Pelican Parts Forums - Evolution vs creationism

Pelican Parts Forums (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/)

- Off Topic Discussions (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/)

- - Evolution vs creationism (http://forums.pelicanparts.com/off-topic-discussions/294896-evolution-vs-creationism.html)

Quote:

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
So again, the believers who are simply defending their ideas from a spontaneous attack get labeled as the oppressors. It's actually comical.

It's pathetic. A persons faith can now be considered a crime against humanity.

The age of the earth is unknown to man.

Who said it was less than 10,000 years old?

The Bible certainly does not.

KT

Quote:

Originally posted by Moses
It's pathetic. A persons faith can now be considered a crime against humanity.

much of the "logical reasoning" exhibited here is definitely a crime against sanity...

Some people will have you believe in order to understand anything, you have to be a part of the "super-smart elite".

Only problem with that is, they are "smart" because they say they are.

Just because someone is an "expert" at material that is false, doesn't make it true.

KT

Quote:

a crime against sanity...

Now THAT was funny. :D

KT

Quote:

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad

So again, the believers who are simply defending their ideas from a spontaneous attack get labeled as the oppressors.

Oh, the irony.

You miss the point. Faith is faith. I have no issue with faith. But call a spade a spade. Faith ain't science. People who (ab)use science to explain their faith have issues. Just as those who insist that those with faith explain it with fact/reason. The two can coexist, but they cannot be used to confirm or deny each other.

KT wrote:
The age of the earth is unknown to man.

Hey KT, this is simply balderdash (BS)! You can go to any current book on geology and find the answer and learn how the answer was obtained. You really need to broaden your reading list! Welcome to the 21st Century.

Quote:

Originally posted by IROC
You *can't* believe this. I mean, I know you wrote it, but you can't believe it. Really. Really? Do you realize that most Christians accept the theory of evolution?

I am not mistaken in thinking that evolution is most oft used as a tool to dismantle the God concept. Those multi-faith believers (evolution/God) are but a side note to the thrust of the argument and the debate...Lets stay focused like a laserbeam...When one is discussing evolution versus creation they are debating macro-evolution versus an intelligent designer or creator.

Lets stay focused like a laserbeam.

ARRIVING AT TRUTH THE SCIENTIFIC WAY

1. Observe what happens.

2. Based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true.

3. Test the theory by further observations and by experiments.

4. Watch to see if the predictions based on the theory come true.

KT

RPKESQ, ( sir )

Coming up with a number of years that represents the age of the earth, or the universe for that matter, is simply guessing.

You know it, I know it...WE ALL KNOW IT!!.

KT

The problem with threads like this is that most (if not all) of the posters have no clue that it is hardly a bipolar discussion.

On the "Creationist" side you have...
- The Jewish views (I'm not qualified to speak to these)
-- Orthodox
-- Conservative
-- Reformed
- The Christian views
-- Reformed (roughly: What the bible said is philosophically correct, or else it was within the context of that period in time)
-- The (for the lack of a better word) conservative view: The bible is right, but we don't necessarily understand the details. There is also the issue of things which are adiaphora (sp?) which means upon which the Bible is silent. This view is generally shared by the Catholics, Lutherans and other "non-reformed tradition" churches.
-- The "Baptist" tradition (aka: "Evangelical" or "Fundimentalist" although both of those terms once ment something very different, but I digress) view: 7 Days means 7x24 hours, or something along that line.

The "Evolutionest" side is hardly monolithic either
- Agnostics: Darwin was right, but it not clear if this proves or disproves any overall plan behind the whole thing.
- Athiests: By definition they believe that there is absolutely no God behind Evolution, which really takes just as much of a leap of faith as being a "believer". Otherwise they'd fall into the Agnostic category.

So to argue either of the extreme cases is really to be kicking a "straw man", and hardly representative of the richness of the discussion.

Speaking of 7 days; here's something to chew on -- The "day" of the creation story in the Bible is the Jewish word yom.

Quote:

yome; from an unused root mean. to be hot; a day (as the warm hours), whether lit. (from sunrise to sunset, or from one sunset to the next), or fig. (a space of time defined by an associated term), [often used adv.]:— age, + always, + chronicles, continually (-ance), daily, ([birth-], each, to) day, (now a, two) days (agone), + elder, × end, + evening, + (for) ever (-lasting, -more), × full, life, as (so) long as (… live), (even) now, + old, + outlived, + perpetually, presently, + remaineth, × required, season, × since, space, then, (process of) time, + as at other times, + in trouble, weather, (as) when, (a, the, within a) while (that), × whole (+ age), (full) year (-ly), + younger.
James Strong, New Strong’s dictionary of Hebrew and Greek words [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1996.

