Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It is ironic how some of the replies are from non-believers, and yet this thread was posted in the Christian sub forum: not in the Athiests and the Agnostics forum acting if I had challenged them or even had addressed them from the OP.
The OP is addressing the concern regarding believers and the evolution theory... and how the Bible is the guide and the means for discernment between good and evil with the Lord's help exposing false teachings, fables, and other lies that are in the world.
Jesus held the authority of the scriptures over the words of man. We should be noting that fact as we are living in this world being flooded by the lies of the world through the media and false prophets coming into the churches.
The call is for believers to go to Jesus Christ for help and discernment in seeking the answers we need by the scriptures. May you trust Him to be Your Good Shepherd in helping you to see that we are to know Him through the scriptures: not by mockers running amok in science, falsely so called.... that has turned many away from the faith.
The world does not want believers to turn to Jesus Christ and the King James Bible for the meat of God's words, hence proven by the distractions in this thread.
Keep your eyes on Jesus. As no lie can be of the truth.. the truth shall set you free from the deceitful doctrines and fables of man.
1 John 2:21I have not written unto you because ye know not thetruth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth....27But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.
I confess, my question was flip. But this discussion was becoming quite circular.
I frankly enjoy respectful input from our atheist friends.
Nevertheless, I understand and respect your views. But I'm of the belief that science can in fact enlighten religion. ( look at Galileo )
God bless good science. Afterall it's composed of people with a genuine curiosity of God's creation. Although I suspect most scientists would describe their motivations differently.
Let all scientists have complete freedom to discuss and discover whatever they want. And I'm convinced that the truths of God's creation will be revealed. And may in fact help remove the veils of scriptural interpretation.
I confess, my question was flip. But this discussion was becoming quite circular.
The OP was pointing believers to go to Jesus Christ and the Bible for the truths in God's words as the final authority in reproving the works of darkness for what it is.
Quote:
I frankly enjoy respectful input from our atheist friends.
I do not see the replies in here as respectful input.. and...a word of caution in our relations to the world.
James 4: 4Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
Quote:
Nevertheless, I understand and respect your views. But I'm of the belief that science can in fact enlighten religion. ( look at Galileo )
God bless good science. Afterall it's composed of people with a genuine curiosity of God's creation. Although I suspect most scientists would describe their motivations differently.
There is good science, and there is bad science. Evolution is bad science.
Quote:
Let all scientists have complete freedom to discuss and discover whatever they want. And I'm convinced that the truths of God's creation will be revealed. And may in fact help remove the veils of scriptural interpretation.
Are you hoping that all scientists will have complete academic freedom or are you under the impression that there is one currently?
In any event, Bible VS science falsely so called in the evolution theory.
The Bible wins for me as I thank the Lord Jesus Christ for showing me the truth in His words.
All this thread is for is reminding believers of the Truth and Who to go to for the truths that can be found in His words.
Darwin predicted geologists would find a host of missing links which would construct a great chain of life from the earliest organisms to mankind. Darwin explains that his is a real problem for his view a little more than a decade after the initial release of "Origin of Species".
Well, it's quite obvious from the very beginning that your wealth of scientific knowledge is not only severely limited but more or less absent altogether. For starters, geologists do not go around digging for fossils. That would chiefly be the job of paleontologists although archaeologists may sometimes come up with rare but priceless findings. Geologists tend to study natural formations of the Earth such as rock formations. Yes, anyone could find a fossil including you, me or any geologist. But, the chief inspectors who would analyze those fossils would be paleontologists (and in the case of human evolution sometimes what we refer to as paleo-anthropologists). Already, I'm highly suspicious of your post for lack of even the simplest understanding of who examines what.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
He noted this problem:
Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain: and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory?
Yes, and you only quoted part of the paragraph. I could probably do a hack and slash job of quoting what you say and spin you into some Christian fundamentalist nutjob - but, I digress. The two sentences that follow your lame copy and paste job are key here. They say:
The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record. In the first place, it should always be borne in mind what sort of intermediate forms must, on the theory, have formerly existed...
