If the Theory of Evolution is true what does it prove?

[Android]

Hey biblestudent, I see you answered gnostic's questions but avoided mine (on page one).
I hope this wasn't intentional. It's an important question that I still haven't heard a good answer for.
Help me out.... if you can.

 

[Biblestudent_007]

For arguments sake, lets pretend that science found a way to prove/disprove god. What would be the point? What would be the practial application? How could that knowledge be of any use in advancing our civillisation?

A biblical answer is by faith ~ if we all had evidence then we wouldn't require faith.

Knowledge gives us to the tools to be doctors,scientists,lawyers,politicians,philanthropists,sociologists,anthropologists and so on.

. .

 

[outhouse]

Because it contradicts what it says in the written word of God.

what did god ever write???

Not at this moment, no. Considering the last scientist was an atheist who supported evolution.

can you back that up at all???

my research finds you in serious error

 

[Vile Atheist]

A biblical answer is by faith ~ if we all had evidence then we wouldn't require faith.

Knowledge gives us to the tools to be doctors,scientists,lawyers,politicians,philanthropists,sociologists,anthropologists and so on.

. .

Please send me your politicians. This is a rare occurance, a politician with knowledge.

To the crux of the matter, -why- does the Biblical answer have to be by faith? Why must a belief in God be supported by faith and faith alone? Why can we not support our belief (or lack thereof) with evidence?

The fact of the matter is God has never given me any justification for his existence. I am perfectly capable of living a perfectly happy and moral life without the guidance of God. Therefore if God exists, he is irrelevant and I may as well not believe in him.

I see no merit nor justification for placing such huge blind faith in such an extraordinary claim that you don't really have much reason to believe in. Perhaps you can explain it?

 

[Copernicus]

Bear in mind that Darwin was not the first person to come up with the idea that humans evolved from other animals. Anyone who has seen a monkey or ape can draw the obvious connection, and the concept of natural selection even occurred in Roman times. It was Darwin who provided overwhelming evidence in support of natural selection as the mechanism behind evolution.

 

[gnostic]

Not at this moment, no. Considering the last scientist was an atheist who supported evolution.

What does atheist have to do with a scientist or evolution?

Atheist is just a person who don't believe in the existence of god or gods. It has nothing to do with science. And science has nothing to do with atheism. They are not one and the same.

Because it contradicts what it says in the written word of God.

How does it contradict God?

Have you even read Darwin's theory?

Where in the bible does it explain diversity of species? It doesn't.

Does the bible teacher you help to do first aid?

Nor do the bible explain simple anatomy or physiology, botany and zoology. It doesn't explain astronomy, the sun, moon or stars. The bible doesn't explain mathematics, physics or chemistry.

But its just a theory and not much more.

Spoken like someone who doesn't understand scientific theory is.

If anything, miracles defy the law of nature or the law of physics, because it is nothing more than Bronze Age and Iron Age superstitions and trickery.

Scientific theory is the best explanation for any given field. Without it, you won't understand the science behind it. Gravity, thermodynamics, optics, nuclear physics, calculus, genetics, medicine, neurosurgery, etc, all use and rely on their respective theories.

Gravity have it's own theory. The theory explained Newton's laws. Without the theory, you won't understand each law. The law are only short statement, which may or may not contain mathematical formula or equation.

Scientific theory is that have been proven by tests (and retesting), measurements, evidences, and mathematics, empirically using scientific method.

Evolution already have evidences to support its theory, and theory also explain the results of those evidences.

Your problem is that you're confusing theory with hypothesis.

 

[Android]

A biblical answer is by faith

Did you even read the question?
I asked for a practical application. You know, something useable. something we can apply to build something to help us fly to mars, or cure cancer, or burn toast faster... ANYTHING!

The question still stands.

 

[rusra02]

If the Theory of Evolution is true what does it prove? . .

If cows could fly, we would be in big trouble from above. The ToE is not true. If it were, then the Bible would be wrong and untrue. Accepting the ToE as true, as many professed "christian" churches and religious leaders have done, is a repudiation of the Bible as God's word. It reminds one of the words at Titus 1:16; "They publicly declare they know God, but they disown him by their works, because they are detestable and disobedient and not approved for good work of any sort."

 

[McBell]

The ToE is not true. If it were, then the Bible would be wrong and untrue.

then the Bibe is wrong and untrue.
Get over it already.

 

[LuisDantas]

If the Theory of Evolution is true

Which it is. It has been quite impressively tested and refined. For decades, if not a whole century already.

(then) what does it prove? . .

Exactly what it says in the tin namely, that lifeforms vary along generations and bring new species into being.

