Creationish Vs Evolutionism? BE POLITE!

[M.FREEZE]

You can draw parallels between creationist and pro-life individuals and evolutionists and pro-choice individuals. Creationists such as myself view a fetus as a life from conception, and believe that the life of the unborn child was created. Is it safe to say that some evolutionists are pro-choice because they think of a fetus in scientific terms? Just posing a question, not judging anyone's thought process, just trying to understand where people's perceptions come from.

 

[JustAFleshWound]

I just want to offer a clarification for this as well - It's more akin to a single apartment building, where all the required labor to keep the building going, is divided up by different people within it. Some process food, some find it, some protect the community, or repair the walls. After a while, that building is simple named as a new animal. You are just such a community, you rely on bacterial flora in your stomach, your organs are simply cells that communicate with one another and do a certain task, cells that evolved from simpler ones. A community. Deciding some types of communities are a new animal, while others are not, is simply semantics - everything multicelled - whether two algae working together, or the billions of cells that work together and are called a human, is just a community (from a cellular standpoint - philosophical identity is another issue)

Anyway. I appreciate your well wishes, and offer them in return.

I'm sorry, but one part of that I forgot to throw in, I don't want to go back and edit my post now.
The difference is that each one of those single celled organisms living in groups can also survive on their own. you can't exactly cut someones liver out and expect the liver or the other parts of them to still work. Hopefully I won't remember something I forgot to say and prolong this discourse any longer. Good day Brother.

 

[Kiah]

For me it delves down to two opposite systems of belief; neither is completely void of supporting evidence, but one (system of belief) demands that I willingly ignore both the blatantly obvious and that which is missing but should be there.

I would argue that one is completely void of supporting evidence.

A major tenet of the theory of evolution is that life changes (oftentimes dramatically) to cope with outside influences. That certainly appears to be sensible and is observable to an extent. But a problem arises when it comes to dramatic changes or major alterations in life as we know it.

Not really. Changing to cope with outside influences and advantageous adaptation aren't the same thing.

The fossil records show us extinctions and new, fully formed and fully functional life-forms. What it doesn't show is that which would have to be there if the theory of evolution were even halfway correct - thousands upon thousands of in-transition fossils for every one fully formed and functional fossil. Remember - change is the one constant, and if the theory of evolution were correct; dramatic change (in life-forms) would be a constant.

Those few fossils which mankind has classified as transitional life-forms are far more likely to be fully formed, functional, animals that just happened to go extinct. Science is riddled with examples of false assumptions. The fact that we humans think there might possibly be a connection of some sorts (based on our desire to connect the two) is little more than proof of our imaginations.

Does this entail that we should currently be seeing new species develop spontaneously?

Mathematics is science. And mathematics tell us that evolution - Darwin's version anyway - is a statistical impossibility. At least one statistician has likened the theory of evolution to a tornado ripping through a salvage yard and assembling (from the scrap) a fully functioning Boeing 747.

Not only is that a statistical impossibility - it can't happen, it won't ever happen.

If one is to believe that the universe is infinite, then it's a statistical impossibility that any number of tornadoes aren't building 747s as we type.

 

[Kiah]

According to the laws of nature, you can't touch the stump where a mans arm once was and have it grow back before your eyes. And yet, one of my pastors had that happen to him on a mission trip to India last week.

In an age of cameras on every cellphone, you'd think somebody woulda thought to video something like that.

 

[RetiredGuns]

I am an atheist. I tried to understand religion when I was younger, but at 51 years old, I still don't believe, and have not seen anything that would make me change my views...

The idea that one person created all things as we know them, and watches over billions of people, is beyond far fetched IMHO. I have friends that are religious and they try to convince me otherwise, by telling me about what is written in the Bible. I personally put as much stock in the bible, as I do reading things on the internet.

I think religion gives people a sense of security because they fear death. I live my life the way I think I should, but it is because I was raised with morals and taught the difference between right and wrong behavior...
I don't need to read a book, or go to church every week, too know the difference.

The idea that "God" is an all knowing, all caring individual, is rediculous. There are children's hospitals all over the world, that are filled with kids suffering from horrific, terminal diseases. They are subjected to incredible suffering because of these diseases, and often have their lives cut short at a very early age.
There is absolutely no way, any caring person would ever subject innocent kids to live with pain and suffering. There is no compassion at all when it comes to this subject. Actually just the opposite.
I know, the usual response is, " It is all part of Gods plan ".... Really ? I don't understand how any rational person can justify, and accept this.
In my mind, this makes the people that are believers, just as cold and uncaring.

I'm not saying my way of thinking is correct, but there is no proof that I am wrong either.

Disease, famine, starvation, violence is indeed crappy and doesn't seem fair. It's extra frightening if you believe that this short life on earth is all we have. I don't think it is and that gives me comfort.

Also wanted to add that the thread has been very civil which is nearly impossible given the topic. Good job BF.

 

[cncpro11]

Also wanted to add that the thread has been very civil which is nearly impossible given the topic. Good job BF.

Agreed. This has been a very grown up conversation.
I've seen many debates take very ugly turns from both sides.

 

[M.FREEZE]

I agree with RETIREDGUNS about the civility of the responses to this topic. It's what true debate is about, each side presents their argument and you have a discussion. Hard to do with evolution, abortion, politics etc....

 

[Grease]

That's the first time I've heard of a faith healing that involved regrowing an amputated limb. Some objective documentation would be great! Certainly would cause many to ask some good questions about what we know about the world. Unfortunately, reliable documentation for miracles seems to be lacking.

