Evolution vs. Creation

Evolution vs. Creation

There are 195626 comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, 2011, titled Evolution vs. Creation. In it, Best of New Orleans reports that:

High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Best of New Orleans.

Patriot

Nashville, TN

#90152 May 22, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
So then your morals are not absolute nor is your god unchanging.
Morals are absolute and GOD does not change James 1:17. Heb 13:8. 1 Peter 1:25

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#90153 May 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Who are the ones now days trying to call anyone who doesn't think Evolution is right unstable and a danger to everyone around them? Sounds like something a large cult would do to aquire control of people. Just sayin
Who does that? If you deny evolution you are deluding yourself, and are really being rather... quaint... if anything, but your stupidity certainly doesn't make you dangerous. By the same token, I am not afraid of flat earthers.

Hey guy, didja know that "evolutionists" have nothing in common with cult members? Where do you guys get this stuff?
FREE SERVANT
#90154 May 22, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
Expanding.
You could call it weird, I find it considerably less fantastical than most of the creation myths. You think that the entire universe was created so that sheep herders could worship God from a near infinitely obscure ball of dirt? You have no concept of scale whatsoever.
Why not take a count of the number of cells and parts that were created so that you can live and breath.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#90155 May 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>I meant to post to you and replied to Mac, but it is the same thing you guys are doing when you liken Christians to Nazies and cults just to try and control peoples thinking and convince everyone there is no God, your leaders are telling you to promote a lie.
I don't tell anyone there is no god. I just don't believe in one. That you seem to think that evolution is incompatible with the notion of god is the fault of evangelicals, not scientists. No scientist goes around saying "evolution disproves god." It's the religious nutjobs who go around saying "evolution can't possibly be true... because god!"
Tyler Armstrong

Englewood, CO

#90156 May 22, 2013
Eveloution can't be true for more than one reason. if the big bang was true all planets would spin in the same direction. Explain this. How do you explain who created the world. Also say for the gun control in the us how would their be free will if their was no one to put it in us. Also how come monkeys now are not turning into humans? Huh?
Patriot

Nashville, TN

#90157 May 22, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually no. Part of the "Jesus story" was written by people who were fairly familiar with the OT prophecies so certain prophecies were "fulfilled" by the authors. For example Jesus was not called "Emmanuel". One verse claims that he was. Yet everywhere else he is called Jesus. That was a ham fisted attempt by the author to "fulfill" a prophesy. And the so called fulfilling of prophecy causes occasional contradictions in the NT where one writer writes one detail and another a different one. Each trying to fulfill prophecies that never came true.
The gospels conplement each other, for example Luke was written from a Greek perspective(he was a physician)Matthew was written from a Jewish perspective. The 3 synoptic gospels, Matt, Mark, Luke record most of the same events but at times they recorded different parts of the same event that can add on to the events the other recorded about the same incident. The gospel of John recorded events mostly not recorded by the 3 others.For example the story of the rich young ruler, the accounts of Matt and Luke each record details the other did not, but they do not contradict each other. For example you and I go to town and we go to a department store and we write about the trip. In your narrative you talk about the place we went,for example we go to department store and you talk about looking at shoes, coats, cookware Mostly and I mostly talk about visiting the sporting goods,pet supplies,shoes and the coats .there is no contradiction we just give different details of the same trip.Even though I did not mention looking at cookware that in no way contradicts your account
Zack Crossley

Englewood, CO

#90158 May 22, 2013
Charles Darwin was an original Christian who was mad at God because of his daughter's death. He also openly admitted in the origin of species that there was no way that the extremely complex human eye was not created without some sort of design.
Tyler Armstrong

Englewood, CO

#90159 May 22, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>The gospels conplement each other, for example Luke was written from a Greek perspective(he was a physician)Matthew was written from a Jewish perspective. The 3 synoptic gospels, Matt, Mark, Luke record most of the same events but at times they recorded different parts of the same event that can add on to the events the other recorded about the same incident. The gospel of John recorded events mostly not recorded by the 3 others.For example the story of the rich young ruler, the accounts of Matt and Luke each record details the other did not, but they do not contradict each other. For example you and I go to town and we go to a department store and we write about the trip. In your narrative you talk about the place we went,for example we go to department store and you talk about looking at shoes, coats, cookware Mostly and I mostly talk about visiting the sporting goods,pet supplies,shoes and the coats .there is no contradiction we just give different details of the same trip.Even though I did not mention looking at cookware that in no way contradicts your account
I agree very strongly with your statment. I'm a huge follower of Christ
Tyler Armstrong

