• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.

Why I don't believe in evolution...

Discussion in 'Creation & Theistic Evolution' started by Humble_Disciple, Aug 3, 2021.

  1. BNR32FAN

    BNR32FAN He’s a Way of life Supporter

    +5,237
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Man didn’t even invent the wheel until 5,500 years ago. It took man over 294,000 years to figure out something as simple as the wheel? I’m not talking about cavemen inventing nuclear weapons, I’m talking about evidence of a progression of simple technology, not technologies as advanced as nuclear capability. And my intention is not to use this as proof that man has not existed for 300,000 years but as evidence that he hasn’t. Evidence doesn’t have to be undeniable proof it just has to support a theory. All I’m saying is that to me this is an interesting piece of evidence that supports a young earth. As a believer I’m going to look for evidence that supports God’s word not evidence that contradicts it because I believe what’s written in the Bible to be 100% accurate and if it appears not to be then we’re not interpreting something correctly.
     
  2. BNR32FAN

    BNR32FAN He’s a Way of life Supporter

    +5,237
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    285,000 years to learn something as primitive as how to plant a seed and 15,000 years later we have space travel. There’s a lot to learn between planting a seed and getting all the way to space travel. According to the genealogies 15,000 years is 9,000 years before Adam was created.
     
  3. Isaiah 41:10

    Isaiah 41:10 Well-Known Member

    +2,443
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Yup. There is. And with modern technology and universities, in 15,000 years we were able to accomplish what cavemen hadn't been able to accomplish in 200,000. That's right.

    And that's why modern technology is so incredible. That's why the invention of the computer was such a big deal. Because our technological advances allow us to advance at an even faster acceleration than we historically had.

    We can learn faster and faster and faster, because our technology is allowing us to gather and collect information faster and faster and faster.

    Computers for example can crunch numbers infinitely faster than the earlier computers could. And now they can solve our problems for us, faster than we can. Well, at least mathematical and modeling challenges.

    And that's why agriculture is such a big deal too. Now instead of going out and hunting for my food and spending all this time starting fires and cooking it, I can just walk to the supermarket and in about 15 to 20 minutes I can have a giant meal they can feed many people. Which means that I then have more time to sit around growing old and reading books. I don't have more time to send emails and send letters and to solve challenges that my parents couldn't resolve.
     
  4. Isaiah 41:10

    Isaiah 41:10 Well-Known Member

    +2,443
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    What use would a man have for a wheel 200,000 years ago? It's not like they had roads to roll on. They weren't conducting agricultural practices yet either, so they wouldn't use such things for crushing objects.

    https://www.sciencenews.org/article/oldest-known-abrading-tool-archaeology-tabun-cave

    People did use hand-held rounded crushing stones though. And some were actually pretty well designed with a sharpened edge, or natives would use flint and sharp tools for cutting.

    But there was really no reason to have a wheel.

    What do you expect? You think they should have had foot powered cars like the Flintstones so they could drive after prey?

    Pottery really didn't kick off until well after the development of agricultural practices as well. Again, having a sedentary lifestyle allowed people to do things like sit around making storage containers to hold objects (such as farmed crops). If you are hunting and gathering and traveling from place to place, you're not going to be sitting around making pots to store objects, because you're not going to be at the location in which the object is stored. Unless you intend to carry those pots around with you, but that doesn't really make sense if you're hunting and gathering.

    Early Hunter gatherer societies had bags and lightweight objects like slings and weaved pouches to carry things. But they weren't lugging around heavy clay pots.

    The wheel is a product of agricultural practice.

    And there's a lot more to agriculture than just planting seeds. Coming from a family of farmers, this is really just insulting.

    But at the end of the day, as noted before, it doesn't really matter how you feel about it. What matters is what the evidence suggests. And the evidence doesn't suggest that people 150,000 years ago were doing astrophysics on cave walls. Maybe in the afterlife we can ask God why they didn't solve issues of quantum mechanics or general relativity during the stone age. But until then, that's just how history played out.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2021
  5. J_B_

    J_B_ Well-Known Member

    604
    +201
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    The field of evolutionary biology uses confusing terminology that is partly responsible for that. Further, the definition you gave was not always the definition of evolution, and that causes some confusion as well. I'm not familiar with how long that has been the consensus definition, but I don't recall it being used when I was in high school biology in the 1980s.

    The separation of abiogenesis from evolution was also a later development - more confusion.

