|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/17/2008 3:44:49 PM
|
|
|
EcclesFruitcake
Posts: 34
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
Young Earth Creation is laughed at and rejected because it does not agree with the world-view of the person doing the laughing, regardless of the data presented. Plain and simple.
No it (YEC) is laughed at and rejected because the best scientific minds overwhelmingly agree that it is not the least bit scientific.
You are too kind. I think scientists generally and rightfully ignore YECists...
anyway I'm off to find my local 'best scientific mind' to see what else I am allowed to laugh at.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/17/2008 4:00:20 PM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
I like how you and drmark don't want to address what I've said about Biblical exegesis. I've written two long posts about it, about the nature of Biblical language as it relates to revelation, truth and God, and how the inproper reading of the Biblical is the only reason we are here discussing these banal and laughable "scientific" theories.
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
quote:
ORIGINAL: Nothingman
The ONLY reason people don't accept OE is because of their dogmatics. It isn't a science issue, its a religious issue.
You are correct. Acceptance and rejection of evolution is a religious (world-view) issue.
But that's not what you meant. What you intended to say was that creationists do not have scientific arguments against evolution, which is exactly what I was talking about before. Topics have been raised that are critical of evolution, and you say that those arguments don't exist. Some people aren't interested in finding the truth, they only want to defend evolution. That's why you said that this is a religious issue and not a scientific one, but correct me if I'm wrong.
No, I didn't mean that. I said the only reason people don't accept the science behind OE is because of their dogmatics. I did not say there isn't science to support YE. There is. I've explored it. I was taught it during my entire high school days. I've grown up in the "fundamentalist" movement and have had PLENTY of exposure to the "science" and reasons why evolution and OE is just a humanistic plot. There is science to support YE. Its just that the science is wrong. This isn't a worldview/religious argument. The science stands on its own. Its wrong. No one can take it seriously anymore because the topic has been so exhausted in the science community. What I mean by when I say its a religious issue is that the science (the bad science) comes about by scientists who prima facie, a priori, conclusively decide that the earth is young because of their Genesis exegesis. THEN they try to find theories to support it. THAT is terrible science.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/17/2008 6:35:58 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
quote:
You do reject science and science has uniformly rejected your interpretation of genesis. Thats fine if you want to believe that, but you don't get to cry atheistic conspiracies when its laughed and rejected in the science curriculum. The majority of Christians have grown in their understanding of God that allows both science and creation story to coexist in harmony. Yes, of course. I appear to have left my aluminum helmet off and you've read my mind and now know that I actually hate science despite the fact that I am seeking a biology major, and currently putting off doing research for a project in my Plant Anatomy and Development class. Aw, don't feel so bad, DanJ, at least Nothingman is an equal-opportunity slanderer when he has no effective argument with which to respond. Just look back at post #194 where I'm called ridiculous for thinking that science is some big atheist conspiracy. Of course, when the "best scientific minds" (as cow puts it) have no effective rebuttals, one wonders just exactly what is meant by "best"!
quote:
There is not one non-literalism scientist who think the world is young. The ones that are have accepted their conclusions from the outset and desperately are trying to bend the data to that conclusion. If you really think the age of the earth is a hotly contested debate simply with different interpreations, some thinking old, some new, then you're - and pardon my french - simply deluded and ignorant. There is not one OE scientist who thinks that Genesis is the historically accurate account of origins. The ones that are have accepted their conclusions from the outset and desperately are trying to bend the Scriptural text to that conclusion. If you really think the proper exegesis of Genesis is a hotly contested debate simply with different interpretations, some thinking literal, some allegorical, then you're - and pardon my french - simply deluded and ignorant.
quote:
Why is evolution and God untenable? Use some imagination... No imagination required, Nothingman! It's right there in His authoritative, inerrant account of life's origins. God specifically tells us he created life according to its own kinds in three days. No zillions of years of evolution whatsoever! I believe Him, why don't you?
