Evolution vs. Creation

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

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108172 Jan 22, 2014
scambuster wrote:
"Evolution Vs. Creation". That seems like a false dichotomy. Could not an all-powerful God create the laws of physics so that evolution constantly improves species to adapt to their surroundings?
I think that the title of this thread should be "Evolution Vs. Biblical Literalism", seeing that there are many Christians who believe in a form of theistic evolution.
The biblical literalism considered is the kind based upon the Greek translation of Aramaic writings. And this changed over the centuries to be virtually uncomparable with the Greek groundtext and most certainly with the Hebrew text.

A small example is the fact that when it talks of animals and humans the hebrew text talks about the same 'nephesh'.

Therefore teaching the christian version of creationism disguised into I.D. as if some actual sound scrutiny of science had been taking part is nothing but pushing the christian agenda forward and putting this on a pinacle.
Thereby creating a cultural devide
One could see it as just a different form of discrimination and even old-school hate stirring in a new jacket.

The only claim I.D. is still being upheld with is the simple mathematics by Sanford to value mutations. Devolution is taken for a fact.(I.D. assumes the 'decadence to deprevation' theory, as does the escatological content of all christian teaching.)
That the mathematical method (it's afterall nothing more but a tool) can be used to also proof neutral as well as forward evolution is usually not considered.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108173 Jan 22, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Don' t run answer the question. And again, why are the people of England called the Engllish alone?
Before the holydays i asked what the relevance of this point was.

I declined reading 4000 posts.

But i suppose you had enough time to figure out the answer to this running gag and can therefore produce it straightaway..

I must say it provides a nice secure idea of this thread continuing as usual.
i.e. expect more strange notions in the attempt to present some sort of theory of creation.

Sofar:
Hebrews (the christian book) says Adam could not have been.
The human race all stem from a fired gardener and a drunk sea captain, starting to lay the groundwork for this exemplary progeny about 6000 years ago.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108174 Jan 22, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:

<quoted text> As long as evolution is zero without creation, there is a creator. Our ancestors are good examples.*

Because we a.o. speak english and since you credit England with that , there is a god functioning as creator performing on demand, as if a monkey, the tricks as stated in the christian bible.!

pfuiii!

Isn't such a notion blasphemy?

* fired gardener and the drunk sea-captain.
And ofcourse Christine M.'s gran-gran-gran without dictionary.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108175 Jan 22, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> Don' t run answer the question. And again, why are the people of England called the Engllish alone?
Because they had the truly great king Alfred (? a.k.a.)

Though charlemange was credited with bringing education to the masses, he did not actually do so.
King Alfred however did, and since he was an Angel (as in sword wielder. Arch-angel is double. Both mean bloody big sword, one as noun and one as verb) the populace got EDUCATION. as in learning to read and write is something we do now not even recognize as english

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108176 Jan 22, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The first DNA or the first genetic material? Because the first genetic material was almost certainly not DNA, it was probably RNA.
But that is beside the point. Where did the first 'information' in genetic material come from? Once again, the information is in the concentrations and types of atoms and basic components of that genetic material and how those components react with each other. There is information in how a nucleotide interacts with other nucleotides. There is information in how strings of nucleotides catalyze important reactions. There is information in how the different components bind to each other. That information comes from the very laws of physics and chemistry that control everything.
cause effect.

To be distinguished from Christine M.:
There is nothing in quantum science to say that effect cannot
come before or is even related to cause.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108177 Jan 22, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
First, you use the charged word 'created'. To be caused is not the same thing as to be created. The latter implies an intelligence working that is not required for the first. So, the first genetic material (which was likely not DNA) was caused, but not created.
Second, the cause of that genetic material was, just like everything else in the universe, the laws of physics and chemistry acting on the materials that were previously around: nucleic acids, lipids, etc. The information is in the ways these basic chemicals interact.
You do understand that DNA and RNA are made from simpler components: the nucleic acids? And that various strings of those nucleic acids can catalyze important reactions for life, right? And that these components do, in fact, naturally bind to each other to promote such reactions, right?
You are so tied up with the concept of information, that you don't realize that many interactions produce information, that it is propagated, and duplicated extensively. Even in the simple fact that hydrogen and oxygen will interact and produce water is information. There is much more so in the ways that the different types of nucleotides interact.
Concur.

Which brings to mind another language sample.

BARA (hebrew) in with/connected i.o.w. filling. Fattening of that which is.
It's not about creating the world but about becoming awareness of/by distinctions.
(Also the grammar does not say so)
LOGOS is the old meaning Heraclitus gave it.(5th c. BCE)

Harking back to the ancient ideas that written words are magic, and fasten objects and give them life. Describing what is there. But a filling nevertheless.( Water , the deep, see the kosmonogy of the egyptians and enumah elish)

LOGOS in the later meaning. Word, thing , object. Making a new thing by a power-furmula.
The 'jewmagick' of John's Word.(4th c. CE insertion.)

Creation (Strongs, mainly looking at the Arab and greek corpus) would be something that was formerly unknown, not there, a new thing. With the clear connotation of missing before and a result of a causal ( re)action. So suggesting a passing of time and a definite cause.
And a person/Judges=elohiym doing the judgement.
Mainly used in 'laws of retribution' formulas. The form: Because X therefore Y.
A god is appearing in a dream and this gives credence to the judgement,, which is put in the form of prophesies, which are essentially nothing more but applying simple cause and effect relationship.
'Laws of retribution' formulas are in the ANE literature also all invocations and 'magic' cusses and curses thus.