Englewood, CO

#90160 May 22, 2013
Zack Crossley wrote:
Charles Darwin was an original Christian who was mad at God because of his daughter's death. He also openly admitted in the origin of species that there was no way that the extremely complex human eye was not created without some sort of design.
Still he had no right to take it out on our God.
Tyler Armstrong

Englewood, CO

#90161 May 22, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't tell anyone there is no god. I just don't believe in one. That you seem to think that evolution is incompatible with the notion of god is the fault of evangelicals, not scientists. No scientist goes around saying "evolution disproves god." It's the religious nutjobs who go around saying "evolution can't possibly be true... because god!"
You should really believe in a God because he has power to save. Also he's the one that made everything in his own image.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#90162 May 22, 2013
Patriot wrote:
<quoted text>Just one you say..ok Isiah 53:7. Psalms 22 is a messianic psalm.
The problem with Isaiah 53:7 is that a lamb for a sin offering for the common people must be female. Leviticus 4:32, Malachi 1:14. As far as Psalm 22, the main thing about this was supposed to be the "floods". What part of the body fills up with "water" and is associated with thirst? Refer also to Psalm 69:2,:14, and :15. Also, Jesus' hands weren't pierced, it was his wrists. If the wrists were supposed to be pierced the scripture would say that. Job 16 is also about this event which happened in the Messiahs' childhood.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#90163 May 22, 2013
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
Eveloution can't be true for more than one reason. if the big bang was true all planets would spin in the same direction.
Wow. Hodgepodge of different questions, but here goes: Planet spin (and rotation around the Sun/star) is USUALLY the result of the principle of PHYSICS (not Biology) called "Conservation of Angular Momentum". Again, this is a principle of PHYSICS, and has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution, or Biology in general.
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
Explain this. How do you explain who created the world.
Again, Physics. Not Biology.
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
Also say for the gun control in the us how would their be free will if their was no one to put it in us.


Damn, son. Try that one again. That sentance made absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
Also how come monkeys now are not turning into humans? Huh?
You mean INDIVIDUAL monkeys? Or populations of monkeys? 4-6 million years ago, a group of what you would call 'monkeys' began a VERY SLOW process of evolution where each successive generation would change VERY SLIGHTLY, with the end result ending up as human.

EVERY animal today -- including humans -- continue this process. Except that INDIVIDUAL animals -- including humans -- do not change. Their children, grand children, and so forth take the next VERY SMALL steps in Evolution.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#90164 May 22, 2013
Zack Crossley wrote:
Charles Darwin was an original Christian who was mad at God because of his daughter's death. He also openly admitted in the origin of species that there was no way that the extremely complex human eye was not created without some sort of design.
Incorrect (LIE).

You're probably thinking of a popular quote-mine of Darwin:

"To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." (Darwin 1872)

<< The paragraph continues >>

"Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound."

(Darwin 1872, 143-144)

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#90165 May 22, 2013
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
<quoted text>
You should really believe in a God because he has power to save. Also he's the one that made everything in his own image.
A compelling argument.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#90166 May 22, 2013
timn17 wrote:
<quoted text>I don't tell anyone there is no god. I just don't believe in one. That you seem to think that evolution is incompatible with the notion of god is the fault of evangelicals, not scientists. No scientist goes around saying "evolution disproves god." It's the religious nutjobs who go around saying "evolution can't possibly be true... because god!"
There are many professed scientists who go around saying that evolution disproves God.
For example, William B Provine, Ph.D., a renowned historian of science and professor at Cornell University, wrote...
"Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent."*

*(Provine W.B., "Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life." Abstract of Prof. William B. Provine's 1998 "Darwin Day address, "Darwin Day" website, University of Tennessee Knoxville TN, 1998).