Specifically, it proves nothing at all about the existence of God (or lack of same). It may perhaps deny some interpretations of scriptures, but the fault is in maintaining those sorts of interpretations in the first place.

 

[outhouse]

If cows could fly, we would be in big trouble from above. The ToE is not true. If it were, then the Bible would be wrong and untrue. Accepting the ToE as true, as many professed "christian" churches and religious leaders have done, is a repudiation of the Bible as God's word. It reminds one of the words at Titus 1:16; "They publicly declare they know God, but they disown him by their works, because they are detestable and disobedient and not approved for good work of any sort."

your post denounces all of science and all of geology and all of biology.


these are things friend keeping you alive at the moment.

NOT a ancient book written 3000 years ago by a ancient man who knew nothing at all about the natural world around him.




the trouble is not ignorance because we have shown you many times facts and evidence on the subject.

 

[Biblestudent_007]

Its very simple. The Bible says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

ToE says something else. Not biblical

 

[outhouse]

Its very simple. The Bible says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

ToE says something else. Not biblical

so when you go in for open heart surgery, is it science and doctors that save you or does your god and the bible save you.???

is it science that made the antibiotics that quiet the babys cries from a ear infection your god does nothing about??




The bible says allot of things we know for a fact are not true, ancient man thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.

Science has grown past ancient myths written as allegory and misinterpreted by man for hundreds of years

 

[Biblestudent_007]

The last debate I had over the Creationism vs. Evolution controversy was about a difference in worldview and ideology. I couldn't agree with someone who was a professed atheist and supported Darwinist evolution. No, I had to go back to what the Bible says about the origins of man and how life was created. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise that God is not the author of life. So from this perspective, the whole Creationism vs. Evolution controversy is about worldviews and ideology. Not just science. Because, I could presume that some often make a god out of science. Granted, I could accept ToE as a scientific theory if I understand it better.

 

[McBell]

The last debate I had over the Creationism vs. Evolution controversy was about a difference in worldview and ideology. I couldn't agree with someone who was a professed atheist and supported Darwinist evolution. No, I had to go back to what the Bible says about the origins of man and how life was created. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise that God is not the author of life. So from this perspective, the whole Creationism vs. Evolution controversy is about worldviews and ideology. Not just science. Because, I could presume that some often make a god out of science. Granted, I could accept ToE as a scientific theory if I understand it better.

Except that the theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the beginning of life...

 

[Dan4reason]

I don't see much point in this debate because it is not even a real debate. The creationist in this instance will not even consider the evidence for evolution not because he has refutations but because it does not say the same thing as his mythology book. One side of this debate is close minded and won't use reason. Atheists might as well be talking to a tree.

 

[outhouse]

Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise that God is not the author of life.

first we dont even know god doesnt live outside the imagination let alone created anything.

we do know however that all life evolved. Its not even up for debate brother. Only religious rejections exist.

the whole Creationism vs. Evolution controversy is about worldviews and ideology

No, ist nothing but a lack of education in the scientific method combined with putting religious belief before logic and reason.

Granted, I could accept ToE as a scientific theory if I understand it better.

if you kept a open and unbiased mind there are many people that would out of the kindness in their hearts, walk you through the basics and help you understadn if you wanted.

meet your real ancestors,, do you really think we are all inbred fromancient hebrews 6000 years ago ???? when we know for a fact all the current races of people existed at that time.


the pic below is 7 million years worth of evolution.

 

[Valjean]

The last debate I had over the Creationism vs. Evolution controversy was about a difference in worldview and ideology. I couldn't agree with someone who was a professed atheist and supported Darwinist evolution. No, I had to go back to what the Bible says about the origins of man and how life was created. Its ridiculous to suggest otherwise that God is not the author of life. So from this perspective, the whole Creationism vs. Evolution controversy is about worldviews and ideology. Not just science. Because, I could presume that some often make a god out of science. Granted, I could accept ToE as a scientific theory if I understand it better.

I think there's quite a range of worldviews and ideologies on both sides of the issue, Biblestudent, and I think you're ignoring what most "evolutionists" consider the main point -- mechanism.
The Bible says nothing about how life was created, just who created it, so creationists are, in fact, arguing that magic -- for magic it must be -- is a more reasonable "explanation" for diversity than any of the mechanisms described by evolution theory.

 

[waitasec]

Its very simple. The Bible says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

ToE says something else. Not biblical

does this posit a dilemma for you?

 

[Biblestudent_007]

does this posit a dilemma for you?

Not really. Scriptures exhort and teach more on a Christian code of conduct than the basics of evolutionary mechanisms.