Evolution?

Got a question? We may have some answers!
Forum rules

1) This is a Christian site, respect our beliefs and we will respect yours.

2) This is a family friendly site, no swearing or posting offensive links, pictures, or signatures.

3) Please be respectful of others.

4) Trolls are not welcome and will be dealt with accordingly.

5) No racial comments, jokes or images

6) If you see a dead thread over 6 months old, let it rest in peace

7) No Duplicate posts
User avatar
Lazarus
CCGR addict
Posts: 2169
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:00 am

Re: Evolution?

Postby Lazarus » Tue Jan 31, 2017 11:25 pm

Judge not lest you be shot in head?

User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3350
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:

Re: Evolution?

Postby ArcticFox » Wed Feb 01, 2017 2:35 am

If it's a religion vs. science thing, just admit it.
Part of the thing that fuels these fires is that we're in another culture cycle where too many people believe that religion and science MUST be at odds. Skepticism of one is automatically attributed to the other. For example, 100% of the people with whom I've debated my skepticism of evolution jumped at first to the conclusion that my skepticism was motivated by my beliefs. This was true even in cases where people knew going in that I was a Mormon, and the LDS Church has no doctrine on the matter one way or the other.

By the same token, people whose religion opposes evolution often accuse science of being a tool of the Devil and that leads them to skepticism of other areas of science where skepticism isn't warranted.

I've said a million times on here why I'm skeptical of evolution so I won't repeat it again now. Suffice to say I'm as annoyed as you are when people reference "science" that says humans rode dinosaurs and that the planet has only been here for a few thousand years. That makes me withdraw from the discussion because that automatically makes it a religion vs science debate and I have no taste for it.

I love religion and I love science. I see no reason why they must be in conflict. It's why I loved the original Cosmos hosted by Carl Sagan and have no patience for the new one produced by Seth MacFarlane. The old one just said what it had to say and felt no need to dig at religion. The new one can't seem to stop.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2915
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: Evolution?

Postby Sstavix » Wed Feb 01, 2017 5:24 am

Maybe it's my Scottish heritage, (John Locke, woot!) but I agree with you, AF. There's no reason, in my mind, why science, religion and philosophy can't work together.

Science addresses the physical state of the universe around us. We can use science to understand how things work, and use the knowledge that we gain to improve our physical lives.

Religion addresses the unseen aspects of our environment - our spiritual development, our reason for being, and the existence of the soul. For those questions that science can't answer - and yes, science cannot answer EVERY question - that's where religion comes in.

Philosophy is the third arm of trying to make sense of the universe, but offers very few answers. Instead, it focuses on the creative approaches, the "what if" scenarios. Sometimes the questions will remain unanswered, because there are no satisfactory answers. Other times, the answers will be discovered by exploring one - or both - of the other two options. Philosophy is the most creative of the three, and is what prompts innovations and advancements through the other two.

Trying to use one of the sides of this metaphorical triangle won't help to answer questions posed by the other sides. You can't scientifically prove the existence of the soul. You can't compute the effects of a supernova on a solar system by searching the scriptures. Unfortunately, people are attempting to do just this, and it's the reason why there is so much frustration and confusion between religion and science. It's like trying to describe how the color red tastes, or the smell of a dog's bark. Yet people keep applying the wrong tools to the questions. It makes no sense to me.
And to me, that always brings up the question. Even when I called myself a skeptic of evolution, so many creationists were so convinced that Evolution was wrong. I grew up with creationist textbooks, I'm still unsure what truly convinced them that Evolution was wrong, outside of their reading of scripture. And it's best to be honest, if it's your religion, own it. Be upfront and honest on why. If it's a religion vs. science thing, just admit it.
I've laid out my own thoughts about evolution above - it doesn't have anything to do with my religion. The science just doesn't add up to me. It requires a leap of faith, and that isn't a scientific approach, in my mind. I'm willing to accept that evolution is a theory, but I'm not going to take it as literal fact at this point.

Another factor may be my own interest in comparative theologies. Most - if not all - religions have their own stories about how the world and people were created. Thing is, no one was around to chronicle what was happening at the time, so who's to say that any of those accounts are correct? Or even if science has it right? For all we know, we could have all been created 20 minutes ago, and all of our thoughts, experiences and memories created along with them. Do we have any proof that I'm wrong? No? Then maybe I'm right! ;)

But another big part of my response is that I regard the debate as highly irrelevant. Whether we're the creation of a kind and loving Heavenly Father, or all descended from monkeys (or, in my case, dinosaurs), it doesn't matter to me. It's interesting to speculate on, but I think our time would be better spent on figuring out where we're going, rather than where we've been. After all, until someone invents the TARDIS, we're only traveling one direction through time....

User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3350
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:

Re: Evolution?

Postby ArcticFox » Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:57 pm

I've laid out my own thoughts about evolution above - it doesn't have anything to do with my religion. The science just doesn't add up to me. It requires a leap of faith, and that isn't a scientific approach, in my mind.
This. This all day long.

