General Discussion

Choose Your Own Topic

Read 12073 times

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #15 on: December 25, 2011, 11:46:59 am »
That's something to definitely take into consideration Jared.

If anything, I'd say there are three things at play here, Intepretation, Science, and Scriptures. Scripture is Truth. Science does not support Scripture, rather, it is Scripture that supports Science. It is why we can accept the Big Bang Theory, but reject infinite-past Universe theories. Interpretation is how we understand Scripture. At times our Interpretation is wrong, but with advances in the understanding of Science, History, different Cultures, etc. our Interpretations can be more accurate in the understanding of Scripture. Science is the study of natural phenomena, and can be supported by Scripture, but does not, in any way, support Scripture -- You don't need to support the Validity of Something that you know is already True.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

1

Crocoduck

  • **
  • 634 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #16 on: December 25, 2011, 11:53:56 am »
Archsage wrote: Science does not support Scripture


You got one thing right, at least, out of this whole mess.
"That is why people with higher IQ's do not believe in God, it is due to the fact that He turns His face away from people with over inflated egos.
Humble yourself and you will find Him."
- a Christian

2

Nicholas Olsen

  • **
  • 282 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #17 on: December 25, 2011, 12:09:39 pm »
The only reason science doesn't support Scripture is because it's incomplete. We're making predictions of where the trail goes beyond our sight.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyb7SQefYMA

3

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #18 on: December 25, 2011, 12:14:42 pm »
An obscure psuedo-truth cannot be used to support an actual truth.

The same reason why Science does not support Empirical truth is the same reason why Science does not support Scriptural Truth. Science is the lesser.
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

4

wonderer

  • *****
  • 14999 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #19 on: December 26, 2011, 10:28:02 am »
209vaughn wrote: I have no doubt that evolutionary research has uncovered clues about our past.  But full belief in a 100% accurate theory of evolution is just to far out there for me to agree with.


I'm not sure why you would think in such black and white terms as to think that anyone is asking you to agree that there is a "100% accurate theory of evolution".  How evolution has occurred is a matter of ongoing research and will be for a long time, as anyone knowledgeable about the subject would tell you.  That theory is not accurate in every detail, is not at all problematic for such an enormously complex subject at this point in human scientific history.

If natural selection were so obviously true, why are there not more intellegent species on this planet?


Intelligence is an expensive use of resources.  The brain consumes around 20% of the energy humans consume.  There are particular factors to human evolution which have made such use of energy by humans evolutionarily successful.

Why are humans 1000x more advanced and sophisticated than even the second smartest species on the plant?  (idk which species that is, a Chimp maybe?)


One of the particular factors to human evolution which makes the expense of carrying around such a big brain worthwhile is that we are members of a social species.  As members of a social species we are able to make use of language to facilitate cultural transmission of understanding that far outstrips the capabilities of instinct.  Research has found that members of social species tend to have bigger brains than members of non-social species, so the many branches of the animal kingdom which haven't resulted in social species aren't likely candidates for an intelligent species to arise from.

Why are there not lots and lots of other species on the planet that are almost as smart as Humans?


It is important to realize that the ascent of man has occurred in what is an eye blink on an evolutionary scale.  Supposing that evolution of human level intelligence is a likely occurrence on a planet like ours, some species would have to be the first species to acquire such intelligence.  And as I mentioned earlier, intelligence is a resource hog, without ecological circumstances which can result in a net benefit to such resource usage, natural selection will select against such otherwise wasteful intelligence.

"The world needed that of us, to maintain—by our example, by our very existence—a world that would keep learning and questioning, that would remain free in thought, inquiry, and word." - Alice Dreger

5

Don Quixote

  • ***
  • 2296 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #20 on: December 28, 2011, 02:50:22 am »
Sonick92 wrote: The only reason science doesn't support Scripture is because it's incomplete. We're making predictions of where the trail goes beyond our sight.
A perfect description of Godel's incompleteness theorem. Hawkins sealed the deal in 82 with a lecture at princeton ,  agreeing we can not know past the singularity. This does not mean there are not external truths to our universe they must be there we are just limited in reaching them. To try is just metaphysical physics says Vilenkin.
If at first you don't succeed...don't try skydiving!

6

Don Quixote

  • ***
  • 2296 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #21 on: December 28, 2011, 02:55:11 am »
VPV wrote:
Quote from: Archsage
Science does not support Scripture


You got one thing right, at least, out of this whole mess.
Are you saying we should believe in the rock of ages not the age of rocks?

Cant we do both?
If at first you don't succeed...don't try skydiving!

7

Alexander

  • ***
  • 1308 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #22 on: December 28, 2011, 05:29:42 pm »
I would recommend submitting the question to him on this website, I don't know if he will answer it, but it is one many people would like to hear his answer to.