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/17/2008 6:45:45 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
I like how you and drmark don't want to address what I've said about Biblical exegesis. I've written two long posts about it, about the nature of Biblical language as it relates to revelation, truth and God, and how the inproper reading of the Biblical is the only reason we are here discussing these banal and laughable "scientific" theories. I've addressed it numerous times, Nothingman. You do not like my answer because it doesn't fit your worldview. The religion of evolutionism requires incorrect hermeneutics to sustain Scriptural support for zillions of years. There's really not much I can do about your "improper reading of the Biblical" which has led you to "these banal and laughable 'scientific' theories" of evolution.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 4:49:48 AM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
drmark, i have two question.
one: because the issue actually is over exegesis, do you think we should perhaps have a more thorough and nuanced discussion on that topic elsewhere?
two: did you ever get the chance to take a geography course while you were in university?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 8:35:34 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
one: because the issue actually is over exegesis, do you think we should perhaps have a more thorough and nuanced discussion on that topic elsewhere? No, the issue is actually over worldview perspective, but evolutionists almost universally deny this fact! However, I would be delighted to discuss correct exegesis of Genesis 1-11 in The Bible threads and I've suggested this many times before in other discussions. Please feel free to start a new thread there.
quote:
two: did you ever get the chance to take a geography course while you were in university? Geography is rarely taught at the college level in the USA. I assume most American educators feel students receive adequate instruction in elementary and middle school curricula. What aspects of "advanced" geography would be relevant to theistic evolution? ( I sense a kangaroo discourse on the way  )
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 10:16:47 AM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 434
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: cow451
quote:
ORIGINAL: DanJames
Young Earth Creation is laughed at and rejected because it does not agree with the world-view of the person doing the laughing, regardless of the data presented. Plain and simple.
No it (YEC) is laughed at and rejected because the best scientific minds overwhelmingly agree that it is not the least bit scientific.
Gosh, I never thought of that. Guess I'll become an evolutionist.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 10:20:42 AM
|
|
|
DanJames
Posts: 434
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
quote:
You do reject science and science has uniformly rejected your interpretation of genesis. Thats fine if you want to believe that, but you don't get to cry atheistic conspiracies when its laughed and rejected in the science curriculum. The majority of Christians have grown in their understanding of God that allows both science and creation story to coexist in harmony. Yes, of course. I appear to have left my aluminum helmet off and you've read my mind and now know that I actually hate science despite the fact that I am seeking a biology major, and currently putting off doing research for a project in my Plant Anatomy and Development class. Aw, don't feel so bad, DanJ, at least Nothingman is an equal-opportunity slanderer when he has no effective argument with which to respond. Just look back at post #194 where I'm called ridiculous for thinking that science is some big atheist conspiracy. Of course, when the "best scientific minds" (as cow puts it) have no effective rebuttals, one wonders just exactly what is meant by "best"!
I'm not worried, I'm wearing my aluminum helmet today. Those atheistic conspirators aren't going to abscond with my thoughts today!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 2:46:23 PM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
No, the issue is actually over worldview perspective, but evolutionists almost universally deny this fact! However, I would be delighted to discuss correct exegesis of Genesis 1-11 in The Bible threads and I've suggested this many times before in other discussions. Please feel free to start a new thread there.
evolutionists aren't a categorical that seperate the sheep from the goats, so to speak. Its a "worldview" thing in as such as the heliocentric theory was a "worldview" issue back in the day. Do you realize how many, the majority in fact, of Christians are also "evolutionists"? You're making a false dichotomy of the matter...
quote:
Geography is rarely taught at the college level in the USA. I assume most American educators feel students receive adequate instruction in elementary and middle school curricula. What aspects of "advanced" geography would be relevant to theistic evolution? ( I sense a kangaroo discourse on the way )
I'm not sure what a kangaroo discourse is but they are interesting animals so I'm game. hmm, that's too bad. If you ever have a relaxed work scheduale in the near future, I suggest you take one. You might find the science fairly interesting and compelling as to what it reveals about the nature of the planet we live on. That's all.
I don't feel like getting in more shouting matches and I'm sure you don't either. But I'll say what my experience has been. I had to take three science courses to fill my requisites in university. I took them in geography. I think if anyone does that there would be no other way to understand this rock otherthan that...its very old...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 2:49:17 PM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
I'm not worried, I'm wearing my aluminum helmet today. Those atheistic conspirators aren't going to abscond with my thoughts today!
does it make any difference to you the fact that millions of Christians are also evolutionists? and that in the worldwide Christian community the YEC are the minority? There is no reason to falsing view the matter as an "atheistic vs theistist" issue...it simply isn't true...