A friend of mine who is a high school biology teacher and I were debating the issue once. I pointed out that people were making certain assumptions despite there being massive holes and gaps in the fossil record. His response: We'll find them. Just because we haven't found them yet doesn't mean they don't exist.

That is a statement of faith, not science.

And that's the problem. The Scientific Method is applied in a very sloppy, very casual way when it comes to Evolution Theory. It's as if the theory itself is being taken as an axiom and everything else is built around it.

My daughter loves to watch Brain Games... a TV show that interactively teaches about how the brain works, how our perceptions are formed, etc. It's really interesting and educational, but what grates on me is that every single segment ends with speculation about how and why evolution must have formed our brain to do this and that. No research is done, no studies... it's just assumed that it MUST have originated from evolution which itself is presented as an axiom. Then it's just a matter of speculating something that sounds smart.

"Our brain fills in the missing information in our field of view because as we evolved, it allowed us to focus more on the important things when hunting or gathering."

Utter speculation, but go ahead and question it in front of a Tyson acolyte or two and watch them start having a fit, and see who they accuse of being an unscientific "SCIENCE DENIER!"
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2915
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: Evolution?

Postby Sstavix » Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:23 am

Just because we haven't found them yet doesn't mean they don't exist.
Have you ever been tempted to say "Funny, that's what some people say about God...." :wink:

User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3350
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:

Re: Evolution?

Postby ArcticFox » Fri Feb 03, 2017 9:01 pm

Just because we haven't found them yet doesn't mean they don't exist.
Have you ever been tempted to say "Funny, that's what some people say about God...." :wink:
I have LOL. It's funny how sometimes the enthusiasm for defending evolution theory starts to resemble a religious zeal. Question it at your peril. The justification for this is, of course, that it's the truth and you have to be foolish for not accepting it, but then I wonder what Galileo would say to that.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens

User avatar
Double_Pixel
Noob
Noob
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2017 11:05 pm

Re: Evolution?

Postby Double_Pixel » Tue Jun 13, 2017 10:46 pm

Greetings,

Just to add my 2 cents. A Christian has no problem studying both Creationism and Evolutionism. They are able to view both sides with an open mind in how well they explain the evidence found. An Evolutionist will block knowledge about Creationism as it is to be considered foolishness without merit. You may be interested in looking up Ian Juby (Wazooloo) on YouTube. He did a series of videos on Creation that explains the evidence from the Creationists view and shows the unspoken holes in the Evolutionists "theories". It is a very good series that I intend on teaching a class on at my church in the future. He also has a series of "Rants" that are also quite informative - and funny. :-)

I also have my son learn about Evolutionism in school and understand how they think. It allows him to be able to understand their arguments better and to see the holes in their explanations more easily.


Take care and have a good day.

RemnantRD
Noob
Noob
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:40 am

Re: Evolution?

Postby RemnantRD » Mon Aug 28, 2017 2:23 am

As has been said before, the concept of evolution has multiple issues when it comes to viewing things on a macro level. Darwinian evolution has 0 ability to be proven as it cannot be tested. People often use microevolution as a way to support macroevolution, but we have 0 evidence of a "kind" of animal changing into a different "kind" of animal.

To be honest, the concept of evolution was created to explain God's Creation. It is man's attempt to understand the origin of the universe and the earth. Darwinian evolution creates a large picture full of open ended answers which can be grasped by esoteric ways of thinking... all in opposition to the fact that God is the Creator.

Many churches have also compromised in this sense as they have tried to integrate Darwinian evolution into their model of Creation. This is mainly to appease the world as there is less blowback from the world when we begin to incorporate the world's views into the church. However, as scripture tells us, friendship with the world is enmity with God. To be carnally minded is death. How then can we try to harmonize the fact that God created the world and the universe in 6 days with 1 day of rest with the theory of billions of years? There was no death before Adam, thus how could we have billions of years of evolutionary death and adaptation within the Creation historical account? Darwinian macroevolution is completely incompatible with our understanding of God and the Scriptures.

Microevolution, on the other hand, has merit. We can see changes in organisms over successive generations, but the plain fact of the matter is that these organisms are still the same "kind" of organism. We have seen speciation from the original canines found on the ark, but they are still.... canines.

Macroevolution is simply one step in a long process where God has been undermined by secular society. As Christians, we have the responsibility to stand for God's truth. Scripture and the Holy Spirit are the final arbiter when it comes to understanding what is in fact truth or error. Let us stand and reason together in God's truth, and not the truth given to us by the world and our own understanding.

User avatar
evered
Master Gamer
Master Gamer
Posts: 623
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 2:45 am
Location: Xork

Re: Evolution?

Postby evered » Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:12 am

Okay, let's think about this.

If you believe in le Bible:

In the Bible it says the world was created by God and Adam and Eve were in the garden right? How is there any proof in there having evolution in the past time? Second, if man came from monkeys why is there many different breeds of monkeys and apes? What about the animals BEFORE the actual flood from Noah?

