Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,849 Year: 4,106/9,624 Month: 977/974 Week: 304/286 Day: 25/40 Hour: 3/3


EvC Forum ⇒ Social and Religious Issues ⇒ Bible Study ⇒

Bible accepts evolution

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Bible accepts evolution
fallacycop
Member (Idle past 5548 days)
Posts: 692
From: Fortaleza-CE Brazil
Joined: 02-18-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 63 of 80 (371729)
12-22-2006 8:38 PM 		Reply to: Message 15 by 4Pillars
12-21-2006 3:17 PM

Re: Macro-Evolution is a Lie
It is classic equivocation by evolutionists to mean macroevolution when they speak of evolution, but turn to microevolution when asked for evidence.
Since you haven`t given us a workable definition (or anybodyelse in these fora, that I`m aware of, for that matter) of macro-evolution, micro-evolution, or what`s the difference between them, I`m forced to chalenge your call of equivocation as invalid.
​
As far as I can see, the macro/micro-evolution is just a meaningless catchy phrase invented (or missrepresented) by creationists in order to distract people`s attention away from the fact that they do not have a single real argumment against the theory of evolution per si except for a feeling of uneasines which by itself amounts to nothing more then personal prejudice against that theory and, by extention, to science in general.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by 4Pillars, posted 12-21-2006 3:17 PM 4Pillars has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by 4Pillars, posted 12-22-2006 9:10 PM fallacycop has replied
  
fallacycop
Member (Idle past 5548 days)
Posts: 692
From: Fortaleza-CE Brazil
Joined: 02-18-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 68 of 80 (371747)
12-22-2006 9:43 PM 		Reply to: Message 65 by 4Pillars
12-22-2006 9:10 PM

Re: Macro-Evolution is a Lie
Read post # 59 , then come back to me when you have a better understanding of it.
Since there is nothing in post # 59 that amounts to a workable definition of macro/micro-evolution, my statements in post # 63 stand. (All you did in post 59 was to use the terms macro/micro without given a proper definition)
​
Next time, clarify first, before opening your mouth making unsupported assertion.
Next time actually do your homework instead of just declaring it done.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by 4Pillars, posted 12-22-2006 9:10 PM 4Pillars has not replied
  
fallacycop
Member (Idle past 5548 days)
Posts: 692
From: Fortaleza-CE Brazil
Joined: 02-18-2006

Normal Thread Display
Message 73 of 80 (371907)
12-23-2006 10:52 PM 		Reply to: Message 72 by Straggler
12-23-2006 9:02 PM

Re: Circular Premise
The second example very much relies on interpreting the passage in question with the benefit of evolutionary/genetic knowledge. It is hardly surprising that interpreted in such a way as to be consistent with current scientific knowledge that we should find current scientific knowledge to be consistent with this interpretation. The conclusion relies on the premise and vice versa. In other word it is a circular argument.
The moral here is not that the bible is necessarily consistent with evolution theory, but that it can be interpreted that way if someone choose to do so.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Straggler, posted 12-23-2006 9:02 PM Straggler has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024