    In fact, I think you're the first I've heard at CF who refers to common descent as a consequence of evolution. I've been in many prior discussions that never get off the ground because I would insist on a clear definition of evolution, and I ended up with circular conversations where descent was part of the definition until it wasn't.
     
  6. BNR32FAN

    BNR32FAN He’s a Way of life Supporter

    +5,237
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    This right here shows your just intentionally being obtuse so I see no need to continue this discussion with you. Have a blessed day.
     
  7. Isaiah 41:10

    Isaiah 41:10 Well-Known Member

    +2,443
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    Hey, you raised the topic.

    It's a fair question though. If people weren't practicing agriculture and were living a hunter-gatherer lifestyle, what would they even use wheels for? Aside from maybe in some kind of effort to make a vehicle to drive after prey?

    Early populations (post-agriculture) used wheels in pottery activities, But again, in a hunter gatherer society, people had no reason to make dense and heavy clay pots or other storage vessels which are more common in sedentary or stationary lifestyles. Else they'd have to carry and haul those pots around. But what grain would they even put into the pots If they had not yet discovered farming?

    Again though, all these thoughts aside, what matters is what the evidence shows us. We don't have cave paintings or carvings of equations of quantum mechanics. We just don't have evidence demonstrating that people who lived 100,000 years ago knew these things. And so all we can really do is simply conclude that they just didn't know these things and that's all there is to it.

    We've found simple things like arrow heads and pots and cave carvings of things. But we don't find any cellphones laying in prehistoric pots. We don't find blueprints for space shuttles carved into cave walls. So the only conclusion that we can make is that the people of these times simply didn't know these things, and that's that.

    Why people of these times didn't already have an understanding of space travel, is something that I suppose only God can really answer. But that's just how history played out. Jesus could have taught people quantum mechanics if He wanted to. But He didn't. So if you have a problem with people in the past not knowing things, you just have to take it to God.
     
  8. Isaiah 41:10

    Isaiah 41:10 Well-Known Member

    +2,443
    United States
    Christian
    Married
    US-Republican
    A couple other things that helped us advance through history and association with agriculture were the domestication of animals such as cattle and sheep. This happened some 11,000 years ago. The cultivation of founder crops, 11-12,000 years ago.

    100,000 years ago, would mankind even have known that seeds grew into plants? It's hard to say. If they did, they certainly didn't have any record of such knowledge and didn't seem to pass such knowledge around or make use of it. My guess is that they probably didn't even know this much. Let alone might they cultivate, domesticate and farm various species of crops.

    And you might as "how could people not know that plants grow from seeds?", But you have to understand that we evolved from the animal kingdom. Does a salamander know how to conduct agricultural practices? We had to first get to a point where we could even ponder and understand such things.

    And when we finally began to understand our origins, some people decided to say "on no! I didn't come from a cave!". Well, too bad, that's what the evidence demonstrates. Our origins are pretty humble to say the least.
     
  9. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    No, it's very straighforward. It's just technical. But if you wanted the definition of "resonance bonding" it would also be a bit difficult for those who don't know much about it.

    True. But the original still works, although it's less precise. Darwin's "descent with modification" is still true as ever. But genetics tells us more about how that modification works.

    When I was studying biology in college, in the mid-60s, that was the definition. There are a lot of dumb biology teachers in high school, as well as an equal number of really good ones. Sorry about that.

    No. It was that way from the start. Darwin assumed God created the first living things and described how populations of them changed over time. He never made the origin of life, part of his theory. He actually had no scientific idea. Since then, we've discovered a great deal about it. If you care about the details, you might look up A New History of Life, which is fairly readable for a non-biologist, and covers what we've discovered so far.

    I spent a lot of years teaching evolutionary theory, so I had to know those things. BTW, even most creationist organizations are willing to accept a certain amount of common descent; they usually draw the line at families or orders, but sometimes go further.

    Hence, the need for a testable definition. You can use either of those I mentioned. The first was basic Darwinian theory, and the second comes from the New Synthesis, about 1950, when the rediscovery of genetics pretty much rescued Darwinism; it showed how the process of evolution works on a cellular level.
     
  10. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Correct. The conflicting genealogies for Christ are contradictory, only if you attempt to make them actual family histories. They have somewhat different names to indicated descent from the House of David, and the particular persons are not the point. That's not what Biblical genealogies are for.

