Evolution Vs. God

reply to post by TinfoilTP


So I'm supposed to have "faith" that a fairy tale that was written by MAN for MAN is the instruction book of life? And that your god didn't become and will never vanish? This is insane! How can you people actually think you don't sound crazy! I mean come on some stuff you say could
Be plausible... Maybe, but that's going out on a limb. Evolution is based off evidence, not stories and feelings. That is why science will always prevail as it is an observation based answer.

My favorite story is that you people think that everything we see and ever has been is only 6000 years old. Ha, haha, ha. Just stop reproducing immediately! Let me play the part of natural selection and just stop your kind from carrying on now! Please don't have kids for the sake of the rest of the world.

Sorry to rant and go of like that, but I cannot fathom the lack of mental ability it takes to actually think like that!

Originally posted by Tylerknight
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

Evolution is based off evidence, not stories and feelings. That is why science will always prevail as it is an observation based answer.

Then do as this video asked these evolution believers, point to the observable repeatable evidence of one Kind changing to another Kind. Species changing to Species. Show that evolution counters and overcomes the extinction rate.

You cannot.
Nobody on earth can, so don't feel bad.
You are believing a story, don't kid yourself.
The only option you are left with is to apply faith in the lack of scientific method evidence.
As I said my version requires less faith than yours.
Also I don't require insults to you to hide my faith.

Originally posted by Tylerknight
reply to post by TinfoilTP

 

My favorite story is that you people think that everything we see and ever has been is only 6000 years old. Ha, haha, ha.

Um, no where in the Bible does is say that the Earth is 6000 years old, nor do any intelligent Christians believe that, but why does it matter how old the Earth is, and why should God share this knowledge with us, what would it accomplish in his plan, nothing oh yeah thats right.

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..

taking the creation fable featured in many biblical texts as literally how it happened only makes one willfully ignorant of God's actual methods of creation..

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously.. the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually was asexual.. eventually it became a more complicated organism as it evolved and learned from its environment, which produced offspring that had a determinate sex of either male or female..

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..

taking the creation fable featured in many biblical texts as literally how it happened only makes one willfully ignorant of God's actual methods of creation..

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

That is NOT evolution. That is a maturation process. So, you see that and believe you came from sludge? There is no proof of macro evolution. Stop comparing apples to oranges.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..

taking the creation fable featured in many biblical texts as literally how it happened only makes one willfully ignorant of God's actual methods of creation..

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

That is NOT evolution. That is a maturation process. So, you see that and believe you came from sludge? There is no proof of macro evolution. Stop comparing apples to oranges.

evolution is the process of maturation, and it never ends.. i believe i came from God and my biological parents, not sludge.. macroevolution has been proven, we discover new variations of species every day..

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..

taking the creation fable featured in many biblical texts as literally how it happened only makes one willfully ignorant of God's actual methods of creation..

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

That is NOT evolution. That is a maturation process. So, you see that and believe you came from sludge? There is no proof of macro evolution. Stop comparing apples to oranges.

Stop relying on the artificial distinction between microevolution and macroevolution to bolster your claims. The difference is a matter of degree.

Should I spoon feed this to you? 29+ Evidences for Macroevolution

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


theyve computed 6000 based on the lifespan of each member of the family tree mentioned from adam to jesus and 2000 years +(plus)

but the question is.. did the bible include everyone.. or just the family tree of the prophets and their descendants for the story of God to hold coherence.

#numbers #666

reply to post by tachyonmind


Discovering something we did not know existed does not prove where it came from. Please show me the intermediate animals changing to a new kind.

If we discovered a new asteroid, did it evolve there suddenly or did we just happen to find it? Is this the best you can do ?

Originally posted by filledcup
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

theyve computed 6000 based on the lifespan of each member of the family tree mentioned from adam to jesus and 200 years +(plus)

but the question is.. did the bible include everyone.. or just the family tree of the prophets and their descendants for the story of God to hold coherence.

#numbers #666

You know this is a hot question and deserves discussion. If you take the bible counting method than yes, Eth ha Adam was created some 6000 years ago, but the bible also speaks of an age before this age. In Genesis 1:1-2 we are told the earth BECAME without form and was made void. Peter speaks of the age that was, the age that is and the age that is to come.

