How do you define evolution?

[YoursTrue]

It is a sad way to interpret God, Christianity and the world around us. It makes no sense to me.

There is a dichotomy too. We can learn about gravity, but we cannot learn about biology.

Again, not true. We certainly can learn about biology. But again -- there is a gap in evidence of the real kind. Real meaning a show of real-life forms from one species to another.

 

[YoursTrue]

But, to believe in God causing miracles or God creating things, such as those narrated in the Bible, don’t require science and don’t even require intelligence.

It depends on who is experiencing the outstanding unusual events. Meaning who is recording them, how these spectacular events are interpreted.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, not true. We certainly can learn about biology. But again -- there is a gap in evidence of the real kind. Real meaning a show of real-life forms from one species to another.

What does a gap in evidence even mean? Nothing you have demonstrated. You just deny evidence. Evidence exists that is consistent with theory and is explained by no other theory or explanation. If every species was kicked into existence as is in a single step, then the evidence makes no sense. The story says one thing, the evidence says another. Do you believe that God is lying to us? I do not.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, not true. We certainly can learn about biology. But again -- there is a gap in evidence of the real kind. Real meaning a show of real-life forms from one species to another.

It is true. That is what you support. Ignore what we learn and force everything into one person's or one group's interpretation of scripture. Ignore any uncomfortable questions and deny any uncomfortable evidence. Don't use the gifts God gave us and pretend we don't see anything.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Nope, there is something about Paul. Because some people don't believe what is written about his experience (from above). I do. And the more I think about it, the clearer, yes, the clearer it becomes that -- God created the heavens and the earth. It did not come about by self-controlled evolution as in the theory of Darwin. Take it as you may. Again -- do I think God causes deformities or birth defects? No. Do I think God has the power to override what He set in motion? Yes, I do.

Once again, I'll post it loud so they can see it from the cheap seats, the theory of evolution is not a theory of the origin of the universe or life on this planet.

Is self-controlled evolution a new straw man for you or just giving us confirmation that you don't have a clue about the science you deny?

The rest of your rant, I have no idea about. The context or what you mean by it.

 

[YoursTrue]

But, to believe in God causing miracles or God creating things, such as those narrated in the Bible, don’t require science and don’t even require intelligence.

No, such belief only required FAITH, and faith alone.

Putting the Bible or any other scriptures under the microscope (eg the creation, flood) with what we have learned from different fields of science, only demonstrated the authors’ weaknesses in understanding natural and physical reality, and it also shine the lights on believers’ ignorance, especially those “believers” who are considered “creationists”.

The pitfalls that all creationists fall into, are believing that god wrote these stories in biblical texts, and therefore assuming the Bible itself is infallible or inerrant.

The Bible is definitely not written by god, because there are so many errors, so many inconsistencies, and I am just talking about Genesis 1 to 8.

In Job 38 to 41, the author (whoever he may be) claiming to write what God’s reply to Job’s were, about the injustice of his sufferings. But instead of giving answer to Job, he tried to justify Job’s sufferings with bullying intimidation of his enormous powers with erroneous bragging about him creating this or creating that - in nature.

The author of Job (book) clearly have no real knowledge about natural phenomena, eg sun, stars, Earth, mountains, seas, rain, hails, snows, thunders, etc. Everything god said to Job, were...to be blunt and frank...were wrong and stupid.

Believing in any passages in Job, is believing in superstitions, and superstitions that are erroneous.

People who have studied these things, astronomy, Earth, seas, meteorology, biology, etc, in the last couple of centuries, can easily explain natural phenomena as they are, eg WHAT they are and HOW they work, and even answer the WHY questions, without resorting to “God did it” nonsense.

When you read something like book of Job, and “really think about it”, then you would know that the author, whoever was the real author, was ignorant superstitious fellow, who have no understanding about nature and natural phenomena, and worse of all, depicted God as stupid, petty bully.

I am not saying god is stupid and petty but that the author’s depiction of god is.

There are some questions about existence (nature?) that I believe will possibly never be answered. Such as: the space between protons and electrons and the power therein. How did it get there? Also keep in mind that according to many scientists today, the earth is at a precarious state regarding its self-existence. So if we don't live to get the answers, it may be in some minds that no one will get the answers in the long or short run. Not to change the subject, while it's interesting, those who have been killed while running for more freedom than they have, perhaps we'll see if they'll see. As I say, according to the predictors, the human race may not have much time left to explore these questions.