In other words... Darwin was pointing out that the geological record (where we find fossils - geological columns, formations, etc...) is far from perfect. Not every geological event in history provided optimal conditions for fossilization. If we were to bury a lizard in the Gobi desert today, chances are that in several million years, the Gobi desert would probably not be what it is today. Nonetheless, the conditions for "fossil production" in the Gobi Desert are pretty slim to none in this day and age. Thus, if several million years from now we were trying to find fossils in a geological stratum of today's modern day Gobi Desert, we would probably not find as much of what we were hoping for. In effect, a lizard in the Gobi Desert today that could be considered an evolutionary ancestor of a millions of years from now lizard-like creature would more than likely either be very difficult to find or lost forever. That does not mean our lizard friend never existed, it's just that the optimal conditions for its fossilization were never around in the first place.
That being said, we have found and made enormous progress in our fossil finds over the past century and a half since Darwin wrote what he did. Even if Darwin had not added those last two sentences, we could promptly consider him wrong about his assumptions based on the extraordinary number of fossil finds we have today. For your information, those fossils are available in numerous museums around the world for your viewing. To deny that these fossils exist is not only stupid but extremely irresponsible for trying to push across your viewpoint. At the very least, try to have some semblance of honesty behind what you're posting. Then again, for someone who thinks geologists look for fossils, I expect your ignorance on the topic to be the birthplace of your lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
The popular phrase which sums up Darwin's view is "amoeba to man" evolution. The problem for Darwin's theory is that geologists haven't found the many missing links he predicted would be found. More than a hundred years of geological research has failed to confirm his theory.
This is utter nonsense and completely irresponsible of you to assert such bloviated rhetoric and lies. The popular CREATIONIST phrase is "amoeba to man." That does not encapsulate or encompass Darwin's theory in any respect unless it is to denigrate it. It provides the false illusion that one day, if we wait for millions and billions of years, an amoeba will suddenly turn into a man. That is NOT what Darwin envisioned and yet, for some reason, people from the far Christian right continue to try and pursue their OWN conception of what evolution is and not what Darwin had in mind. Try to get a better understanding of the actual topic - not what some mindless retard working at the Discovery Institute lies about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
Stephen Gould, the prominent evolutionary biologist, emphasizes the problem for Darwin's evolution here:
The absence of fossil evidence from intermediary stages between major and minor transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.
I would be downright embarassed to have falsely, deliberately, and stupidly quoted not just one but two people entirely out of context to get my point across. Is this what you must resort to in order to get your point across? Is this what they teach you to do in Church? I'm sure Jesus would be proud to see you lie for his cause. The actual quote is as such (not that I expect you to actually understand the differences between gradualism and punctuated equilibrium - indeed, you even express your ignorance in the next few paragraphs by more faulty lies and misnomers - which I will soon get to):
The saltational initiation of major transitions: The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary states between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution. St. George Mivart (1871), Darwin's most cogent critic, referred to it as the dilemma of "the incipient stages of useful structures" -- of what possible benefit to a reptile is two percent of a wing? The dilemma has two potential solutions. The first, preferred by Darwinians because it preserves both gradualism and adaptation, is the principle of preadaptation: the intermediate stages functioned in another way but were, by good fortune in retrospect, pre-adapted to a new role they could play only after greater elaboration. Thus, if feathers first functioned "for" insulation and later "for" the trapping of insect prey (Ostrom 1979) a proto-wing might be built without any reference to flight.
I do not doubt the supreme importance of preadaptation, but the other alternative, treated with caution, reluctance, disdain or even fear by the modern synthesis, now deserves a rehearing in the light of renewed interest in development: perhaps, in many cases, the intermediates never existed. I do not refer to the saltational origin of entire new designs, complete in all their complex and integrated features -- a fantasy that would be truly anti-Darwinian in denying any creativity to selection and relegating it to the role of eliminating new models. Instead, I envisage a potential saltational origin for the essential features of key adaptations. Why may we not imagine that gill arch bones of an ancestral agnathan moved forward in one step to surround the mouth and form proto-jaws? Such a change would scarcely establish the Bauplan of the gnathostomes. So much more must be altered in the reconstruction of agnathan design -- the building of a true shoulder girdle with bony, paired appendages, to say the least. But the discontinuous origin of a proto-jaw might set up new regimes of development and selection that would quickly lead to other, coordinated modifications."
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
In order to explain this embarrassing reality, evolutionists have developed a new theory of biological evolution called "punctuated equilibrium". This theory contends that species remain relatively unchanged for long periods of time. When substantial changes between the species do occur, they happen very fast, so fast we are left with virtually no fossil documentation in the geological record.
