. If you care to look at Stellarium for 27th August 70 AD, three days before the fall of Jerusalem to the Romans, you will find that the Sun was in Virgo, with the Moon east of Spica, i.e. at the feet of Virgo, and Venus, Jupiter and Mercury west of the Sun and between it and Regulus (the brightest star of Leo). In addition, Saturn was east of the Moon, and between it and Antares (alpha Scorpii).

Unfortunately I can't download Stellarium for this date, so that you will have to look at it for yourself. Of course, nobody could actually have seen this planetary alignment, but astronomers knew enough about the movements of the Moon and the planets to know where they were in the sky at any particular time.

As another interesting fact, the island of Patmos, where John was living when he wrote Revelation, is about 170 km from the island of Rhodes, the home of Hipparchus (ca. 190-120 BC), the greatest observational astronomer of antiquity.

I don't want to make too much of this. Revelation is a very strange and difficult book, and the occurrence of this planetary alignment just before the fall of Jerusalem was, in astronomical terms, no more than a coincidence. However, you may find the coincidence interesting.

I will look into that, I was informed that it hadn't occurred since 9-11-3BC

 

[Ronald]

There was no insult by sfs. It can be argued that you are doing more harm than good to Christianity with your demands of a literal interpretation of Genesis.

Perhaps you should try to learn why we know that there was no flood. The science behind that is easier to understand. Which is why it was known long before Darwin's time that the Earth was old.

Would you like to discuss that?

Been down that road, see things differently. I guess we will just end it here, been wanting to close for days now.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, statistics confirm that half of the body of Christ believe in theistic evolution, mostly Catholics I would think since the Pope believes it as well -- I don't know, maybe Mary and Saints he prayed to told him? But half of us believe the God created everything in a finished form as Genesis literally claims. So out of 2.3 billion, half are confused, but that won't effect their salvation, since it is not based on these kind of pre-requisite qualifications. You can have faith in Jesus without ever reading the Old Testament, I started out that way because I could not digest some of those stories at first.

Yes, the Catholics like to dress it up a bit. The point is that there still was no Adam and Eve, no Noah's Ark. And you are only looking at the U.S. numbers. Creationism is mostly, but not exclusively, an American delusion.

 

[Obliquinaut]

But there are other spiritual gifts, mine I believe deals with exhortation and prophecy.

TBD! I guess we'll find out next month (is that the time?)

I've always been drawn to prophecy and I'm always warning people about the end times.

"Always" seems to be a bit problematic. Seems like only once should do it. But you will certainly join a long line of distinguished folks predicting the end of the world imminently. I'd say "good luck with that" but I'd probably be lying.

they are just warnings of what is to come.

Here's a radical idea: if you want to connect with someone sufficiently to warn them of something then probably the worst way to go about it is to tell them they are wrong without taking the time to learn all the stuff that they actually do and know.

For instance it would be irrational for me to tell you you were wrong about something that you know very well if I didn't also attempt to study it myself and understand your position and then critique it from a position of some modest level of understanding.

At that point you might have a better chance of connecting in order to get your more important point across (end of the world).

Now, to be fair, many of us have at least a modest knowledge of history so we know that there's a 100% failure rate of end-of-the-world predictions so far. And there's been quite a few. So it would be unlikely you'll get a lot of takers on your gambit, but it might go over better with a bit more honey and a bit less salt.

Do you think the Jews of the Old Testament liked the prophets who rebuked them for their sinful ways and foretold of their coming punishment/judgment? No they didn't like them at all, they tried to kill them too or shut them up.

Hmmm, well you know there's a difference between being a grating personality and getting people to dislike you and being a Prophet of God. Granted many Prophets probably were grating to many (which is why they were reviled in their home lands presumably) but just being a grating personality does not necessarily make one a prophet.

All cats are animals but not all animals are cats.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Been down that road, see things differently. I guess we will just end it here, been wanting to close for days now.

So are you afraid to learn, do you think that you can't learn, or do you simply not want to learn? At any rate you end up rather blatantly trying to tell God how he made the Earth instead of learning how he made it.

 

[Speedwell]

"For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time ..." 1 Cor. 15:3-6 If you believe that, you will be saved.

If that is true, why is such a hard line taken against Christians who believe it, but don't interpret Genesis the same way you do?

But there are other spiritual gifts, mine I believe deals with exhortation and prophecy. I've always been drawn to prophecy and I'm always warning people about the end times.
And so my efforts aren't evangelical in nature, they weren't intended to lead you to the altar today, they are just warnings of what is to come. Do you think the Jews of the Old Testament liked the prophets who rebuked them for their sinful ways and foretold of their coming punishment/judgment? No they didn't like them at all, they tried to kill them too or shut them up.

Keep in mind that you are exhorting a mixed group of atheists and (predominately Christian) theists about a subject (purported technical difficulties with the ToE) which has little or nothing to do with salvation.

 

[pitabread]

No, statistics confirm that half of the body of Christ believe in theistic evolution, mostly Catholics I would think since the Pope believes it as well

What statistics?

 

[majj27]

If that is true, why is such a hard line taken against Christians who believe it, but don't interpret Genesis the same way you do?