You are guzzling evo-koolaid. The disclaimer that God is compatible with Darwinism is made oly for purposes of political correctness.
buckwheat

Tulsa, OK

#90167 May 22, 2013
Tyler Armstrong wrote:
<quoted text>I'm a huge follower of Christ
I'm sad for you. Maybe, someday, you can break loose of that childhood brainwashing that we all went through as children.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#90168 May 22, 2013
FREE SERVANT wrote:
<quoted text>Why not take a count of the number of cells and parts that were created so that you can live and breath.
You make the expected and mundane fundamental(ist) error in stressing the word "created." It is a word that you cannot shake from your daily lexicon and a telling limitation.
Following your lead to its logical conclusion, don't you know that biology is meddling with the mysteries of God, hospitals are the houses of Satan and medicines are demonic potions? If it's God's Will for you to suffer a headache, who are YOU to supplant His Will with an asprin?

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#90169 May 22, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
There are many professed scientists who go around saying that evolution disproves God.

For example, William B Provine, Ph.D., a renowned historian of science and professor at Cornell University, wrote...

"Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent."*

*(Provine W.B., "Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life." Abstract of Prof. William B. Provine's 1998 "Darwin Day address, "Darwin Day" website, University of Tennessee Knoxville TN, 1998).
Which is nothing but his (their) opinion(s).
Provine's (or other similarly-minded) PERSONAL OPINIONS are just that. Opinion. Worth only the weight you might endow it with.

Certianly not proof of a pattern of thought amongst all scientists.
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>You are guzzling evo-koolaid. The disclaimer that God is compatible with Darwinism is made oly for purposes of political correctness.
Which is nothing but YOUR opinion.
Your PERSONAL OPINIONS are just that. Opinion. Worth only the weight anyone might endow it with.

Certainly not proof of a pattern of thought amonst all Christians.
HTS

Mandan, ND

#90170 May 22, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Which is nothing but his (their) opinion(s).
Provine's (or other similarly-minded) PERSONAL OPINIONS are just that. Opinion. Worth only the weight you might endow it with.
Certianly not proof of a pattern of thought amongst all scientists.
<quoted text>
Which is nothing but YOUR opinion.
Your PERSONAL OPINIONS are just that. Opinion. Worth only the weight anyone might endow it with.
Certainly not proof of a pattern of thought amonst all Christians.
I was merely refuting the statement, "No scientist goes around saying "evolution disproves god."
That is clearly not the case.

Level 3

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#90171 May 22, 2013
HTS wrote:
<quoted text>
There are many professed scientists who go around saying that evolution disproves God.
For example, William B Provine, Ph.D., a renowned historian of science and professor at Cornell University, wrote...
"Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly. 1) No gods worth having exist; 2) no life after death exists; 3) no ultimate foundation for ethics exists; 4) no ultimate meaning in life exists; and 5) human free will is nonexistent."*
*(Provine W.B., "Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life." Abstract of Prof. William B. Provine's 1998 "Darwin Day address, "Darwin Day" website, University of Tennessee Knoxville TN, 1998).
You are guzzling evo-koolaid. The disclaimer that God is compatible with Darwinism is made oly for purposes of political correctness.
He is in the minority.

And if it's not compatible, then your religion is automatically disqualified from consideration. I don't care about being politically correct - in fact, I'm happy for you to take yourself out of the running. The evidence for evolution is so clear and so compelling that, if set up as diametrically opposed to religion, it's no contest.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 3 min SweLL GirL 189,547
Answer a question with a question (Apr '15) 5 min KNIGHT DeVINE 1,863
for those who are sick of devine poetry say I (Sep '12) 7 min grace-fallen 63
Only Three Word (Nov '09) 9 min andet1987 13,075
Word Association 2 (Sep '13) 10 min Jennifer Renee 17,178
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 11 min Dont_You_Dare 8,143
WHAT???? A NEW word game? FOUR WORDS (Sep '08) 12 min Parden Pard 43,810
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 17 min Dont_You_Dare 144,187
Crystal_Clears Kitchen (Refurbished) 27 min LBS 5,361
Transgender bathrooms .... thoughts? 47 min Lawrence Wolf 99
More from around the web