Wrong again. Stop lying! It's getting annoying. Though Gould and Eldridge's proposition does hinge largely on their cognition that large periods of stasis dominate the fossil record, it doesn't say anything for whether or not evolution happens. It's absolutely because of intermediates in the fossil record that Gould and Eldridge were able to formulate their theory. What they did notice is that throughout periods of geological time, many species appeared to be relatively unchanged. Then, within brief geological time (perhaps a few million years) sporadic and abrupt changes are noticed within the fossil record.
My personal standpoint is that gradualism and punctuated equilibrium work in conjunction with one another. Some evolutionary biologists, such as Richard Dawkins, are very strict gradualists and, in my opinion, give an unfair assessment of punctuated equilibrium. Though we might not know for certain the exact timing mechanisms of evolution (is it completely gradual or completely punctual?) it says nothing to the fact that evolution does occur.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
This development is an admission that the fossil record shows nothing about the origin of species except when the species were created. Geology continues to provide a heavy and reasonable argument against Darwin's biological evolution.
No, geology doesn't. If anything, geology continues to support the evolutionary theory despite your confusion over what constitutes geology and what constitutes biology, paleontology, etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
What Darwin thought were the earliest and simplest forms of life involved remarkable complexity. Darwin could never have dreamed that the most basic living organisms are intricate systems involve perfectly functional components. This complexity cannot be explained by gradual development over time, because all the components must be present and perfectly functional for these organisms to have existed at all.
This is complete nonsense and complete garbage. There are overwhelming scientific papers, examples, and explanations of precisely how complexity can and will arise from simpler systems. I can go into intricate detail about this if you prefer...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sciotamicks
Many scientists today, are in fact developing a formidable case that even the most basic life forms involve "irreducible complexity". This implies that incremental biological evolution over time, as Darwin and evolutionists conceive(d) it, is simply impossible.
Some of them may hold the title of "scientist." That doesn't mean they have asserted an ounce of actual scientific proof to prove their assertions. Science does not consist of scientists just "saying stuff." It consists of scientists using the scientific method to come to their conclusion. Thus far, I have yet to find an Intelligent Design proponent that has properly used the scientific method to assert their Intelligent Design propaganda. This was most noticeable in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School Board trial in Dover, Pennsylvania where Intelligent Design proponents (I hesitate to even call them scientists) perjured themselves to lie for Jesus rather than make honest conclusions based on the scientific method.
Note to all believers that we are not to strive with man when it is obvious that they are not seeking God nor care for the truths in His words. The Lord shall be Your Good Shepherd in letting you know when to dust off your feet when those you minister in serving Him are protesting way too much.
Galatians 1: 9As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. 10For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. 11But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
And the evolution theory is after man.
2 Timothy 4:3For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; 4And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. 5But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.
Theists should beware....
Titus 1: 13This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; 14Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth. 15Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. 16They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.
No one can deny the effects of the evolution theory in turning some from Jesus Christ.
James 3:17But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
1 Timothy 5:20Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. 21I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.
There can be no middle ground for the evolution theory for that leaves the door wide open for mockers and the devil to turn some from Him through deceit.
For all believers that want the truth about the evolution theory... Jesus is the Truth. He referred to the first man and the first marriage... not an ape nor anything else down the imaginary pike. Jesus spoke of Noah and the Flood which is continuously denied by the evolution theory.
For all believers in Jesus Christ.... there should be no contest about the evolution theory for it is false. Rest in Jesus Christ and His words to expose the works of darkness in the world. May He help you to see the truth so that the truth may set you free.
Nearly 12,000 Christian clergy have signed the Christian clergy letter, which affirms that ”the theory of evolution is a foundational scientific truth, one that has stood up to rigorous scrutiny and upon which much of human knowledge and achievement rests.”
Over 400 rabbis have signed the Jewish clergy letter, which affirms that ”It is possible to be inspired by the religious teachings of the Bible while not taking a literalist approach and while accepting the validity of science including the foundational concept of evolution.” The Clergy Letter Project
I believe eventually all but the most extreme of religions will join in accepting the facts of evolution.
and to quote the bible, it took 6 "yoems" to create the world.
Sure it did, but what is a yoem?
It can mean, day, season, time, and period. Depending on the context. Now don't get me wrong, I believe the creation story is a pattern for the covenantal sabbath week, this is in stone. This I do not deny one bit.
Before 1830, and before Ellen G White, the majority of Christians believed the earth to be very old, the flood was local, and the six "day" pattern, was beyond the day interpretation. Just some thoughts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