yom (3117), "daylight; day; time; moment; year." This word also appears in Ugaritic, extrabiblical Hebrew or Canaanite (e.g., the Siloam inscription), Akkadian, Phoenician, and Arabic. It also appears in post-biblical Hebrew. Attested at every era of biblical Hebrew, yom occurs about 2,304 times.
Yom has several meanings. The word represents the period of "daylight" as contrasted with nighttime: "While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease" (Gen. 8:22). The word denotes a period of twenty-four hours: "And it came to pass, as she spake to Joseph day by day …" (Gen. 39:10). Yom can also signify a period of time of unspecified duration: "And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made" (Gen. 2:3). In this verse, "day" refers to the entire period of God’s resting from creating this universe. This "day" began after He completed the creative acts of the seventh day and extends at least to the return of Christ. Compare Gen. 2:4: "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day [beyom] that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.…" Here "day" refers to the entire period envisioned in the first six days of creation. Another nuance appears in Gen. 2:17, where the word represents a "point of time" or "a moment": "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day [beyom] that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Finally, when used in the plural, the word may represent "year": "Thou shalt therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year [yamim]" (Exod. 13:10).
There are several other special nuances of yom when it is used with various prepositions. First, when used with ke ("as," "like"), it can connote "first": "And Jacob said, Sell me this day [first] thy birthright" (Gen. 25:31). It may also mean "one day," or "about this day": "And it came to pass about this time, that Joseph went into the house to do his business …" (Gen. 39:11). On Joseph’s lips, the phrase connotes "this present result" (literally, "as it is this day"): "But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive" (Gen. 50:20). Adonijah used this same phrase to represent "today": "Let king Solomon swear unto me today that he will not slay his servant …" (1 Kings 1:51). Yet another nuance appears in 1 Sam. 9:13: "Now therefore get you up; for about this time ye shall find him." When used with the definite article ha, the noun may mean "today" (as it does in Gen. 4:14) or refer to some particular "day" (1 Sam. 1:4) and the "daytime" (Neh. 4:16).
The first biblical occurrence of yom is found in Gen. 1:5: "And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." The second use introduces one of the most debated occurrences of the word, which is the duration of the days of creation. Perhaps the most frequently heard explanations are that these "days" are 24 hours long, indefinitely long (i.e., eras of time), or logical rather than temporal categories (i.e., they depict theological categories rather than periods of time).
The "day of the Lord" is used to denote both the end of the age (eschatologically) or some occurrence during the present age (non-eschatologically). It may be a day of either judgment or blessing, or both (cf. Isa. 2).
It is noteworthy that Hebrew people did not divide the period of daylight into regular hourly periods, whereas nighttime was divided into three watches (Exod. 14:24; Judg. 7:19). The beginning of a "day" is sometimes said to be dusk (Esth. 4:16) and sometimes dawn (Deut. 28:66-67).
W.E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger and William White, Vine’s complete expository dictionary of Old and New Testament words [computer file], electronic ed., Logos Library System, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson) 1997, c1996.

So did that clarify a few things??? :confused:

Jim Cesiro wrote:
I read through this and have no problem with about 80% of it. (like you care what I have a problem with) I start wondering how accurate it all is when the number 3000 Million years is thrown out.

We can barely figure out a culture from 1000 years ago now we have definitive (sic) answers to something that might have accored (sic) 3000 Million years ago? Its all guessing and telling stories at that point.

Jim, that statement is simply not true; we know a lot about almost all 1000 year old civilizations. In fact we have in some cases recorded (written) history for the last 10,000 years. If you study and learn how the dates and activity was tested and verified then you would not be so quick to make these wildly inaccurate statements. Unless you have studied geology, physics (how about String Theory?), chemistry, biology, history: how can you expect to make rational, reasoned judgments on these subjects?

Been to Chichén Itzá?

http://www.mysteriousplaces.com/mayan/TourEntrance.html

No one knows what happened to the people. They disapeared. No a very old civilization yet everyone is baffled why they just disapeared.

Just one example.

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Cesiro
Been to Chichén Itzá?

http://www.mysteriousplaces.com/mayan/TourEntrance.html

No one knows what happened to the people. They disapeared. No a very old civilization yet everyone is baffled why they just disapeared.

A bunch of evangelical Christians came and bored them to death :p

"Are we still evolving?"

In general: Yes.

Although recent scientific studies have found that the evolutionary cycle for those who believe in divine creation stopped about 500 years ago.

There is no scientific discipline that does not support evolution.

Originally posted by Jim Cesiro
Been to Chichén Itzá? No one knows what happened to the people. They disappeared (sic). No a very old civilization yet everyone is baffled why they just disappeared (sic).

In point of fact, we have discovered quite a lot about the Mayan civilization. You need to visit some more Mayan web sites and read some current archeological journals. But due to the fact we have not yet deciphered much of their writings, we have some gaps in our knowledge. Not all information is at the same level for all civilizations. Some have yet to be studied still. Science always admits its gaps. But until you can (using the scientific method) prove we will never know, then it is just an unknown. Not a MYSTERY, not WERID, not anything, except... an unknown. Not something that will never be known (if you think so, prove it), just something not fully understood YET! It is specious to argue that just because you cannot fully answer all questions, you don't know anything about a subject. A logic course would have taught you that.

Quote:

[i]My challenge is simple: using logic/critical thinking and the scientific process using a test that provides repeatable results on-demand, prove there is a god.[/B]

Proof that there is a god:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1153885345.jpg

And it is repeatable:

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1153885385.jpg

Jeff. Those amazing creatures are just a fluke of evolutionary random chance. Just a series of 2nd Law violations, mutated and re-ordered from some unknown and un-proven primate...The evolutionists are pretty darned sure that is how it happened, maybe, possibly, but who knows for sure, except it is absolutely true without a doubt.