So, I have no problem with the earth being millions of years old. The young earth theory does bother me, and I recently listened to a lot of those who believe it. I can see why they think dinosaurs were wandering around not long ago given some archeological evidences they show. If you are not familiar with that you can dig em up. It seems Job knew about the animal with a tail as long as a cedar tree which is about 100 ft long. There are some odd old photos of pterodactyl being killed. Were the old legends of dragons about remnant dinosaurs as the word dinosaur did not exist then? I really don't know if St. George killed some nasty man killing dino or little foot.

I don't believe Noah's flood was worldwide as most Christians do believe. I think the worldwide flood was at Genesis 1:1-2. I also believe the bible says God made many races and liked them all just fine. Some were designed for hunting and fishing and then he saw no man to til the ground so he made the man Adam. It's pretty interesting to read it in the original languages. There have been many disasters on earth, many regional floods, and it's quite easy to see how those floods could make massive changes to the Earth suddenly. I always go back to the sudden appearance of so many unique species during the Cambrian age. There should be precursor species to them evolving into them, but they have never been found. Suddenly there are just amazing and different species.

Originally posted by tachyonmind

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..

taking the creation fable featured in many biblical texts as literally how it happened only makes one willfully ignorant of God's actual methods of creation..

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Evolution is theory kid. Any self-respecting scientist knows that while something is a theory it is never to be accepted as pure fact. Now lets point out some logical problems with the theory of Evolution. First if we all originated from a single cell organism that uses asexual reproduction, then the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually bred with what?

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

That is NOT evolution. That is a maturation process. So, you see that and believe you came from sludge? There is no proof of macro evolution. Stop comparing apples to oranges.

evolution is the process of maturation, and it never ends.. i believe i came from God and my biological parents, not sludge.. macroevolution has been proven, we discover new variations of species every day..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

more power to you my friend. u are actually more intelligent than a stone. the atheists are still working it out.

Romans 1:20-22 New International Version (NIV)

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

it should be apparent by our history and the many missing building blocks such as the missing link.. and how the pyramids were built being lost to all, that God has wiped out civilizations previous to ours. gone without a trace. that which gives life, can take life.. without killing or murder.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

Discovering something we did not know existed does not prove where it came from. Please show me the intermediate animals changing to a new kind.

certainly.. here's one.. also, there is me. you are also one. all animals are constantly changing and adapting to their surroundings as they process the information it provides them..

If we discovered a new asteroid, did it evolve there suddenly or did we just happen to find it? Is this the best you can do ?

it evolved into an asteroid from some other form, yes. if we happen to find it, it only proves it exists.. if we study it, we can prove where it came from..

more power to you my friend. u are actually more intelligent than a stone. the atheists are still working it out.

thankyou, although atheists do believe in God, just not one that is exclusively described in scripture.. i myself am atheist..

Romans 1:20-22 New International Version (NIV)

20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools

it should be apparent by our history and the many missing building blocks such as the missing link.. and how the pyramids were built being lost to all, that God has wiped out civilizations previous to ours. gone without a trace. that which gives life, can take life.. without killing or murder.

edit on 29-8-2013 by filledcup because: (no reason given)

"this is necessary.. life feeds on life.." -james keenan

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..


if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously.. the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually was asexual.. eventually it became a more complicated organism as it evolved and learned from its environment, which produced offspring that had a determinate sex of either male or female..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

Ok I was under the impression we were debating Macro-evolution not micro evolution which is obviously an observable fact of nature, but bears no weight on the existence of God either way. Macro-evolution if it were true would still be occurring today.



www.ldolphin.org...

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


*Ahem* Your food is getting cold.

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Originally posted by tachyonmind
there is a fundamental problem with the idea of all things being created as they are, rather than through a process of evolute creation, and that is that it goes against everything we observe..

a child is born and evolves into an adult.. it is not created in adult form.. same goes for any species, including homosapiens..


if it was asexual, it bred with itself, obviously.. the first thing that evolved that needed to reproduce sexually was asexual.. eventually it became a more complicated organism as it evolved and learned from its environment, which produced offspring that had a determinate sex of either male or female..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

Ok I was under the impression we were debating Macro-evolution not micro evolution which is obviously an observable fact of nature, but bears no weight on the existence of God either way. Macro-evolution if it were true would still be occurring today.



www.ldolphin.org...