Except maybe in Biblebelt U.S.A
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:07:55 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
I know enough statistics to be wary of surveys and polls, but I'm really tiring of your unsubstantiated claims that you like to use in order to define truth by majority opinion. Here is one of the more recent polls I quickly found which shows the majority of evangelical Christians do not believe in Darwinian evolution. Of course, you may quickly find your pet survey to refute this finding, much like you may find your pet scientist to refute YEC science. The fact remains that the veracity of God's Word is not determined by popular vote!
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:18:27 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 511
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I know enough statistics to be wary of surveys and polls, but I'm really tiring of your unsubstantiated claims that you like to use in order to define truth by majority opinion. Here is one of the more recent polls I quickly found which shows the majority of evangelical Christians do not believe in Darwinian evolution. Of course, you may quickly find your pet survey to refute this finding, much like you may find your pet scientist to refute YEC science. The fact remains that the veracity of God's Word is not determined by popular vote!
Evangelical Christians don't believe in evolution? Gee, who woulda thunk?
Take a look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/08/14/science/sciencespecial2/20050815_EVO_GRAPHIC.html
Now realize that the USA is consistently slipping to other nations in the areas of science and math.
Along with our shoddy education system, we now have to contend with the literalists doing everything they can to tear down and weaken the institution of science.
But hey... at least we beat Turkey!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:21:07 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Now realize that the USA is consistently slipping to other nations in the areas of science and math.
Along with our shoddy education system, we now have to contend with the literalists doing everything they can to tear down and weaken the institution of science.
That's a myth and a logical fallacy. You presume we are slipping because you presume evolution to be scientific fact; that begs the question.
And there is no indication that our beliefs about evolution are causing us harm in any other area of science or scholarship.
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:23:14 PM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
Evangelical Christians don't believe in evolution? Gee, who woulda thunk? Apparently Nothingman has this incorrect idea.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:26:47 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3683
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
I know enough statistics to be wary of surveys and polls, but I'm really tiring of your unsubstantiated claims that you like to use in order to define truth by majority opinion. Here is one of the more recent polls I quickly found which shows the majority of evangelical Christians do not believe in Darwinian evolution. Of course, you may quickly find your pet survey to refute this finding, much like you may find your pet scientist to refute YEC science. The fact remains that the veracity of God's Word is not determined by popular vote!
Doc, you may both be right. One survey found that 66% of Americans believe in creationism and 53% believe in evolution. Some quick math makes that total 119% (not counting Don't know  ). The polls validate my contention that most Americans are poorly educated in both science and religion. And, as you are correct to point out, truth is not determined by polls.
_____________________________
Wenn zuerst Sie nicht gelingen, Versuch, versuch wieder. Geben Sie dann auf. Es gibt keinen punkt, in ein zu sein, verdammt Narren darum. -- W. C. Fields
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:27:26 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 511
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: drmark
quote:
Evangelical Christians don't believe in evolution? Gee, who woulda thunk? Apparently Nothingman has this incorrect idea.
He just said Christians.
Roman Catholicism is the largest denomination of Christianity in the world, and has no problem with evolution. I often wish they would be more pro-active in being missionaries in this country. Instead they've given up the airwaves to the likes of the evangelical (and often corrupt) televangelist charlatans who bring people (and dollars) in by the millions to their 'flock'.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:29:54 PM
|
|
|
drj11
Posts: 511
Joined: 3/29/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Jhud
That's a myth and a logical fallacy. You presume we are slipping because you presume evolution to be scientific fact; that begs the question.
And there is no indication that our beliefs about evolution are causing us harm in any other area of science or scholarship.
Its pretty widely accepted, america is slipping in its standing with other nations in regards to science and math.
In my view, its obvious that biblical literalism and the rise of the evangelical movements only serves to worsen this problem, though that is just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 3:47:21 PM
|
|
|
Jhud
Posts: 6770
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Lake Wobegon
Status: offline
|
quote:
Its pretty widely accepted, america is slipping in its standing with other nations in regards to science and math.
In my view, its obvious that biblical literalism and the rise of the evangelical movements only serves to worsen this problem, though that is just my opinion.
Sorry, 'widely accepted' doesn't fly. Any actual evidence we are 'slipping' compared to those other nations in regard to science and math?
