I started a thread asking for proof of God or a god. As usual, instead of the nice Christian offering of what is true to show me the way, I was bombarded with accusations that I cannot prove evolution? So what? What does proving evolution have do with it? I just asked for proof of God.

Are Christians so afraid that they can only defend by offending. Attacking evolution because I questioned God seems cowardly, weak, and a bit lacking in intellectual honesty.

So fine, bring that, you can only disprove god if you can prove evolution or whatever you want to call it here. I like the idea, It is just not what that thread is about. So this one is.

Nice Angel

I know I was a lil guilty of feeding the trolls in that last thread... thats why my last post in there was an attempt at getting back on topic

I'll hang in here too... I'm waiting for people to come up with falsifiable hypotheses to explain their positions on creation...

So far, since the advent of science, none has been offered...

Originally posted by nj2day
Nice Angel

I know I was a lil guilty of feeding the trolls in that last thread... thats why my last post in there was an attempt at getting back on topic

I'll hang in here too... I'm waiting for people to come up with falsifiable hypotheses to explain their positions on creation...

So far, since the advent of science, none has been offered...

Not at all. If anyone knows how to fall into that trap it is me. I derail every thread that some ignorant jerk starts challenging me in. It is hard to go back to the OP when someone says something obnoxious right to you. I get it so I just hoped this would help. All the same folks can still argue but we can keep gods and science over there, and whatever the hell creation, deity, spaghetti theory that comes up here.

Proving or dis-proving evolution has nothing to do with proving and disproving the existence of Jesus or God. It may however contradict the teachings of the Bible, Christianity, and of course the Catholic Church.

Darwinian evolution promotes the idea that nature is nothing more than its material aspects, and encourages the belief that competition and self-service equals progress. The teachings of Christ discuss moral refinement, compassion and service-to-others.

Originally posted by blowfishdl
Proving or dis-proving evolution has nothing to do with proving and disproving the existence of Jesus or God. It may however contradict the teachings of the Bible, Christianity, and of course the Catholic Church.

Actually, this is half correct...

Proving Cosmology, Abiogenesis and Evolution beyond a doubt, and having the current theories pass into the realm of scientific law, would mean the book of genesis is false...

If genesis is false... how can the concept of original sin exist?

If the bible (which is supposed to be the word of god) is proven to be false... what else do we have to base the existence of jesus, or the Abrahamic god?

Proving these things would go a long way into showing the fairy tale for what it is...

You are correct though, that it wouldn't disprove the existence of a supreme being... nothing can disprove that... it is a non-falsifiable statement... much like the invisible dragon I keep in my garage...

For some reason though, religious people have it in their head that if A is false, B must be true... This is also incorrect...

If evolution is ever disproven, and is withdrawn as a theory... we will have 2 failed theories on biodiversity. (creationism being the other).

Originally posted by blowfishdl
Proving or dis-proving evolution has nothing to do with proving and disproving the existence of Jesus or God.

You do have a reading comprehension problem, why wont you at least address it when it is pointed out. You have already completely miss-represented something I said once in the other thread and now you want to do it here?


What did I say? READ IT SLOWLY!

I said that I did not understand why other people decided that the only antithesis to a challenge to god is a challenge to evolution.

Here's a question for you - why didn't darwin accept his own theory? Evolution is flawed because it ignores consciousness. It says it's just "random mutations" where survival of the fittest works.

I personally believe in evolution, so I don't think it is a counter at all. I just personally believe there is a consciousness behind the evolution.

Originally posted by badmedia
Here's a question for you.......

Thank you. You get a star. Please tell me you are being sarcastic because that is some funny funny stuff, my friend.

I didn't attack evolution, I think evolution is true. I just don't think it's a bunch of randomness is all.

I don't see where it goes against Genesis, the "days" are just measures of different periods of time. Like a way of saying "this" happened, then "this" happened. Doesn't give exact details on how it happened. But if you look at the order of what happens in Genesis and the general way of saying it, then I don't think there is any reason evolution doesn't happen.

The entire story of Genesis is actualy evolution - it starts with this, then it evolves into this, which evolves further into this. Even says the animals came before man etc.

And btw, evolution is false by the very rules of science. As it includes "randomness", which is not allowed in science, because then it is not repeatable as fact.