In b'rshyt the two forms (filling - MAKE and judgement-formula MAKE IT SO) have become mingled.
A few words actually doing a lot of work.(The nature of the language is that all nouns are implying action. Not a static language with abstractions thus.)
The book as far as i'm concerned could have sufficed with just the word b'rshyt.
Everything else is repetition.( ;) variation on Hillel the third and his golden rule statement)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#108178 Jan 22, 2014
Charles Idemi wrote:
<quoted text> You mean your delusion. You can not rule out the possibility of God. Evolution is zero without creation.
Actually so far creationism is batting zero in terms of empricism while evolution has been doing pretty good for 150 years. And you guys have had a four thousand year head start.

On an apologetics level however, I agree completely that you're beating us in that regard.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#108179 Jan 22, 2014
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>Erm, no.
There was a whole war over that.
Meh, details, details...
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#108180 Jan 22, 2014
scambuster wrote:
"Evolution Vs. Creation". That seems like a false dichotomy. Could not an all-powerful God create the laws of physics so that evolution constantly improves species to adapt to their surroundings?
I think that the title of this thread should be "Evolution Vs. Biblical Literalism", seeing that there are many Christians who believe in a form of theistic evolution.
All depends on what limits you want to place on your God.

The "God" aspect will always be non-scientific, only due to the fact that it does not pass the scientific method. But science itself does not automatically rule out the possibility, so until someone comes up with a scientific definition for it, it will remain in the non-falsifiable category.

Basically it's like this - if your religious beliefs do not require you to reject reality, then good for you. If they do, reality will beat you at every time. It's that simple.

The VAST majority of creationists however (and some hard-line atheists too) prefer the false dichotomy. Which is a shame since it's more of a philosophical dichotomy than a scientific one. When it comes to philosophical or theological opinions, science doesn't care either way. All science is interested in is what can be demonstrated empirically.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#108181 Jan 22, 2014
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Before the holydays i asked what the relevance of this point was.
I declined reading 4000 posts.
There is no point. I just find it amusing to bring it up every time Chuck goes off-topic from who owns English. Just one quick mention and just watch the next twenty pages of Charles ranting about the English language. I don't even have to get involved.

Fun.

:-)

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108182 Jan 22, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Meh, details, details...
I know, I know.

Some people just don't pay attention.

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108183 Jan 22, 2014
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>I know, I know.
Some people just don't pay attention.
Yep.
Hi mac!

Afterall guess what happens to god if all Americans start speaking French!

Poof!

Since: Jan 14

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#108184 Jan 22, 2014
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no point. I just find it amusing to bring it up every time Chuck goes off-topic from who owns English. Just one quick mention and just watch the next twenty pages of Charles ranting about the English language. I don't even have to get involved.
Fun.
:-)
I've just had a look over some recent posts, and I'm pretty sure the English own English. Why would it be called that otherwise? I mean, everyone knows that Hamburg owns all the hamburgers in the world, Frankfurt owns the frankfurters, Vienna owns Viennese Whirls, the Swiss own all the Swiss rolls, all sandwiches are owned by the English town of the same name, Battenberg cakes are owned by a German town, French fries are owned by France... I'm hungry. And apparently I don't own any of the food in my kitchen :-(

““You must not lose faith ”

Level 5

Since: Jun 11

Location hidden

#108185 Jan 22, 2014
ouch Hill Start

anglo-saxons Sakson coburg and all that.

We went over the subject pages ago. recent posts are just fun and trying to be creative as in bringing some aspects not talked about.

wiki old-english

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#108186 Jan 22, 2014
MAAT wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep.
Hi mac!
Afterall guess what happens to god if all Americans start speaking French!
Poof!
"In Dieu We Trust"?

LOL

Level 1

Since: Jul 08

Rio Rancho, NM

#108187 Jan 22, 2014
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
For me it says Oct 5, 2007.
Sorry, I meant Chimney.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#108188 Jan 23, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
So you cannot answer the q uestion, fair enought
If you don't, the world knows.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#108189 Jan 23, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh an easy one, that would be you
n6w
No one is above mistake.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#108190 Jan 23, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you did
I quote
And again, in summary, all those nations mentioned by you can speak English because of England.
So using exactly the same logic (I know, I know, logic us way beyond you) my cat is a fish because she likes tuna
Irony.

Level 2

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#108191 Jan 23, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes you did
I quote
And again, in summary, all those nations mentioned by you can speak English because of England.
So using exactly the same logic (I know, I know, logic us way beyond you) my cat is a fish because she likes tuna
Learn the word, " logic".

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
News James Franco Says He and Selena Gomez Had a "Ba... 2 min Marcavage s Trick 6
motorcycle traveling stories 4 min Beautiful Black M... 35
A To Z Of Movies (Sep '12) 4 min Tonk101 4,619
Christian Metal Hangout (Nov '10) 8 min Wolftracks 6
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 10 min wichita-rick 159,949
***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Jan '10) 15 min Princess Hey 78,572
Add 2 Letters to Complete a Word 18 min andet1987 415
Poll Can single Men be friends with Married Women? (Jun '12) 27 min Beautiful Black M... 251
Word Association (Jun '10) 37 min Mega Monster 27,013
Do you have a Topix crush? (Jun '11) 44 min David0407 8,237
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 3 hr NinaRocks 18,025
More from around the web