 

[YoursTrue]

It is true. That is what you support. Ignore what we learn and force everything into one person's or one group's interpretation of scripture. Ignore any uncomfortable questions and deny any uncomfortable evidence. Don't use the gifts God gave us and pretend we don't see anything.

Again, you're telling me what I believe, which I'm telling you that your opinion of what I believe is not true. To say we see something is like saying you see the in-betweens of the species. As it happened. And how it happened. Which we don't. But you know what? (insult me all you want, but) I believe that the forces of life are so strong that there is no way they came about by themselves. And that the One that made these fabulous, extraordinary amazing forces can override them when desired. Anyway, it's been a nice discussion, thank you for your thoughts. Further, yes, there are some things that only our hearts and mind can truly figure out, and yes, I believe God knows what's going on.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There are some questions about existence (nature?) that I believe will possibly never be answered. Such as: the space between protons and electrons and the power therein. How did it get there? Also keep in mind that according to many scientists today, the earth is at a precarious state regarding its self-existence. So if we don't live to get the answers, it may be in some minds that no one will get the answers in the long or short run. Not to change the subject, while it's interesting, those who have been killed while running for more freedom than they have, perhaps we'll see if they'll see. As I say, according to the predictors, the human race may not have much time left to explore these questions.

Some Christians can't wait until the end comes for us all. I am not one of them.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, you're telling me what I believe, which I'm telling you that your opinion of what I believe is not true. To say we see something is like saying you see the in-betweens of the species. As it happened. And how it happened. Which we don't. But you know what? (insult me all you want, but) I believe that the forces of life are so strong that there is no way they came about by themselves. And that the One that made these fabulous, extraordinary amazing forces can override them when desired. Anyway, it's been a nice discussion, thank you for your thoughts. Further, yes, there are some things that only our hearts and mind can truly figure out, and yes, I believe God knows what's going on.

I am reporting what I see. Besides, you have not been shy about telling me what I believe, even when I have never said what you keep repeating about "other" Christians.

What we see is what you refuse to see. Just because you refuse to see it, does not mean that it is not there.

You have not spared me the insults, but that does not matter, I am not insulting you. I am reporting what I see.

And I am telling you that science does not claim that life made itself happen and the theory of evolution is not a theory of the origin of life or the origin of the universe. If you cannot see that after being told countless times by everyone and their brother, I should not be surprised you cannot see what is there to be seen.

I cannot imagine God would give me and others minds to think with and senses to detect with and then expect us to deny what we see.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, not true. We certainly can learn about biology. But again -- there is a gap in evidence of the real kind. Real meaning a show of real-life forms from one species to another.

There is real evidence. Denying that evidence does not make it unreal.

 

[shunyadragon]

Again, not true. We certainly can learn about biology. But again -- there is a gap in evidence of the real kind. Real meaning a show of real-life forms from one species to another.

You need to rewrite this to make it coherent and understandable.

95%+ of ALL biologists support the scientific evolution without reservations as intimately related and apart of biology.

 

[shunyadragon]

Again, you're telling me what I believe, which I'm telling you that your opinion of what I believe is not true. To say we see something is like saying you see the in-betweens of the species. As it happened. And how it happened. Which we don't. But you know what? (insult me all you want, but) I believe that the forces of life are so strong that there is no way they came about by themselves. And that the One that made these fabulous, extraordinary amazing forces can override them when desired. Anyway, it's been a nice discussion, thank you for your thoughts. Further, yes, there are some things that only our hearts and mind can truly figure out, and yes, I believe God knows what's going on.

Still remains that your view of biology and evolution reflects an ancient Biblical perspective and not remotely science.

 

[YoursTrue]

Still remains that your view of biology and evolution reflects an ancient Biblical perspective and not remotely science.

The more I think about it and consider the idea of evolution, the greater it solidifies in my mind that life did not happen by chance. So... with that in mind, have a nice day. (Again, I wasn't there.)

 

[YoursTrue]

There is real evidence. Denying that evidence does not make it unreal.

I thought about that. I don't believe there is real evidence, fossils are not real evidence of evolution. Neither are chemical reactions. People can be fairly convinced by circumstantial evidence in a trial but the verdict doesn't always meet the truth. Even though the evidence may convince them.

