The word theory, as defined in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

The “theory” of evolution is not “conjecture” or “speculation” or “opinion.” The theory of evolution is an explanation of what we see in nature. It is capable of predicting future occurrences (that animals will continue to evolve, not necessarily what they will evolve into), and it is testable. If there were one observation, one experiment, that showed the theory were wrong, it would be thrown out or revised. This has not happened.

Re: Evolution vs creationism
 

Here’s another example of what Aurel, in the very first post in this long thread, was referring to:

Museum uses bible to tell earth's history

I just don’t get how they can say things like humans and dinosaurs roamed the earth together and get away with it. They are passing this information off as fact, when it most clearly is not.

Man has not evolved from monkeys. Man is his own monkey, a species distinct from other monkeys.

Polystrate
 

To pick up on my earlier post, what do people know about Polystrate Fossils? As I mentioned earlier, I didn't buy into the speaker's position that the existance of these fossils was absolute refutiation of the scientific chronology of creation and thus proof of the "Creationist's" view. But they do seem to pose an interesting question about how such fossils came it being.

A) The original organism was covered in some sort of a mud-slide.
B) The fossil was displaced by geological events (I don't buy this since then the strata would be displaced too I'd think. (See image 20 on page 6 of the link)
C) The plant fossil was mis-identified.

What do people think? How did these fossils come about?

Apparently, the vertical whale fossil has already been discredited, reinforcing my opionions of the strident creationist once again. Lies and deception don't do a good job of proclaiming God's word.

That's true. But God isn't trying to sell you something. This isn't a popularity contest or marketing to the lowest common denominator.

It is what it is.

jluetjen,


not my particular area however here is another good link as to why and how:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate/trees.html

Yup Zuffen, I found that site for the "Con" view and this site for the "Pro" view. As I said, I don't think that Creationists are doing themselves any favors hanging their arguments on Polystrate fossils. You certainly won't find me making any theological arguments based on them.

Yeah, I saw that "pro" site as well, not a very well put together argument...

Romans 8:29-30.

For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

I'm no expert on polystrate fossils, and I doubt any of you are either. I’ve read some of the above links, as well as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polystrate_fossils . I don’t see anything that would make me think they disprove evolution. In fact, I see that mainstream geology has good explanations for them.

Scientists have known about these fossils for a long time. If they disproved evolution, it would have happened a long time ago, and we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

The Bible deals quite clearly with the Age of Understanding.

Either God knows what you will choose and you therefore have no free will. Or God allows you choice, and is therefore not omniscient.

Loving one's neighbor begins with giving up the claim to have special access to truth.

So Gandhi goes to hell? Hard to wrap my heart around that one.

There is considerable discussion within the Christian community regarding the value of "good works". Without going into details, the camps kind of break out like this...

- If you do good works, it will help to make you receptive to the Holy Spirit (assuming that you somehow have heard the Word of God), and you will come to believe and be saved.

- If you believe through the Holy Spirit, you will do good works.

It's kind of a Chicken and Egg type of discussion.

As I said earlier, it's not for us to judge what is in other's hearts. Whether Gandhi is saved or not is up to God. As a Christian, it's my duty to be available to share and tell the truth about God's Word with people who want to learn about it. If Gandhi heard about Jesus (as I'm pretty sure that he did), and chose to turn away, it's kind of like a poor innocent man in court turning away a top shelf court appointed lawyer. Do so at your own risk. Given that nobody's perfect, you won't have much to stand on.

Stuart you again are trying to force God into your box. Let me put it to you this way:

Imagine for a second that God exists and that God was responsible for creation. Just for the sake of argument, consider that for a moment. Consider how powerful and intelligent and awesome that being would be.

Now then, can you consider that a being that is capable of creating the universe and the laws that govern it would also be capable of existing outside those laws? Would that being be able to perform things that would not make logical sense to humans?

Certainly not one of the easiest verses to understand. Here is some related discussion and additional verses for consideration. It's obviously not cut and dried.

As a non-believer, it's my duty to be available to share and tell the truth about the fantasy called God's Word with people who want to learn about it and all of the nonsense associated with it. It is my life's work..

Thanks for this wonderful image, Klauke.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1154358645.jpg

And since when have we had prayer in school?????????

Oh that's right, I forgot. I am a Christian, therefore I must be about the business of shoving my beliefs down everyone's throat and establishing a theocracy in the US. Silly me, I forgot. :rolleyes:

I've no doubt that it's your life's work. But why do you feel compelled to be anti-God rather the pro-Science? That's what gets me. I'd find you far more enlightening if you'd spend more time espousing the strength's of your views and answering questions, rather then to constantly be telling me and other Christians how stupid you think we are. I don't find anything remotely useful, interesting or enlightening about a beligerant, hateful philosophy. Unfortunately that's how you come across.

So at the heart of it lies this.

"The doctrine of predestination does not mean that God is unjust, deciding that some people will be saved and that others will be lost. Mankind, because of Adam's Fall in the Garden of Eden, sinned by free choice.
Thus, no person deserves salvation. But God's grace is universal. His salvation is for "everyone who believes" (Rom. 1:16)."

And this is utter nonsense.

And circular. God created Adam. God created to Adam to "sin".

I wish I'd thought of religion. Id have that GT3 by now.