• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

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

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

waitasec

waitasec

Veteran Member
Biblestudent_007 said:
Not really. Scriptures exhort and teach more on a Christian code of conduct than the basics of evolutionary mechanisms.
Click to expand...

it is rather interesting that in order to keep ones faith alive in the face of
truth, as in natural selection, one would have to ignore such truths...the irony.
 
Skwim

Skwim

Veteran Member
Biblestudent_007 said:
The Bible says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

ToE says something else. Not biblical
____________________________________________________________________________________________
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..
Click to expand...
Ah, did you even read what Mestemia told you? On the outside chance that you missed it let me repeat his words. It's kind of important.



The theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the beginning of life.


The theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the beginning of life.


The theory of evolution says absolutely nothing about the beginning of life.


​
 
Last edited:
doppelganger

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Biblestudent_007 said:
If the Theory of Evolution is true what does it prove? . .
Click to expand...
Scientific theories are neither "true" nor "false." They are more or less useful for predicting and explaining observations. The theory of evolution is the model that currently lines up best with what we know about the diversity of species and biological and genetic systems and how we are using that information.

One offshoot that troubles those with a psychological need to look outside themselves for certain answers to quell their existential anxiety is that the model takes human beings and human purposes out of the center of the Earth as its highest purpose. In much the same way, dogmatic religion opposed Galileo and Giordano Bruno because they offered more useful cosmological models that had the incidental effect of taking the Earth out of the center of the Universe.

The result for an ego that needs to be the focus of the Universe is that its clinging to a state of static identity to assuage fear necessitates that such models be rejected outright, regardless of whether they better explain our observations of our Universe.
 
gnostic

gnostic

The Lost One
Repeat it all you want, Skim. Biblestudent_007 is not going to get it.

Apparently he has not read Darwin's theory; he just parroting the same nonsense of his priest or pastor, who also didn't understand or want to understand what is written in evolution.

You're right, evolution is not about the origin of life. Some get it, but I don't think biblestudent_007 ever will. Willful ignorance is a common trait (or failing) of those who believe in a literal creationism.
 
Skwim

Skwim

Veteran Member
Noaidi said:
What? Speak up, Skwim. Some of us obviously can't hear what you're saying.
Click to expand...
Draka said:
I'm sorry Skwim, did you say something?
Click to expand...
Sorry for all the shouting, people.

It just gets tiresome to continually hear the old evolution/beginning-of-life chestnut being pulled out. I've since toned down the post.




(For those wondering about Noaidi and Draka's remarks, I shouted as loud as I could; five repetitions increasing to size 7 font, the last in red.)
 
Noaidi

Noaidi

slow walker
Skwim said:
Sorry for all the shouting, people.

It just gets tiresome to continually hear the old evolution/beginning-of-life chestnut being pulled out. I've since toned down the post.




(For those wondering about Noaidi and Draka's remarks, I shouted as loud as I could; five repetitions increasing to size 7 font, the last in red.)
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic there, Skwim. :D If anything, the message should be shouted louder.
 
David M

David M

Well-Known Member
Biblestudent_007 said:
Its very simple. The Bible says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

ToE says something else. Not biblical
Click to expand...

Not about the creation of the universe and the planets and stars its doesn't. It says nothing about it. The only thing is explains is how life diversifies.

Your problem is that you think it contradicts how you have decided to interpret part of the bible. Many Christians have no problems accepting ToE and the Genesis account because they realise the latter is not a history or science textbook.
 
Last edited:
Father Heathen

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
Biblestudent_007 said:
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.
Click to expand...
.
If you not even reading the thread, why are you posting in it? We've already established that evolution and god are not mutually exclusive. The only thing evolution conflicts with is literal interpretations of ancient creation stories, which do not have a monopoly on god. So you will not get anywhere by continuing to regurgitate that drivel, kiddo.
 
Father Heathen

Father Heathen

Veteran Member
rusra02 said:
The ToE is not true. If it were, then the Bible would be wrong and untrue
Click to expand...
Well, the former is substantiated by evidence and logic while the latter is not, so an honest person would conclude that the bible is indeed wrong and untrue. But don't worry, it's not necessary to believe in some primitive goat herders' interpretation of god to actually believe in god. But for those who insist on clinging to a book, they can at least take it allegorical rather than literal.
 
Last edited:
McBell

McBell

Admiral Obvious
David M said:
Your problem is that you think it contradicts how you have decided to interpret part of the bible. Many Christians have no problems accepting ToE and the Genesis account because they realise the latter is not a history or science textbook.
Click to expand...
I can two serious problems here...
You touched on one in your above quoted post.

The second serious problem here is that it is not the ToE that is being argued.
It is some strawman version of the ToE that is being argued.

Add this problem to the problem of personal interpretation....
 
Biblestudent_007

Biblestudent_007

Active Member
Father Heathen said:
How so? ToE doesn't even deal with the origins of life or the universe, only with how it adapts. Do you even know what ToE is, son?
Click to expand...

Its the scientific theory of how different species evolved over thousands of years.

Its also about the biological mechanisms concerning diversity of species.

Natural Selection,Origins of Man, and Biology are just a few interconnected topics.

I got some information from here http://talkorigins.org/ . . .
 
Last edited:
Valjean

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top