What if someone told you that God told them He used evolution to create the world?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:10 AM
link   
Evolution admittedly does not address how the first life form came to be in existence. The theory pertains to species evolving into other species.




posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:29 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 


i'd say what i say to to all creation "scientists":

"you're just trying to sneak god in through the back door"



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 

Most, if not all, of the Harry Potter novels take place in England in their entirety. There is an empirically and objectively observable place called England. Does this mean that the Harry Potter novels are a true story?



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 


This is good stuff.

Young Earth Creationism is only one interpretation of Genesis.

There is also Old Earth Creationism, and Theistic Evolution.

Read: www.biologos.org...

and there are many other websites, just google "Theistic evolution genesis" or "theistic evolution bible"

S&F



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by redindigo
Darwinism is just as much a theory as Creationism. Scientists who claim that evolution is a proven fact are just used to perpetuating entrenched scientific dogma. Much the same way many fundamentalist Christians will go against all reason to tell us that the earth was created by God in six days.

Ever heard of irreducible complexity?

If evolution was a fact and not just a theory the "missing link" would have been found by now. And given the fact that evolution operates under the premise of very gradual cause and effect, survival of the fittest, there should be billions of missing links to be found. We shouldn't have such a hard time finding them. Scientists are grasping at straws, finding an ape leg bone and a human skull 40 feet apart and deeming it the missing link. What the real scientists (not the knuckleheads who are paid to find proof for theories that science supports) are finding is more and more evidence to suggest that man has existed longer than many species of apes and even potentially walked the earth at the same time as the dinosaurs.

To find the true nature of our origins we must not look to the apes but to the stars.





Darwinism is not a theory, it's a scientific fact.
show me some proof that says that evolution is not occurring
and that Darwin was wrong....

Credible links only please.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
reply to post by redindigo
 


Darwinism is just as much a theory as Creationism.

If you’re using “theory” in its scientific sense, then “Darwinism” (even though Darwinism hasn’t been the dominant facet of evolutionary theory since the late 1800’s/early 1900’s … there’s a reason we have something called “modern evolutionary synthesis” now) is a theory and Creationism is not. If you’re using “theory” in the colloquial sense, then Creationism is a theory and “Darwinism” is not. Or are you following a third definition for “theory” known only to you?


Scientists who claim that evolution is a proven fact are just used to perpetuating entrenched scientific dogma.

No, evolution is an observable and reproducible phenomenon i.e. a fact. The theory of evolution is a framework which seeks to explain the facts surrounding evolution and is subject to change as new facts are uncovered.


Much the same way many fundamentalist Christians will go against all reason to tell us that the earth was created by God in six days.

It goes against reason because there’s no empirical evidence to back up that claim.


Ever heard of irreducible complexity?

Many times. The cdesign proponentsists have yet to produce an example that has not been shown to be reducibly complex. See the Behe testimony from Kitzmiller vs. Dover.


If evolution was a fact and not just a theory the "missing link" would have been found by now.

The only thing proven by someone mentioning the “missing link” is their own lack of understanding of what the theory of evolution actually says. There’s no such thing as a “missing link”.


And given the fact that evolution operates under the premise of very gradual cause and effect, survival of the fittest, there should be billions of missing links to be found. We shouldn't have such a hard time finding them.

Given the rarity with which fossils are formed, something that was known even in Darwin’s day, we’ve found a significant number of transitional fossils.


Scientists are grasping at straws, finding an ape leg bone and a human skull 40 feet apart and deeming it the missing link.

You've constructed a wonderful strawman argument for yourself to knock over here.


What the real scientists (not the knuckleheads who are paid to find proof for theories that science supports) are finding is more and more evidence to suggest that man has existed longer than many species of apes and even potentially walked the earth at the same time as the dinosaurs.

Given your disdain for “knuckleheads”, I’m sure you have some kind of citations for these claims, right?


To find the true nature of our origins we must not look to the apes but to the stars.

So you’re an interventionist?



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthEvolves
 


I'd say there is no such thing as evolution, but there certainly is adaptation, cross breeding, and selective breeding.

I would also say God is Nature, so of course God uses all of the resources of nature to renew the world and make new creations routinely.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
I would say that they are a rational person. There's no reason to discount fields of science without even understanding how they work. There is nothing wrong with personal faith in god. Instead of people attacking evolution, they should instead show how it makes god great. Lives are saved by evolutionary medicine all the time. These are good deeds, science is a good thing. Science and religion are separate concepts but can easily coexist. The problem is people put more faith in man's translation an ancient book, than in god, himself.



I'd say there is no such thing as evolution, but there certainly is adaptation, cross breeding, and selective breeding.