If you don't:

Okay so there has been findings of mammoth foot prints next to man. And is there any fossils with a half man half monkey dude?! No! No there hasn't! Till I see that I don't believe what these silly sausage scientists say! Also, the deer has spots on her back when she is born. ON MAY! Only God would have such timing and detail! No big old blob made us! God our Lord and savior did. No matter how many times I hear people say the Big Bang did it. God will always find a way to show us the truth.

Thank you for reading this. Have a wonderful day! And may the Lord bless you and keep you. :)

-Heidi

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2915
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: Evolution?

Postby Sstavix » Mon Aug 28, 2017 3:23 pm


Okay so there has been findings of mammoth foot prints next to man. And is there any fossils with a half man half monkey dude?! No! No there hasn't!
Erm... hate to burst your bubble, but that's what scientists think Neanderthals and their predecessors are. While they are still looking for "the missing link," which actually would firmly tie monkeys to humans, they do believe that these are the ancestors of humanity.
Also, the deer has spots on her back when she is born. ON MAY!
Actually, the deer are even more bizarre than that! A deer can get pregnant at any time, but when the season gets to the point where food is scarce - such as winter - she somehow has the ability to actually put her pregnancy on pause until the situation improves.

Incidentally, the whole evolution debate, in my opinion, has proof that God has a sense of humor. Primarily in the form of the platypus.

Think about it - you have a creature which lays eggs but nurses its young like a mammal. It has the tail of a beaver but the mouth of a duck. And the males actually have venomous spurs which contain snake venom. And they have been this way for thousands of years - according to some fossil records, all the way back when there was a single supercontinent on the Earth (in other words, predating humans, according to evolutionary theory!) So what evolutionary theory can explain... that thing?!? But you can't deny that such a thing can exist when you can physically hold one of these creatures in your hands.

Plus, they're funny looking. Amazing animals, actually, but goofy.

RemnantRD
Noob
Noob
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:40 am

Re: Evolution?

Postby RemnantRD » Mon Aug 28, 2017 5:55 pm

Erm... hate to burst your bubble, but that's what scientists think Neanderthals and their predecessors are. While they are still looking for "the missing link," which actually would firmly tie monkeys to humans, they do believe that these are the ancestors of humanity.
What is interesting about all of that is that most of the "fossils" of ancient man have been found to be fabricated. DNA evidence and bone examinations have shown that many of the Neanderthals and early humans have simian bones added to the skeletons to promote the idea that these are early humans based on posture and "transitional" states. Even Lucy the Australopithecus is questioned for validity. The pilt down man is another known hoax.

User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2915
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Idaho!

Re: Evolution?

Postby Sstavix » Tue Aug 29, 2017 4:50 am

Erm... hate to burst your bubble, but that's what scientists think Neanderthals and their predecessors are. While they are still looking for "the missing link," which actually would firmly tie monkeys to humans, they do believe that these are the ancestors of humanity.
What is interesting about all of that is that most of the "fossils" of ancient man have been found to be fabricated. DNA evidence and bone examinations have shown that many of the Neanderthals and early humans have simian bones added to the skeletons to promote the idea that these are early humans based on posture and "transitional" states. Even Lucy the Australopithecus is questioned for validity. The pilt down man is another known hoax.
Interesting - I didn't know that! But still, I would imagine that there are many scientists who insist that these anthropological discoveries are not hoaxes and the science is valid.

Probably some of the same scientists who insist that manmade climate change is real, too. ;)

DandiestBerry68
Noob
Noob
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 7:10 pm

Re: Evolution?

Postby DandiestBerry68 » Mon Jan 01, 2018 11:04 pm

There is a lot of misconception over evolution. I am an evolutionary christian, my gf is a creationist. I would suggest taking a college ev. bio. course if you can, otherwise i've read THE FIRST BRAIN and THE WATERS EDGE and they are full of information. I believe early/old Bible books are part of the Jewish storytelling tradition, and full of truth, but are not historical per se.
Hope those sources help.
B

User avatar
Rachel1701
Noob
Noob
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:03 pm

Re: Evolution?

Postby Rachel1701 » Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:16 pm

I can't really say if evolution happened or not. I think that if it did happen, that it doesn't mean God isn't necessary. God is awesome, he could have used evolution if he wanted to.

RemnantRD
Noob
Noob
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2017 1:40 am

Re: Evolution?

Postby RemnantRD » Sun Apr 29, 2018 4:04 am

God can indeed use anything. It doesn't mean that He will or does.
I am someone who is very scientifically minded. My course of study in university was steeped in science... yet I truly believe in the 100% absolute truth found in the bible and the historical narrative given to us from the first Yom (Day) of Creation until the end. How is this possible? Because the bible does not contradict science. In fact, the Bible upholds science and even gave scientific truth before the world's scientists came up with their conclusions.

Macroevolution/Darwinian Evolution at its very core is unprovable via the scientific method. This is why it is still a theory. It is a narrative that the world has come up with to explain God's creation and remove God from the equation. There is a very important pattern to the 7 literal days of Creation and they serve an important purpose. One very clear point is that God uses it to establish His Sabbath/rest. Another is that it provides unequivocal proof of His power.

Job 38:1-7 NKJV
38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
2 “Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?


Return to “Spiritual Matters”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron