Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,929 Year: 4,186/9,624 Month: 1,057/974 Week: 16/368 Day: 16/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   to Christians in this forum...
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 197 (95854)
03-30-2004 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Rand Al'Thor
03-29-2004 11:49 PM


Rand Al'thor,
Your comment
How do you know that god didn't just guide evolution or maybe he just kicked it off? The only thing TOE contradicts is a literal interpretation of the bible. There is nothing to say that he didn't influence the process.
Is most revealing. The word, "evolution" deconstructed means "e-" "out of" or "from" and "volution" life-cycle. It expresses the essense of "natural" selection, whereas god guiding the production of organic diversity would be "artificial" selection. We produced breeds of dogs through "evolition," out of our will or choices.
Now, this concern about "semantics" is "good science." That is, scientists in general are normally professionally trained, not to be scientists, but to be "doctors of philosophy" wherein lies the high standard of defining words carefully. This is carried so far normally that it produces jargon. But here, we have an important distinction. At least, Darwin thought it important enough to put "natural selection" in the title of his book, while "artificial selection" was treated in depth within, distinctively.
Philosophically, we recognize the existance of evil, of suicide bombers, including intellectual suicide bombers. Of people who pretend to be enlightening counsel, but are really darkening counsel. They pretend to be trying to get to the truth, but in reality, they hate the truth, and want to frustrate anyone's efforts to get there. Let's not get into why they exist. We know that dis-information experts are out there, and in this forum. So, how do we spot them, and protect ourselves from them?
The main clue is, they pervert language. They are lawyers, wanting to win their case, even if the truth is lost, and their best trick is to confuse our understanding of words.
To the topic, believers are pressured by this: "Freely you have received, now freely give." They come to forums like this, in an effort to "let their light shine" so that those coming here to get the truth, are not fatally stumbled by the sabateurs. God, amoung His other duties, is a judge, and like all judges, wants the case for or against those He judges to be as clear as possible. Eve's complaint, that she was tricked into disobeying His command, was heard and considered valid. He sends His servents to places where people come looking for information, counsel, and wisdom, so that the snakes there don't get an uncontested shot at deceiving them.
In the kingdom of God, words are powerful, and have very precise meanings. To stand for evolution, which implies as Willowtree asserts, Godlessness, or at least a God who is not intervening in the affairs of organic life, is not wise. It is, due to confusion and deception, often covered by grace, for there is much in the theory that accurately describes God's nature. Those seeking to know the truth, including the truth about God, can "hear everything, but hold on to what is good." Hopefully, those "darkening counsel" will be frustrated.
Find a different word for God-directed "common descent."
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Rand Al'Thor, posted 03-29-2004 11:49 PM Rand Al'Thor has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Cynic1, posted 03-30-2004 9:49 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 65 of 197 (97860)
04-05-2004 12:03 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Cynic1
03-30-2004 9:49 AM


Cynic1,
If you are correct, and you may be, then we need different words for developement via natural selection and developement via artificial selection. Nearly everyone sees "evolution" and "intelligent design" as conflicting ideas, which, if you are right, is not the case.
Confusion is not good. Neither is jargon, but....
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Cynic1, posted 03-30-2004 9:49 AM Cynic1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Cynic1, posted 04-05-2004 1:32 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024