 

[Polymath257]

I thought about that. I don't believe there is real evidence, fossils are not real evidence of evolution. Neither are chemical reactions. People can be fairly convinced by circumstantial evidence in a trial but the verdict doesn't always meet the truth. Even though the evidence may convince them.

The fossils are evidence that living things in the past were often very different than those living today. The fossils also showed that the types of living things at various times changed with the new organisms being similar to those that existed previously. That *is* evolution.

I'm not sure what chemical reactions you are saying are not evidence for evolution. Which ones did someone claim *were* evidence of such?

Often, the biggest problem with juries are those who have made up their minds before any evidence was given. Those are the ones that only accept one conclusion no matter what the evidence is.

 

[YoursTrue]

The fossils are evidence that living things in the past were often very different than those living today.

Yes, I understand that premise.

The fossils also showed that the types of living things at various times changed with the new organisms being similar to those that existed previously. That *is* evolution.

I understand the premise, however I no longer accept it as postulated as if it's the actuality because yes, there IS no proof other than bones and possibly similar physiognomy. Also dating. We haven't really gotten into that at least I may not have read it yet since it's so complicated, and I still say that debris from the rocks under or in or by the painting itself, including the composition of the paint, may be offsetting insofar as a timeline goes.

I'm not sure what chemical reactions you are saying are not evidence for evolution. Which ones did someone claim *were* evidence of such?

Oh, the chemical reactions in testtubes as if if proves evolution since things may have emerged different from the beginning of the insertion of the chemicals. And that is where we may possibly part insofar as accepting the postulates go. I have, however, appreciated your kindness in coping with my viewpoint.

Often, the biggest problem with juries are those who have made up their minds before any evidence was given. Those are the ones that only accept one conclusion no matter what the evidence is.

Well, thinking about that again -- sometimes the evidence can be quite convincing. Yet wrong conclusions were sometimes drawn because -- the actual 'real' evidence wasn't there. Such as cameras filming the before, during, and after the act in continuing time. So again, thank you for your most pleasant type conversation.

 

[shunyadragon]

The more I think about it and consider the idea of evolution, the greater it solidifies in my mind that life did not happen by chance. So... with that in mind, have a nice day.

Contemporary science does not propose that evolution happened by chance.

(Again, I wasn't there.)

You were not there anywhere beyond your miniscule life span. You were not there when the Bible was written.

 

[Polymath257]

Yes, I understand that premise.

Not a premise. A conclusion. Do you understand the difference?

I understand the premise, however I no longer accept it as postulated as if it's the actuality because yes, there IS no proof other than bones and possibly similar physiognomy. Also dating. We haven't really gotten into that at least I may not have read it yet since it's so complicated, and I still say that debris from the rocks under or in or by the painting itself, including the composition of the paint, may be offsetting insofar as a timeline goes.

And the bones are evidence that living things have changed, right?

You decided not to go forward with learning about dating. Do you want to go to the next step?

Oh, the chemical reactions in testtubes as if if proves evolution since things may have emerged different from the beginning of the insertion of the chemicals. And that is where we may possibly part insofar as accepting the postulates go. I have, however, appreciated your kindness in coping with my viewpoint.

I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Well, thinking about that again -- sometimes the evidence can be quite convincing. Yet wrong conclusions were sometimes drawn because -- the actual 'real' evidence wasn't there. Such as cameras filming the before, during, and after the act in continuing time. So again, thank you for your most pleasant type conversation.

And, if you continue testing and observing and *trying to show where things go wrong*, your views will change to become more in line with reality.

You don't need cameras to know what happened in the past. if you did, then you would have to reject the Bible as authoritative since all it is is printed words on a page. Maybe you should have half as much skepticism towards it as you do towards the fossil record?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The more I think about it and consider the idea of evolution, the greater it solidifies in my mind that life did not happen by chance. So... with that in mind, have a nice day. (Again, I wasn't there.)

Life happening and evolution are not the same thing. How is it that you cannot understand that? How many people have explained it to you and yet, you just refuse to get it?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I thought about that. I don't believe there is real evidence, fossils are not real evidence of evolution. Neither are chemical reactions. People can be fairly convinced by circumstantial evidence in a trial but the verdict doesn't always meet the truth. Even though the evidence may convince them.

Fossils are evidence that supports the theory of evolution. They are not the only evidence.

Chemicals like RNA and DNA are evidence for evolution.