So you are saying genetic mutations don't exist or effect the organisms? If you admit natural selection exists, that's the only other part of evolution.
edit on 19-4-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by osirys
 

I had no trouble reconciling my belief in God with my acceptance of the theory of evolution back when I believed in God. And I can honestly state that my acceptance of the theory of evolution had nothing to do with my gradual turn to atheism. I think the conflict comes from two places: from people on the scientific side of the debate claiming that evolution or other naturalistic explanations somehow "disprove" the existence of God, and from people on the religious side of the debate claiming that the bulk of modern science must be wrong because it conflicts with their particular interpretation of their favorite religious text.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by rigel4
 


Riddle me this: when did apes become apes, and when did humans become humans? How did the FIRST humans survive? Did little baby male and female humans mutate out of earlier mammals, and then survive on there own?

have you ever put a toddler in the woods and watched to see if it survives?

I'm not saying Darwinian evolution didn't happen, because there's a plethora of evidence suggesting it did.....

I'm just saying, it's quite obvious God stepped in and guided the process, and that it didn't just happen on its own with no cause and nobody "overseeing" the process......

I don't think science OR the Holy Bible have given us 100% of the answers on creation/origin, though I do believe the Bible gave us the basic run down of what happened, and science is currently discovering the nitty gritty details of what went on.....

Now if both sides could just reconcile, and the YEC / literal biblical interpreters say "well, maybe Genesis is not a completely literal account, and maybe we should get up to speed with the allegorical interpretation of Genesis and the idea of Theistic Evolution",

And the Darwinians ought to say "we should stop being so arrogant, and thinking all of these wonderful processes we have discovered were somehow just happening for no reason whatsoever aside from a random chaotic universe somehow springing life randomly for no reason and with no guidance",

We should all push for enlightenment, knowledge and wisdom,

But we must keep and open mind and unbiased perspective when trying to come to factual scientific conclusions on our being, existence, origin, and future.....



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by redindigo
Darwinism is just as much a theory as Creationism. Scientists who claim that evolution is a proven fact are just used to perpetuating entrenched scientific dogma. Much the same way many fundamentalist Christians will go against all reason to tell us that the earth was created by God in six days.


Only partially true.

Darwinism (Evolution, etc) is only a theory. That part is right. Tomorrow, someone could come up with a much better, testable, hypothesis that will go through the scientific rigors and eventually become a theory. No scientist worth his salt will say that it is proven. It's been shown to be consistent through many rigorous tests, but that hardly means it's a proven fact. Anyone who tells you this is misquoting science or is a bad scientist, both of which I recommend you avoid.

Creationism can never do what this 'new' hypothesis would do to disprove Darwinism. There is no testable hypothesis, per se. A scientist cannot stick his head in the clouds and wave to God, and another cannot repeat that. Creationism is not a theory, it is a mythos (note I did not say myth). There is nothing wrong with saying "I believe that God created the world in six days." That is fine. But trying to put it next to a scientifically tested theory and claiming they are the same is wrong. It is doing a disservice to science and a disservice to Creationism in general.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by BluFenix
 


This is the type of thinking we need to see more of,

Star for you



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Iason321
 



have you ever put a toddler in the woods and watched to see if it survives?


Tarzan?

Mobley?



I agree with you 100%, there is no jump from one species to another, but there are adaptations to environment, cross-breeding, and selective breeding that win out for the species, but apes don't become humans and parameciums don't become complex organ systems.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Some of the ideas that evolutionists/atheists have are nearly as silly and unbelievable as people who believe in a literal garden of eden with a literal single adam and eve and a literal talking snake that existed 6,000 years ago....

Both are pills that are way too much for me to swallow....and I think the truth of it all lies in between (although I will say, I believe every word of the Bible, and believe it is the absolute truth of what happened....I just think a lot of people are unable to "read between the lines")



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by redindigo
Darwinism is just as much a theory as Creationism. Scientists who claim that evolution is a proven fact are just used to perpetuating entrenched scientific dogma. Much the same way many fundamentalist Christians will go against all reason to tell us that the earth was created by God in six days.

Ever heard of irreducible complexity?

If evolution was a fact and not just a theory the "missing link" would have been found by now. And given the fact that evolution operates under the premise of very gradual cause and effect, survival of the fittest, there should be billions of missing links to be found. We shouldn't have such a hard time finding them. Scientists are grasping at straws, finding an ape leg bone and a human skull 40 feet apart and deeming it the missing link. What the real scientists (not the knuckleheads who are paid to find proof for theories that science supports) are finding is more and more evidence to suggest that man has existed longer than many species of apes and even potentially walked the earth at the same time as the dinosaurs.

