|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 13/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: God's Place In Evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
slevesque writes: Okok, well I not too well versed in that subject, but I have to say that this all seems to be more of an hypothesis then an established fact., which seems to be intricately connected to the documentary hypothesis. Which, in my humble opinion, seems to be an outdated hypothesis for the authorship of the Pentateuch. But that's probably another subject Well, you can always just look at the gods in the two fables themselves to see the evolution of the god description. The two different gods are completely unlike, one competent and sure but aloof and apart, the other fumbling, unsure, fearful but personal, intimate. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined:
|
The difference being that we can detect the percentage of oxygen in a gaseous atmosphere. Even more, we can create oxygen free atmospheres and see if that person does survive. What are the analogous supernatural experiments that we can do? This all has nothing to do with the fact that the reasoning is a fallacy or not. It is confounding belief in something with the actual thing. Just because something is essential to life, does not mean belief in said thing is also essential. Even with all the scientific experiments in the world, someone may not believe in oxygen. It does not make it any less essential for that person. Idem for the God issue. If goldrush says ''God is essential for human existence'', even if this is unfounded, replying ''I don't believe in God and I exist just fine'' is clearly a fallacious rebuttal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jon Inactive Member |
What are the analogous supernatural experiments that we can do? Frako's claim was that he does just fine without believing in God; this is a fallacious counter argument to the claim that God is fundamental to life. Experimentation that might prove the conclusion true does not validate an argument. Jon Check out No webpage found at provided URL: Apollo's Temple! Ignorance is temporary; you should be able to overcome it. - nwr
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
Well, you can always just look at the gods in the two fables themselves to see the evolution of the god description. The two different gods are completely unlike, one competent and sure but aloof and apart, the other fumbling, unsure, fearful but personal, intimate. I think you are seeing way more into this then what the texts indicate. If I remember correctly supposedly the creation account is made in a known jewish litterary style, where it at first looks at the general aspect of creation, then 'zooms in' on the creation of man. (yes, I know this is an unfounded assertion)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
slevesque writes: Well, you can always just look at the gods in the two fables themselves to see the evolution of the god description. The two different gods are completely unlike, one competent and sure but aloof and apart, the other fumbling, unsure, fearful but personal, intimate. I think you are seeing way more into this then what the texts indicate. If I remember correctly supposedly the creation account is made in a known jewish litterary style, where it at first looks at the general aspect of creation, then 'zooms in' on the creation of man. (yes, I know this is an unfounded assertion) Totally unfounded and not supported at all by the text. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
slevesque Member (Idle past 4669 days) Posts: 1456 Joined: |
I think there an easy way to test if the writing of Gen1 and Gen2-3 is seperated by time. There should be a notable language/syntax differences between the two.
AbE I you want to continue on this issue, start a new thread. Edited by slevesque, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
Jon, if you want to judge my stating a point or position, and then not bothering with arguing my point further as a "duck and run" move then that's your call. Honestly, once I make a point, I don't feel the need to argue it to death or make a rebuttal to every challenge thrown out, (especially when these challenges go off on tangents all around my point). I post what I think and I basically allow others to do the same.
What do I have to offer? Probably nothing to the people who are already committed to the idea that a creator does not/cannot exist (or is foolish or wrong). But for all others, it is myhope that I will be able to share some points that will get them to step back and think about the real reasons they are for or against a creator. It is not my goal to present perfect arguments that convince everyone, but to present ideas that raise questions in the way we view things. Will I sound like an idiot from time to time? Yes, lol. But I feel we all say silly things sometimes, which brings me back to my point. I feel the real reasons for our positions on whether are not there is a creator goes beyond the purely rational or intellectual sphere. I believe it has a lot to do with the way we have come to view world conditions (especially the human condition) and the way these views have impacted us emotionally- positively or negatively. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
[qs=frako]
Animals are more or less sure of things (instinct). not true releasing a captive animal that had no contact with its own species in the wild is fatal to the animal because it does not know how to survive there what happened to the instinct ????? You have a point here. But something similar is also true for isolated big- brained humans, as I pointed out in the outset. We are endowed with certain capacities, but the way we are nurtured (our environment, our training) has much to do with what we become and are capable of.
Really if evolution and materialistic forces truly created man from beast, then should there even be any mention of God ever in history? You keep talking about your one god what abbout the other 100 000 gods out there those where imagined right ??? I did not elaborate in my original post, but my reference to one God comes from the fact that a comparison of various religions reveals striking similarities in their specific themes, "fables" and "legends". It's basically the same story different characters (and sometimes additional ones). Many religions feature accounts about a golden age/age of perfection, a fall from perfection, and an interesting one is the account of the ancient flood "legend" found in various forms in cultures all over the world. The fact that many cultures all over the world contain an ancient flood legend supports the fact that humanity started in one place, with one God, and one religion, and spread. When people spread, details became added and embellished.
God is fundamental to humanity's existence. Well i dont believe in god and most of my friends dont and we still havent died been struck by lightning ....... so my guess is THEY are not so fundamental I was actually referring to the beginning of the human existence. I was not intending to go anywhere further than that in my original post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
It seems to me, that your reasoning is that knowlege and language goes from simple to complex, but this is not necessarily true. The Hebrew language is older and more specific and complex than English. So according to your theory, English should have come before Hebrew, but this is not the case.
Also, who is the common ancestor between man and apes? If he is only a theory, what is the evidence for him? All creatures differ a little from their parents, but what hard evidence do we have that one species or kind became another? What evidence do we have that over time mutations create new species altogether? Edited by goldrush, : No reason given. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2135 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
All creatures differs little from their parents, but what hard evidence do we have that one species or kind became another? There is a lot of evidence for speciation, both from modern studies and studies of the past. Are you suggesting that speciation didn't happen? And if so, what is the basis for your suggestion? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
No, I'm simply asking the person claiming speciation to explain it and present evidence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2135 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
goldrush writes:
There is evidence all through the scientific literature. No, I'm simply asking the person claiming speciation to explain it and present evidence. Whole floors of major libraries are devoted to peer-reviewed journals filled with evidence for evolution and speciation. Seems to me that anyone disputing that evidence should bring some pretty convinving evidence of their own. Their position is not mainstream. Fact is, it's pretty fringe. And your evidence is...? Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
[qs=Dr Adequate][qs]
Obviously, God gave the first man language, spoke to him, and instructed him. Aren't you a Christian? Only the Bible presents a very different picture --- God brings the animals before Adam, who names them (Genesis 2:20). God didn't need to tell Adam what they were called, because Adam had the capacity to make up names for them, just as we have the capacity to invent the word "television", and deaf-and-dumb people had the capacity to invent sign language. Even the author of Genesis, then, doesn't seem to have swallowed your thesis. No, mythesis actually does not dispute the Genesis account. Evidently, according to the account, God spoke to Adam before having him name the animals. He gave him commands. Hence language came from God to begin with. So Adam's naming the animals was an extension of the language he received from God from the time he was created by God. Edited by goldrush, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 4.7 |
Also, who is the common ancestor between man and apes? If he is only a theory, what is the evidence for him? How many intermediaries need be found between Ardipithecus and Homo before you people get the point that a chain exists? Now, I'm not saying you have to accept, but how the hell can you not even know the answer to your own question? It really doesn't take much intellect to do the research. The chain of evidence is out there for you to see. All of it! Go look. It will not poison your brain. Well, not by much. With lasting effect. For very long. Initially.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
goldrush Member (Idle past 4804 days) Posts: 61 Joined: |
Explain to me please how I disputed anything by merely asking a question. If evidence is as abundant as you say, surely you shouldn't have a problem presenting at least one piece.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024