But now if I don't completely agree with a theory I'm suddenly attacking it? Never mind the fact I even give reasons why? There are obvious flaws in the theory.

Originally posted by badmedia
And btw, evolution is false by the very rules of science. As it includes "randomness", which is not allowed in science, because then it is not repeatable as fact.

Entropy is a scientific concept... so therefore... it must be allowed in science...

As far as your genesis idea... it is listed in the wrong order evolutionarily, as well as cosmologically..

Animals were here before plants... Genesis says this is the other way around...




[edit on 13-12-2008 by nj2day]

Originally posted by badmedia
I didn't attack evolution, I think evolution is true. I just don't think it's a bunch of randomness is all.

No, what you did was perfectly demonstrate the very reason for this thread. I started it because in another thread, when given the opportunity to prove a god, people began trying to just disprove evolution instead. I, and others, pointed out how unfortunate it is that they cannot prove their idea so all they do is attack the opposition. The question is why is evolution the counter to Jesus? Why is it that just because I deny Jesus, the bible, God, whatever, I get quizzed about the loopholes of evolution.

That is the question, why can't you just prove your god without arguing away the oppostioon??????

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
No, what you did was perfectly demonstrate the very reason for this thread. I started it because in another thread, when given the opportunity to prove a god, people began trying to just disprove evolution instead. I, and others, pointed out how unfortunate it is that they cannot prove their idea so all they do is attack the opposition. The question is why is evolution the counter to Jesus? Why is it that just because I deny Jesus, the bible, God, whatever, I get quizzed about the loopholes of evolution.

That is the question, why can't you just prove your god without arguing away the oppostioon??????

Tell me - what would you consider to be proof of god? What could a single person do that would prove god to you?

NOTHING. The only one who can give you proof of god is god. But by all means, keep up the silly game.

Looks like I was right Angel...

There is absolutely no evidence... so instead of appearing like they are blindly following faith... they have to do something...

Thus, they attack evolution...

Only god can prove he exists? for real?

well, he must not care if people believe or not, because he didn't give us one shred of evidence...

Or is he just intentionally trying to send people to eternal damnation?

If the bible is taken figuratively as suggested... why isn't the concept of "god" a figurative concept?

who decides the literal parts and the figurative?

Originally posted by badmedia
Tell me - what would you consider to be proof of god? What could a single person do that would prove god to you?

Easy... Give me a scientific hypothesis, that is testable and falsifiable... thats all you have to do...

Then we'll take the job of testing and experimenting objectively...

Just give us the Testable scientific hypothesis... and we'll show you the scientific method...

or do you mean to say that in over 4000 years (have to take it back to the old testament remember) that there is not one shred of evidence? god walked the earth a few times... he talked to people, his angels screwed humans... all this happened... and we can't so much as turn up a single piece of evidence?

Originally posted by badmedia
Tell me - what would you consider to be proof of god? What could a single person do that would prove god to you?

Did you miss where that was the question that I was asking?

NOTHING. The only one who can give you proof of god is god. But by all means, keep up the silly game.

It is nice of you to assume what I might accept as proof but you are admitting that there is no proof for you. Thank you for admitting that are wasting time arguing the validity of proving something you believe in with no chance of proof. You make this fun.

To be fair, I am a Christian, but people have the right to believe what they want to believe in and I respect that. I myself truly believe that God [obviously] created science and how everything in our universe(es) work. So many Christians are hesitant when it comes to evolution because the bible says that God specifically created man, and man did not evolve. I am not educated on either matter enough to argue any point, however, Christians who deny science with solid and provable proof are not right either. I am not here to judge, but to deny science is to deny the very God that created it. Parts of the bible are figurative, and some literal. You have to study the context, unfortunately, I am not a bible scholar. I know what I believe, and I stand firm in it. Not because it's how I was brought up (aka blindly following) but because I know what I believe is real for several reasons. However, I'm not here to convert anyone, so if someone is curious, just ask. But I will stop there.

I always wish the science community and the "religious" (if you will call it that) community would get along. I find both so intriguing. It's like if you combine God and science, you can answer anything. Sure, there was the big bang, but what caused it? Two membranes in the 11th universe colliding? Okay, makes sense. But what caused the membranes to collide? Physics hasn't gotten that yet, so just substitute the answer with "God".

I hope my answer has been somewhat relevant.
Thanks for reading.
Peace