It seems to me that WLC wants to avoid being labeled a creationist while never showing any real support for evolution.

8

Abigail

  • **
  • 794 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2011, 05:53:44 pm »

For more information regarding "Evolution and the Bible" please go to the website below.

It contains information regarding Theistic Evolution, Progressive Creation, The Day-Age Theory and The Gap Theory.

-Evolution and the Bible

The evolutionary system has been entrenched for so long that many people who otherwise accept the Bible as infallible have deemed it expedient to compromise on this issue. Thus, evolution has been called, "God's method of creation"; and the Genesis record of the six days of creation has been reinterpreted in terms of the evolutionary ages of historical geology. These geological ages themselves have been accommodated in Genesis either by placing them in an assumed "gap" between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 or by changing the "days" of creation into the "ages" of evolution.

Theories of this kind raise more problems than they solve, however. It is more productive to take the Bible literally and then to interpret the actual facts of science within its revelatory framework. If the Bible cannot be understood, it is useless as revelation. If it contains scientific fallacies, it could not have been given by inspiration.

The specific purpose of this study is to show that all such theories which seek to accommodate the Bible to evolutionary geology are invalid and, therefore, should be abandoned.

(http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-bible/)

-Conclusion
Only a few of the many difficulties with the various accommodationist theories have been discussed, but even these-have shown that it is impossible to devise a legitimate means of harmonizing the Bible with evolution. We must conclude, therefore, that if the Bible is really the Word of God (as its writers allege and as we believe) then evolution and its geological age-system must be completely false. Since the Bible cannot be reinterpreted to correlate with evolution, Christians must diligently proceed to correlate the facts of science so with the Bible.

[Please keep in mind that we are discussing the subject and not the author or organization. Thank you.]


9

The Watcher

  • ***
  • 1432 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #24 on: December 28, 2011, 08:20:07 pm »

blank wrote:
Quote from: gregwilson
Well, theoretically God could and would know these answers.  He would have no problem in determining when a non-human primate became a primate.  So if evolution were obvious, then the theist could accept it without knowing when humans received souls.


Or it could be that the religious people simply made up the idea of a soul.

gregwilson wrote:
However, scientifically, evolution has too many holes for me to believe in it--and it is ultimately an act of faith.  I place my faith in an all-knowing and all-powerful God, one whose design, however long or what process it took, is magnificent and too complex to be the result of blind chance.


The scientific theory of evolution is an act of faith? Maybe we don't understand the word "faith" in the same way. Also, evolution isn't simply blind chance.


I'm sorry, I think you came to the wrong thread.  The question already assumed the truth of Christianity, and pondered whether or not evolution fits under the belief system.  

Faith is simply believing in something you cannot physically demonstrate.  I don't have faith that I am sitting in a chair right now as I can physically show that I am.  Science, true science, is not faith-based. A skilled chemist can isolate oxygen or hydrogen in a laboratory demonstrably and repeatedly.  Is the same true for macroevolution?  Where has macroevolution been demonstrated in a laboratory?  Or do you have a time machine where we can go back 65 million years and set up a time-motion camera to watch macroevolution?  It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.

10

Archsage

  • ****
  • 8964 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #25 on: December 28, 2011, 08:29:08 pm »
gregwilson wrote: It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.

Lol! For all the talk of how theism is nothing but fantasy... seems a bit ironic, right?
“It is of dangerous consequence to represent to man how near he is to the level of beasts, without showing him at the same time his greatness. It is likewise dangerous to let him see his greatness without his meanness..."  –Blaise Pascal

11

The Watcher

  • ***
  • 1432 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #26 on: December 28, 2011, 08:33:01 pm »
Archsage wrote:
Quote from: gregwilson
It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.

Lol! For all the talk of how theism is nothing but fantasy... seems a bit ironic, right?


It's one of David Berlinski's favorite musings, so I can't take credit for the thought.

12

Rostos

  • *****
  • 10415 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #27 on: December 28, 2011, 10:08:33 pm »
gregwilson wrote:

Quote from: blank
Quote from: gregwilson
Well, theoretically God could and would know these answers.  He would have no problem in determining when a non-human primate became a primate.  So if evolution were obvious, then the theist could accept it without knowing when humans received souls.


Or it could be that the religious people simply made up the idea of a soul.

gregwilson wrote:
However, scientifically, evolution has too many holes for me to believe in it--and it is ultimately an act of faith.  I place my faith in an all-knowing and all-powerful God, one whose design, however long or what process it took, is magnificent and too complex to be the result of blind chance.


The scientific theory of evolution is an act of faith? Maybe we don't understand the word "faith" in the same way. Also, evolution isn't simply blind chance.