    No, that excuse won't work. They are both said to be though Joseph, not Mary.
     
  11. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Doesn't matter. Facts matter.

    It doesn't say that was a normal lifespan for men. It says a lifetime is "three score and ten." Some men may have lived very long, but that doesn't mean most men did. It never says that was how long most humans lived. Again, this is taking one thing, and trying to extend it to other things that the Bible does not say.

    Paul says it does for us. But God didn't mess up His creation just to get even with us. That's not Biblical.

    No. As you learned, science does not rule out miracles. Try to remember this; it's important.

    It was. You just don't approve of the way He did it. Remember now, science does not rule out miracles.

    And Jesus makes it easy for you to follow him. Love Him, love your fellow man. If you do, your life will evidence it, and you will then be among the sheep He takes with him because they helped the unfortunate, as he says in Matthew 25.

    That's a bit unfair. Even the "sola fide" people, if they act on their faith, are Christians and can be saved.

    Don't try to extend the Bible beyond what it says. It's about God and man and our relationship. That's enough. And remember, love God, love your fellow man. Everything else depends on that. Don't try to make it complicated.
     
  12. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Doesn't say "ashes." And it merely notes that Adam's physical self was brought forth by the earth, as other animals were. But He became a living soul by supernatural means. As all of us are. Our bodies are created naturally, but our souls are given directly by God.

    Don't try to extend figurative language beyond itself.

    Doesn't say anything about having a corpus callosum, either. For reasons we all should understand.
     
  13. J_B_

    J_B_ Well-Known Member

    604
    +201
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    If you restrict yourself to Darwin, maybe so. But we need to be careful not to let current categorizations color how we read history. Further, just because Darwin didn't suggest an origin of life doesn't mean he considered them separate processes. If he explicitly said he believed they were separate processes, then that settles it. If he was just silent on the matter, then we would need to remain silent as well, and say we don't know what he thought.

    But you probably know that better than me if he spoke on the matter.

    I just know that when stepping outside Darwin, the separation isn't always clear. Of course Darwin is considered the beginning of the modern theory, but he wasn't the first to ponder evolution-like ideas. So, for example, Anaximander mixed spontaneous generation in with his speculations on the changing forms of life.
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2021
  14. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Since Darwinism is pretty much the only theory with any scientific support, that's what we have. But could you show us a different scientific theory of evolution that is about the origin of life?

    The name of the scientist and the journal article or book might be a good thing to show.
     
  15. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    It does. He was quite explicit about the way natural selection works. There are four points, and non of them are applicable to the origin of life.

    We do know what he thought:
    There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.
    Charles Darwin, last sentence of On the Origin of Species, 1873
     
  16. J_B_

    J_B_ Well-Known Member

    604
    +201
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    OK.

    I wasn't promoting anything as a valid alternative theory. I was merely noting some social and historical aspects related to evolution-like & origin-like ideas.
     
  17. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    Ah, that would bring up a lot more unusual ideas, wouldn't it?
     
  18. J_B_

    J_B_ Well-Known Member

    604
    +201
    United States
    Christian
    Private
    If you mean all the ideas people have had about how life forms change, I suppose there would be some unusual ones among them.
     
  19. BNR32FAN

    BNR32FAN He’s a Way of life Supporter

    +5,237
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    I’m not, I just don’t believe it was figurative. Your assuming it was. But that’s not the only piece of evidence refuting evolution. The scriptures specifically state several times in both the NT and the OT that the earth was created in 6 days.
     
  20. The Barbarian

    The Barbarian Crabby Old White Guy

    +8,574
    United States
    Catholic
    Married
    US-Libertarian
    You don't, because you aren't satisfied with it as it is.

    Since evolution is observed to be happening everywhere there are living things, you might as well ask the Bible refute thunderstorms.

    Since scripture itself tells you that the "yom" of the creation story are not literal day, there's no point in believing that they are. If the were literal days, there would be no verses about mornings and evenings before there was a sun to have them.

    Honest YE creationists openly admit that there is much evidence for evolution and an ancient Earth. Some of them just say they prefer to believe otherwise, and someday, there will be an adequate explanation for the evidence. Others come up with things like "virtual history" to suggest God planted evidence to make a backstory for creation that never actually happened. And some suggest God planted evidence to fool people and send them to Hell.

    None of those make much sense to me. How do you account for the evidence?
     
Loading...