Because someone is WRONG on the INTERNET!!!11!1!! (semi-seriously. Anonymous web forums are a great place to really tear into people who you believe are wronger than wrong).

But also, because in my experience some biblical literalists don't really feel there is an option. Having decided to follow the literalist view, they've essentially taken the Bible and made it a falsifiable document. In doing so, they've backed themselves into a corner where if ANY of it is in any way incorrect, the entire thing evaporates into smoke and mirrors. This leads them to viciously defend any issues regarding the Bible's accuracy, because their own worldview literally hinges on defeating the opposing argument.

Not all literalists react like this, but the majority I've happened across have.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because someone is WRONG on the INTERNET!!!11!1!! (semi-seriously. Anonymous web forums are a great place to really tear into people who you believe are wronger than wrong).

But also, because in my experience some biblical literalists don't really feel there is an option. Having decided to follow the literalist view, they've essentially taken the Bible and made it a falsifiable document. In doing so, they've backed themselves into a corner where if ANY of it is in any way incorrect, the entire thing evaporates into smoke and mirrors. This leads them to viciously defend any issues regarding the Bible's accuracy, because their own worldview literally hinges on defeating the opposing argument.

Not all literalists react like this, but the majority I've happened across have.

And that defense of the indefensible can lead to lunacy. Look at some of the major advocates for creationism. Kent Hovind has a lecture where he conflates star formation with the Big Bang, or at least he takes a schoolbook chapter on star formation and uses it to describe how the singularity "spun faster and faster". How he arrived at that interpretation I do not know.

 

[majj27]

And that defense of the indefensible can lead to lunacy. Look at some of the major advocates for creationism. Kent Hovind has a lecture where he conflates star formation with the Big Bang, or at least he takes a schoolbook chapter on star formation and uses it to describe how the singularity "spun faster and faster". How he arrived at that interpretation I do not know.

Kent Hovind is one of those folks whose ideas are so wrong that they're kind of fractally wrong. Every part is as wrong as the entire whole. It's like that distant cousin of mine who believes that humans can actually learn to survive on photosynthesis.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Kent Hovind is one of those folks whose ideas are so wrong that they're kind of fractally wrong. Every part is as wrong as the entire whole. It's like that distant cousin of mine who believes that humans can actually learn to survive on photosynthesis.

King Crocoduck!

 

[Jimmy D]

No, statistics confirm that half of the body of Christ believe in theistic evolution, mostly Catholics I would think since the Pope believes it as well -- I don't know, maybe Mary and Saints he prayed to told him? But half of us believe the God created everything in a finished form as Genesis literally claims. So out of 2.3 billion, half are confused, but that won't effect their salvation, since it is not based on these kind of pre-requisite qualifications. You can have faith in Jesus without ever reading the Old Testament, I started out that way because I could not digest some of those stories at first.

What is your source for these statistics exactly? Half of the world's Christians believe in American-style Creationism? I don't accept that. Outside of the Jehovah's Witnesses I've never encountered any Christians in my country that believe such nonsense.

Please link your sources.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

No, statistics confirm that half of the body of Christ believe in theistic evolution, mostly Catholics I would think since the Pope believes it as well -- I don't know, maybe Mary and Saints he prayed to told him? But half of us believe the God created everything in a finished form as Genesis literally claims. So out of 2.3 billion, half are confused, but that won't effect their salvation, since it is not based on these kind of pre-requisite qualifications. You can have faith in Jesus without ever reading the Old Testament, I started out that way because I could not digest some of those stories at first.

Those aren't the statistics I remember (for example, even in America, the hub of creationism, it's only around 35%) do you have a citation for those numbers?

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

THis is a very good question and usually addressed in any first-year philosophy class when they go over Aquinas' Arguments for the Existence of God.

Invariably they get to the "First Uncaused Cause". It starts exactly as you stated that all things which exist must have a cause.

But here's where it breaks down: that claim, while integral to the argument for God's existence, fails because God must not be part of that claim. It is a case of "Special Pleading". Simply saying God exists eternally because He's God is not compelling.

It is as compelling as saying that the Universe has always existed (say in an eternal cycle of big bang-inflation-deflation-Big Bang-Inflation-Deflation-Big Bang---....etc.)

The point being that if you propose an ETERNAL GOD then why must other things be denied "eternal" versions?

Because for example God is not restricted by 2nd Thermodynamic law , universe however is , because if it was eternal it would be infinitly old and there would be equal energy everywhere in universe , just by writting this message to you i prove that there is still enought energy to get it to you , that means there had to be beginning .

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... universe however is , because if it was eternal it would be infinitly old and there would be equal energy everywhere in universe , just by writting this message to you i prove that there is still enought energy to get it to you , that means there had to be beginning .

I'm afraid that idea is rather out of date - there are lots of hypotheses involving a universe with no beginning which are consistent with the best physics theories (including thermodynamics).

 

[Faith Alone 1 Cor 15:1-4]

I'm afraid that idea is rather out of date - there are lots of hypotheses involving a universe with no beginning which are consistent with the best physics theories (including thermodynamics).

I think theory of evolution is more of "out of date " , 150+ years without proof yet still people believe this crap.