I'm sorry, I think you came to the wrong thread.  The question already assumed the truth of Christianity, and pondered whether or not evolution fits under the belief system.  

Faith is simply believing in something you cannot physically demonstrate.  I don't have faith that I am sitting in a chair right now as I can physically show that I am.  Science, true science, is not faith-based. A skilled chemist can isolate oxygen or hydrogen in a laboratory demonstrably and repeatedly.  Is the same true for macroevolution?  Where has macroevolution been demonstrated in a laboratory?  Or do you have a time machine where we can go back 65 million years and set up a time-motion camera to watch macroevolution?  It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.
"My thoughts are nothing like your thoughts," says the LORD. "And my ways are far beyond anything you could imagine.
Isiah 55:8

"For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted." - Mathew 23-12

13

Rostos

  • *****
  • 10415 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #28 on: December 28, 2011, 10:10:00 pm »
gregwilson wrote:

Quote from: blank
Quote from: gregwilson
Well, theoretically God could and would know these answers.  He would have no problem in determining when a non-human primate became a primate.  So if evolution were obvious, then the theist could accept it without knowing when humans received souls.


Or it could be that the religious people simply made up the idea of a soul.

gregwilson wrote:
However, scientifically, evolution has too many holes for me to believe in it--and it is ultimately an act of faith.  I place my faith in an all-knowing and all-powerful God, one whose design, however long or what process it took, is magnificent and too complex to be the result of blind chance.


The scientific theory of evolution is an act of faith? Maybe we don't understand the word "faith" in the same way. Also, evolution isn't simply blind chance.


I'm sorry, I think you came to the wrong thread.  The question already assumed the truth of Christianity, and pondered whether or not evolution fits under the belief system.  

Faith is simply believing in something you cannot physically demonstrate.  I don't have faith that I am sitting in a chair right now as I can physically show that I am.  Science, true science, is not faith-based. A skilled chemist can isolate oxygen or hydrogen in a laboratory demonstrably and repeatedly.  Is the same true for macroevolution?  Where has macroevolution been demonstrated in a laboratory?  Or do you have a time machine where we can go back 65 million years and set up a time-motion camera to watch macroevolution?  It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.

Just because it cant be proven, doesnt mean it is not true...

I have a head ache, i cant prove it, but does that mean that i dont have a headache?
"My thoughts are nothing like your thoughts," says the LORD. "And my ways are far beyond anything you could imagine.
Isiah 55:8

"For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted." - Mathew 23-12

14

blank

  • ***
  • 1330 Posts
    • View Profile
Christianity and Evolution
« Reply #29 on: December 29, 2011, 06:47:53 am »
gregwilson wrote:

Quote from: blank
Quote from: gregwilson
Well, theoretically God could and would know these answers.  He would have no problem in determining when a non-human primate became a primate.  So if evolution were obvious, then the theist could accept it without knowing when humans received souls.


Or it could be that the religious people simply made up the idea of a soul.

gregwilson wrote:
However, scientifically, evolution has too many holes for me to believe in it--and it is ultimately an act of faith.  I place my faith in an all-knowing and all-powerful God, one whose design, however long or what process it took, is magnificent and too complex to be the result of blind chance.


The scientific theory of evolution is an act of faith? Maybe we don't understand the word "faith" in the same way. Also, evolution isn't simply blind chance.


I'm sorry, I think you came to the wrong thread.  The question already assumed the truth of Christianity, and pondered whether or not evolution fits under the belief system.


Isn't the OP open to the proposition that Christianity is false? One shouldn't be so hasty.

gregwilson wrote:
Faith is simply believing in something you cannot physically demonstrate.  I don't have faith that I am sitting in a chair right now as I can physically show that I am.  Science, true science, is not faith-based.


Actually, religious faith is something much more than that. It also includes believing something in the absence of evidence or contrary to the available evidence.

gregwilson wrote:
A skilled chemist can isolate oxygen or hydrogen in a laboratory demonstrably and repeatedly.  Is the same true for macroevolution?  Where has macroevolution been demonstrated in a laboratory?  Or do you have a time machine where we can go back 65 million years and set up a time-motion camera to watch macroevolution?  It'd be quite a movie watching how whales evolved from cow-like beings.


You need to realize firstly that science is much more than what one does in a lab. After all, people have never seen sabre toothed cats before, they didn't see the asteroid impact at the Yucatan peninsula 65 million years ago, neither have they seen the reversal of the magnetic poles of the earth. Yet they are ideas based on science. Also, no one has seen Noah's ark or evidence of it neither have they seen the Garden of Eden despite the availability of satellites yet some still believe stories about them.