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

there is no difference between micro and macro evolution besides the scale.. are you saying the evolute mutation experienced with the introduction of radiation is not macro? birth defects spanning generations, manifesting in missing fingers, abnormally shaped heads, blindness etc.. if allowed to continue uninhibited you would end up with a new species of human..

interesting link, thankyou.. it doesn't scientifically disprove evolution though, it misunderstands what evolution is..

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity

Originally posted by filledcup
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

theyve computed 6000 based on the lifespan of each member of the family tree mentioned from adam to jesus and 200 years +(plus)

but the question is.. did the bible include everyone.. or just the family tree of the prophets and their descendants for the story of God to hold coherence.

#numbers #666

You know this is a hot question and deserves discussion. If you take the bible counting method than yes, Eth ha Adam was created some 6000 years ago, but the bible also speaks of an age before this age. In Genesis 1:1-2 we are told the earth BECAME without form and was made void. Peter speaks of the age that was, the age that is and the age that is to come.

So, I have no problem with the earth being millions of years old. The young earth theory does bother me, and I recently listened to a lot of those who believe it. I can see why they think dinosaurs were wandering around not long ago given some archeological evidences they show. If you are not familiar with that you can dig em up. It seems Job knew about the animal with a tail as long as a cedar tree which is about 100 ft long. There are some odd old photos of pterodactyl being killed. Were the old legends of dragons about remnant dinosaurs as the word dinosaur did not exist then? I really don't know if St. George killed some nasty man killing dino or little foot.

I don't believe Noah's flood was worldwide as most Christians do believe. I think the worldwide flood was at Genesis 1:1-2. I also believe the bible says God made many races and liked them all just fine. Some were designed for hunting and fishing and then he saw no man to til the ground so he made the man Adam. It's pretty interesting to read it in the original languages. There have been many disasters on earth, many regional floods, and it's quite easy to see how those floods could make massive changes to the Earth suddenly. I always go back to the sudden appearance of so many unique species during the Cambrian age. There should be precursor species to them evolving into them, but they have never been found. Suddenly there are just amazing and different species.

I was hoping you would say that was your reasoning for the Bible calling the earth 6000 years old. Lets look at the verse you brought up. Genesis 1: 1-2 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. So In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Okay does it say that the earth and the heavens were created at the same moment? No it just tells us that this is the beginning for humans. God created the heavens in the beginning the reason earth is still added as something "at the beginning" is because God created the universe with us in mind. Now God never told us how much time elapsed in between the creation of the heavens and the earth, and why should he it has no merit to the Word, so you pulling names out of context and adding their age does absolutely nothing for the age of the earth as per Bible standards.

Peter speaks of the age that was, the age that is and the age that is to come. This show that you have no understanding of Biblical theology, but I will help you out. The age that was...the age before Jesus Christ(Old Covenant style of worship)...the age that is the Church Age(New Covenant)...and the Age that is to come...the Millennium(Christ reigns on earth 1000 years). The three ages are paralleled by the Feast of the Lord The spring feast represent old covenant the summer gap between feast represents the church age and the fall feast represent the age to come. Many other examples but you can find those

As for the flood evidence goes both ways:
We find extensive fossil “graveyards” and exquisitely preserved fossils. For example, billions of nautiloid fossils are found in a layer within the Redwall Limestone of Grand Canyon. This layer was deposited catastrophically by a massive flow of sediment (mostly lime sand). The chalk and coal beds of Europe and the United States, and the fish, ichthyosaurs, insects, and other fossils all around the world, testify of catastrophic destruction and burial.

We find that the sediments in those widespread, rapidly deposited rock layers had to be eroded from distant sources and carried long distances by fast-moving water. For example, the sand for the Coconino Sandstone of Grand Canyon (Arizona) had to be eroded and transported from the northern portion of what is now the United States and Canada. Furthermore, water current indicators (such as ripple marks) preserved in rock layers show that for “300 million years” water currents were consistently flowing from northeast to southwest across all of North and South America, which, of course, is only possible over weeks during a global Flood.

