by Hetairos » Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:53 am
by Farnhamia Redux » Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:55 am
by Barfobulville » Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:57 am
by Dragontide » Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:58 am
by Free Soviets » Mon Jun 01, 2009 9:59 am
Farnhamia Redux wrote:You really shouldn't use the word "believe" in discussing evolution. There's no belief involved. Evolution is, as you say, the explanation of what we observe in the natural world as to how life changes and develops.
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:00 am
Hetairos wrote:That evolution happens is NOT a theory, and anyone who tells you it is doesn't understand it. It is an OBSERVATION. We can SEE evolution happening in the laboratory
by Free Soviets » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:00 am
Dragontide wrote:The earth is 8-12 billion years old. Just because it's not 6000 years old does not mean there is no God.
by Australian Asia » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:07 am
by Free Soviets » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:12 am
Australian Asia wrote:Uhm, that's no matter of belief, I think so. Evolution for me is like rain... It has always been, and I am so sure about it, that there is no doubt.
by Dragontide » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:14 am
Free Soviets wrote:and it does mean that biblical literalist god doesn't exist.
it leaves the door open to other possible gods, of course, but it most certainly rules out some.
by Farnhamia Redux » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:15 am
Free Soviets wrote:Farnhamia Redux wrote:You really shouldn't use the word "believe" in discussing evolution. There's no belief involved. Evolution is, as you say, the explanation of what we observe in the natural world as to how life changes and develops.
sure there is. if you think something about something, you have a belief. belief is not and has never been restricted to believing that god exists or whatever.
by Hetairos » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:15 am
Barfobulville wrote:Actually, evolution IS a theory. The scientific definition of 'theory' is an observation that is highly supported by data consistently for a long time. Theories can sometimes hold more water than 'facts'. So, technically, evolution being a theory (well proven) makes it less of a 'theory' (unproven).
Multiple, opposite meanings, how fun.
by Farnhamia Redux » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:15 am
Dragontide wrote:Free Soviets wrote:and it does mean that biblical literalist god doesn't exist.
How so? It only points out mistakes in the Bible. Misinterpretations. How is God suppose to explain the entire nature of the universe to someone like Abraham or Moses?it leaves the door open to other possible gods, of course, but it most certainly rules out some.
Why would there be more than one?
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:16 am
Dragontide wrote:Free Soviets wrote: it leaves the door open to other possible gods, of course, but it most certainly rules out some.
Why would there be more than one?
by Farnhamia Redux » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:17 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Dragontide wrote:Free Soviets wrote: it leaves the door open to other possible gods, of course, but it most certainly rules out some.
Why would there be more than one?
People believe there are. 70% of the world after all is not Christian
by Helios Surrexit » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:18 am
Dragontide wrote:Free Soviets wrote:and it does mean that biblical literalist god doesn't exist.
How so? It only points out mistakes in the Bible. Misinterpretations. How is God suppose to explain the entire nature of the universe to someone like Abraham or Moses?
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:21 am
Helios Surrexit wrote:If God told Moses that the world was created in seven days, in the specific order described in Genesis, then God was *lying to Moses*.
by Ravea » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:23 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Helios Surrexit wrote:If God told Moses that the world was created in seven days, in the specific order described in Genesis, then God was *lying to Moses*.
Or God planted false evidence to suggest it took much longer and happened in a different order.
Either way, He would be a liar.
by Hetairos » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:24 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Hetairos wrote:That evolution happens is NOT a theory, and anyone who tells you it is doesn't understand it. It is an OBSERVATION. We can SEE evolution happening in the laboratory
Strictly speaking, the mere fact that most people are NOT carbon copies of their parents is also evolution. Which of course is why so many people who deny evolution exists live in regions with lots and lots of inbreeding.
The "theory of evolution through natural selection" examines a possible consequence of the fact of evolution.
by Barfobulville » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:25 am
Helios Surrexit wrote:
If God is unable to explain evolution/abiogenesis more accurately than he supposedly does in Genesis, God is not all-powerful.
by The Alma Mater » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:26 am
Hetairos wrote:But in organisms which reproduce asexually, the offspring are carbon copies of the parent, but these species can still evolve.
by Dyakovo » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:26 am
Dragontide wrote:The earth is 8-12 billion years old. Just because it's not 6000 years old does not mean there is no God.
by Dyakovo » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:27 am
Farnhamia Redux wrote:Free Soviets wrote:Farnhamia Redux wrote:You really shouldn't use the word "believe" in discussing evolution. There's no belief involved. Evolution is, as you say, the explanation of what we observe in the natural world as to how life changes and develops.
sure there is. if you think something about something, you have a belief. belief is not and has never been restricted to believing that god exists or whatever.
Well ... I suppose it's just semantics but the reason I don't like using "belief" in talking about evolution is that creationists like to twist statements about evolution on that word, claiming that evolution is as much a non-rational position as any religion, or that it is a religion. Why allow them even that little opportunity?
I prefer to say that I accept the scientific explanation of evolution.
by Angleter » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:29 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Helios Surrexit wrote:If God told Moses that the world was created in seven days, in the specific order described in Genesis, then God was *lying to Moses*.
Or God planted false evidence to suggest it took much longer and happened in a different order.
Either way, He would be a liar.
by Dragontide » Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:29 am
Helios Surrexit wrote:Dragontide wrote:Free Soviets wrote:and it does mean that biblical literalist god doesn't exist.
How so? It only points out mistakes in the Bible. Misinterpretations. How is God suppose to explain the entire nature of the universe to someone like Abraham or Moses?
God is supposed to be all-powerful and *not a liar*.
If God is unable to explain evolution/abiogenesis more accurately than he supposedly does in Genesis, God is not all-powerful.
If God told Moses that the world was created in seven days, in the specific order described in Genesis, then God was *lying to Moses*.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bienenhalde, Ifreann, Ineva, Plan Neonie, Saint Neots
Advertisement