_____________________________
Jack
“I mean to live my life an obedient man, but obedient to God, subservient to the wisdom of my ancestors; never to the authority of political truths arrived at yesterday at the voting booth”
William F. Buckley Jr. 1925-2008
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/18/2008 9:36:29 PM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
Here is one of the more recent polls I quickly found which shows the majority of evangelical Christians do not believe in Darwinian evolution
quote:
Apparently Nothingman has this incorrect idea (that Evangelical Christians don't believe in evolution)
Wow
When did I mention Evangelicals? I was refering to Christians, worldwide. Looking at the complete Body of Christ and you'll notice that the literal belief in Genesis is a minority.
Are you going to tell me next that only Evangelical Christians are actually Christians?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/19/2008 8:51:59 AM
|
|
|
drmark
Posts: 3172
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: online
|
quote:
Are you going to tell me next that only Evangelical Christians are actually Christians? Are you going to tell me that anyone who clams to be a Christian actually is one? Well, we can put an end to that fallacy right away - Matthew 7:21. Of course, you didn't like what Jesus had to say in Matthew 19:4, so I suspect this will go over about as well! It's pretty easy to make the Bible say anything one wants when one interprets Scripture to suit one's worldview.
This is another off-topic issue, Nothingman, which should be discussed in the Salvation threads. Do you want me to start it? - I notice you haven't been to the Bible threads with your issue of exegeting Genesis.
_____________________________
Jeremiah 31:31-34. The time is NOW, fellow saints!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/19/2008 5:44:24 PM
|
|
|
doer
Posts: 2755
Joined: 4/13/2005
Status: offline
|
I am not an evolutionary creationist. the very mention of that word suggests that God would want us to think that we were once ape like creatures...... that is what the "other guy" wants us to think!!!
_____________________________
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/19/2008 9:36:04 PM
|
|
|
EcclesFruitcake
Posts: 34
Joined: 1/15/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: doer
I am not an evolutionary creationist. the very mention of that word suggests that God would want us to think that we were once ape like creatures...... that is what the "other guy" wants us to think!!!
We still are ape like creatures.
"But my brother Esau is an hairy man, but I am a smooth man."
Nothing wrong with a bit of deception though.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/20/2008 10:18:00 AM
|
|
|
unclemonkey
Posts: 1451
Joined: 5/14/2006
Status: offline
|
ORIGINAL:drj11quote:
Along with our shoddy education system,
It didn’t used to be a shoddy education system. In fact when the Bible was used in public schools as a reader our education system was far superior to what it is now. This is easily verified by a little history research of early Americans like Noah Webster.
It started its downward trend when God was kicked out of public schools in the 1950s and the more influence atheism has on the public school systems the shoddier it gets.
_____________________________
Visit my home church.
Also consider Life's Most Important Queston
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Theistic Evolution questions. - 4/21/2008 4:48:16 AM
|
|
|
Nothingman
Posts: 110
Joined: 4/3/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: unclemonkey
ORIGINAL:drj11quote:
Along with our shoddy education system,
It didn’t used to be a shoddy education system. In fact when the Bible was used in public schools as a reader our education system was far superior to what it is now. This is easily verified by a little history research of early Americans like Noah Webster.
It started its downward trend when God was kicked out of public schools in the 1950s and the more influence atheism has on the public school systems the shoddier it gets.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Wikipedia
Webster released his own edition of the Bible in 1833, called the Common Version. He used the King James Version as a base, and consulted the Hebrew and Greek along with various other versions and commentaries. Webster molded the KJV to correct grammar, replaced words that were no longer used, and did away with words and phrases that could be seen as offensive.
Along with making numerous other alterations, Webster took out what he deemed was the offensive parts of the Bible.
You advocate the production of heretical versions of the real and only Scripture? You want that example, of picking and choosing whatever we feel like from the Bible, to be taught to our children, so that it may be instilled in them from an early age that it is ok edit the Holy Scriptures? I'm sorry but I do not want that to be taught to my children. In fact, I think the school shouldn't really have anything to do with teaching my children about religion. I, as a parent, should handle that. And I'm sure that you think I'm not wrong when I say that I think that you, as a parent, are probably the most capable and best-suited to teach your children.
Religious instruction should be left as personal as possible, and certainly not be taught from a bureaucratic institution. Religion is personal; Faith is a relationship; schools are impersonal; and indoctrination is counter-production.
< Message edited by Nothingman -- 4/21/2008 5:06:58 AM >
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