Originally posted by tachyonmind


evolution is the process of maturation, and it never ends.. i believe i came from God and my biological parents, not sludge.. macroevolution has been proven, we discover new variations of species every day..

edit on 29-8-2013 by tachyonmind because: (no reason given)

Yes, exactly we discover new variations of species(Mirco-evolution), not entirely new species(Macro-evolution) and I wouldn't say everyday. Obviously animals can adapt to their environment, but there are always genetic barriers it is impossible for them to cross.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


well put!

the only thing i want to add is the time frames mentioned in the bible are not literal.. for instance, here's a list of what God created on each of the "six days" of creation.. a "day" is the measurement of the length of time of a body's rotation on it's axis, so God, "revolved" six times and then rested..

Day 1: The heavens, the earth, light and darkness.
Day 2: Heaven
Day 3: Dry land, the seas, and vegetation.
Day 4: The sun, the moon and the stars.
Day 5: Living creatures in the water, birds in the air.
Day 6: Land animals and people.
Day 7: God "rested".

and here are the eras of the universe as described by science:

1. planck era (all four known forces are unified) : 10^-43 seconds after the big bang
2. g.u.t (grand unified theory) era (gravity "freezes out" and becomes distinct) : 10^-43 to 10^-38 seconds after b.b.
3. electroweak era (the nuclear strong force "freezes out" and becomes distinct) : 10^-38 to 10^-10 seconds after b.b.
4. particle era (particles begin to form) : 0.001 seconds (1 millisecond) after b.b.
5. era of nucleosynthesis (nuclear fusion creates helium, and tiny amount of heavier elements) : 3 minutes to 500,000 years after b.b.
6. era of nuclei (electrons are not yet bound to nuclei) : 500,000 years after b.b. (note: when we look out into the universe, we can never see back in time beyond 500,000 years, which is the time of last scattering of photons.. earlier than this, we can only see the hot surface of the universe..)
7. era of atoms (electrons recombine to form neutral atoms, and the first stars are born) : 500,000 - 1billion years after b.b
8. era of galaxies (galaxies begin to form, leading up to the present) : 1 billion years after b.b. to present

now where exactly is the conflict? they both describe the same thing in different language..

Originally posted by tachyonmind

Originally posted by ServantOfTheLamb

Originally posted by tachyonmind


there is no difference between micro and macro evolution besides the scale.. are you saying the evolute mutation experienced with the introduction of radiation is not macro? birth defects spanning generations, manifesting in missing fingers, abnormally shaped heads, blindness etc.. if allowed to continue uninhibited you would end up with a new species of human..

interesting link, thankyou.. it doesn't scientifically disprove evolution though, it misunderstands what evolution is..

www.icr.org... Here is your difference between Miro and Macro evolution please read the whole page.

www.icr.org...

edit on 29-8-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

Yes, exactly we discover new variations of species(Mirco-evolution), not entirely new species(Macro-evolution) and I wouldn't say everyday. Obviously animals can adapt to their environment, but there are always genetic barriers it is impossible for them to cross.

new variations of species are macro evolution.. whether we "define" them as a new species or a variation of a previous species, it is still macroevolution..

sure, an organism can only evolve at the rate governed by its genetics, but that does not mean it can not give birth to a variation of its species, which gives birth to a further variation, and so on, until the creature is no longer considered to be the same species as its great great great great^1000 grandparents..

www.icr.org... Here is your difference between Miro and Macro evolution please read the whole page.

www.icr.org...

there is no difference between micro and macro evolution.. here is your lack of difference between micro and macro evolution:

Microevolution is the changes in allele frequencies that occur over time within a population. This change is due to four different processes: mutation, selection (natural and artificial), gene flow, and genetic drift.

Population genetics is the branch of biology that provides the mathematical structure for the study of the process of microevolution. Ecological genetics concerns itself with observing microevolution in the wild. Typically, observable instances of evolution are examples of microevolution; for example, bacterial strains that have antibiotic resistance.

Microevolution over time may lead to speciation or the appearance of novel structure, sometimes classified as macroevolution. Contrary to claims by creationists however, macro and microevolution describe fundamentally identical processes on different time scales.

wikiwikievolveordie