To find the true nature of our origins we must not look to the apes but to the stars.





Oh lord, your post actually made me laugh out loud.
There's actually no such thing as a 'missing link'.
But feel free to provide your sources please?



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


I have another theory of evolution for you to check out,

It's called creative evolution,

This is sort of another form of Theistic evolution:

www.icr.org...

Keep your mind OPEN friend, do not try to tackle scientific theories with a PRECONCEIVED BIAS! It is a fatal flaw in your scientific approach!

EDIT: From the link I posted, comes this, and these are two of my main issues with unguided, godless darwinian evolution: The key elements of neo-Darwinism are creation of biological variety and natural selection of the more fit organisms. Survival of the fittest has been well documented. Difficulties that still remain include the problem of the arrival of the fittest and the transformation of one species into another. Darwin was aware that his solution to this problem was merely "a provisional hypothesis or speculation," but he believed that it was the best theory so far devised that could explain the origin of the species "until a better one be advanced." He also believed that his theory would "serve to bring together a multitude of facts which are at present left disconnected by any efficient cause" (

Can you answer this with a logical, scientific explanation? When did the ARRIVAL of the fittest happen, and when EXACTLY did the transformations from one species to another happen, and how?

Also, as I was saying, exactly HOW did abiogenesis occur? How did the FIRST PROTOTYPES SURVIVE ON THERE OWN? How did baby apes and baby humans come to be? What made the small babies survive on there own? Did male and female humans spring into existence at the same time? Were the first "evolved" humans fully grown on birth?

Or were they not born, and just walked out of the dirt?

I can poke holes in your godless darwinian evolution THEORY all day, and you cannot answer them, because you don't know the answers, nor does science.
edit on 4/19/2012 by Iason321 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


Some of the ideas that evolutionists/atheists have are nearly as silly and unbelievable as people who believe in a literal garden of eden with a literal single adam and eve and a literal talking snake that existed 6,000 years ago....

Both are pills that are way too much for me to swallow....and I think the truth of it all lies in between (although I will say, I believe every word of the Bible, and believe it is the absolute truth of what happened....I just think a lot of people are unable to "read between the lines")


We meet again. This time more cordially I hope.

It bothers me that you bind atheism and evolution together, I see this stance taken by Bible believers all the time. I believe that a person can believe in God(your God to be specific) and still grasp and accept the fundamentals of evolution, would you agree?



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 


Of course I agree, that's the whole point im trying to make!

I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with Darwinian evolution, or Creative Evolution, or evolution in General, or the earths age of 4.54 billion years old.....

I DO take issue with an unguided process of evolution, which is a common stance that Darwinian Evolution believers / evolutionary biologists take....

Read the post I just made, and the edit I made on it



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iason321
reply to post by rigel4
 


Riddle me this: when did apes become apes, and when did humans become humans? How did the FIRST humans survive? Did little baby male and female humans mutate out of earlier mammals, and then survive on there own?

have you ever put a toddler in the woods and watched to see if it survives?

I'm not saying Darwinian evolution didn't happen, because there's a plethora of evidence suggesting it did.....

I'm just saying, it's quite obvious God stepped in and guided the process, and that it didn't just happen on its own with no cause and nobody "overseeing" the process......

I don't think science OR the Holy Bible have given us 100% of the answers on creation/origin, though I do believe the Bible gave us the basic run down of what happened, and science is currently discovering the nitty gritty details of what went on.....

Now if both sides could just reconcile, and the YEC / literal biblical interpreters say "well, maybe Genesis is not a completely literal account, and maybe we should get up to speed with the allegorical interpretation of Genesis and the idea of Theistic Evolution",

And the Darwinians ought to say "we should stop being so arrogant, and thinking all of these wonderful processes we have discovered were somehow just happening for no reason whatsoever aside from a random chaotic universe somehow springing life randomly for no reason and with no guidance",

We should all push for enlightenment, knowledge and wisdom,

But we must keep and open mind and unbiased perspective when trying to come to factual scientific conclusions on our being, existence, origin, and future.....


You either have an IQ of 50 or your trolling.
I not even going to address your stupid analogies.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by seabhac-rua
 



I believe that a person can believe in God(your God to be specific) and still grasp and accept the fundamentals of evolution, would you agree?


I would agree that God and Evolution can co-exist quite easily. There is no reason in the world someone couldn't believe in a creation and also in evolution.

Now, in fact, I would expect atheists to have a more logical approach and see the flaws in the theory of evolution. If anyone should accept the flawed science of evolution, it should be the folks that are used to accepting things on faith alone, because that is about all there is to the theory of evolution.





new topics
top topics
 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join