Aye, thats the hard part. When that sort of thing happens, no one is worried about proving that it happened later on. You can't really say "Yes, this miracle is about to happen and we need to prove it!" because you don't know what to expect, if anything. It took place at a fairly big (several thousand people) meeting in a larger city. I would bet if you spoke the native language you could track the guy down, but most of the people who went on the trip had to go through interpreters and couldn't really learn names or details about the people they did stuff for

The hardest part over there is the fact that evangelism is illegal. You can decide to change faiths on your own, and you can go look for answers to your questions, but you can't decide to go offer the answers first. It certainly made the trip interesting for them, to say the least.

 

[HomeBru]

I am a 7-day, young earth, Biblical creationist. I am also a biologist and teach high school biology, including evolutionary theory. (Yes, it's theory. If it can't be proven/observed, it remains theory, scientifically.) Books have been written about all perspectives, but I'll be brief.

First, the biblical side: If it can be accepted that God is omnipotent (all powerful), therefore it must be accepted that the earth and all living things could have been created in six days about 15,000 years ago. It could even be accepted that the earth was created fifteen seconds ago with all of it's collective history, development, and issues. This requires accepting an omnipotent God. Therefore, since I believe that the Bible is the word of God as recorded by men, then since the Bible says six days, I accept that as truth. It's called faith.

Now, to the evolution side: There is irrefutable evidence that species change over time in response to changes in their environment (microevolution) and populations disappear at times or thrive at other times. The propensity for change is built into the genetic code of all organisms. However, the evidence for speciation (macroevolution) is still very much theoretical.

The issue is viewpoint. I look at the world as created and see the fingerprints of God in everything from DNA, protein synthesis, reproduction, and biological response to the relationships between species. It is an amazing testament to the creativity and attention to detail of the creator. An atheist looks at the same DNA, protein synthesis, etc. and requires a natural, scientific explanation for the same. Because the atheist does not accept the existence of God, they cannot accept the possibility of a creator.

 

[Grease]

Disease, famine, starvation, violence is indeed crappy and doesn't seem fair.

Think of it this way. You built a robot, gave it self awareness, then told it to go have fun within a few set rules that would keep it safe. The robot decided to break the rules and got hurt. Is that your fault or the robots fault? It's not fair based on our human definition of the word, but in the grand scheme of things its just how stuff works. Actions have consequences, some better than others.

Thats why God offered a second chance, so we can decide to become a perfect person that won't make stupid mistakes any more. It's like a "I told you so", but he follows it up by saying "Here, come join me again and I won't let that bad stuff happen any more. Sound good?"

 

[M.FREEZE]

"Because the atheist does not accept the existence of God, they cannot accept the possibility of a creator."

That was the point I was trying to get across earlier when I likened some evolutionists to pro-choice. If someone doesn't believe in a higher power but sees everything as scientific then that person would most likely view life in the womb as a group of cells rather than a fetus.
Well said HomeBru

 

[M.FREEZE]

Double post

 

[willseeyalater]

Creation and a Creator-When you look at the complexity of things going out into space as far as we can observe then going the other way with microscopes the design continues to unpeel in intricate and complicated systems. Macro and micro order and intricacy, I think there was a Designer with a really nice set of tools.

 

[kniferbro]

"In the biological context, 'evolution' refers to changes across generations in biological characteristics. These changes may lead to more complexity, or to less. Neither does evolution produce a better set of organisms in any aesthetic sense, nor does it produce a product that is intrinsically better than earlier forms. It simply reflects the pattern of organic change over time in response to processes that alter biological facets of organisms such that in a given environment or set of environments those organisms with particular traits leave more offspring, on average, that do others with different sets of traits" (Fuentes, 2009).

A lot of people misunderstand what evolution really is, and so base their rejection of it off a false view. It really is not as cut and dry as "things change over time to become better". Many people cite the eye as their proof that God must have created it, since it is so complex and could never have evolved all of its parts at once. Well that is simply a misunderstanding of how evolution works. The eye or human hand for example doesn't have its own genetic code to which it can itself "evolve". Every part of the body works in a system. You cannot view the eye as evolving out of nothing to serve its function as the sight organ. It evolved within a system, incorporating many other parts of the body.

 

[Ken44]

According to the laws of nature, you can't touch the stump where a mans arm once was and have it grow back before your eyes.
And yet, one of my pastors had that happen to him on a mission trip to India last week.

Could you please tell us more about this story, and how it was told to you ?
Thanks.

edit- nevermind. I just saw your above post.

 

[jwblack911]

As a raised Christian and now card carring atheist I have strong thoughts about religion. The more I read the bible, and I do, the less I believe. Understanding Mesopotamian, Egyptian, Greek and Roman history only solidifies my beliefs. That's all ill say. I'm for evolution.

i second this

 

[ISKski]

I'm actually quite astounded at the poll results as of right now (majority being biblical creationist). Personally I find it a little disheartening.

 

[Klok]

I come from a Deeply Irish catholic family and considered myself as such until about the age of 8 when I actually read the bible for the first time, I clearly remember thinking "this is silly" and in just a couple hours become non religious. soon after I figured out Santa wasn't a thing and was heartbroken. Anyone else remember when Carl Sagen was on the Discovery channel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E-_DdX8Ke0&list=PLD768D4FBD0EBC177
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvMoC1M-GYw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl89HIJ6HDo

Carl sagan is always worth watching.

 

[Esav Benyamin]

Don't be. You can't tell if the sample is fair, or one side is more devoted to participating.

Actually, total creationism = 30
Total science + evolution = 43
Others = 8

 

[cpio]

I am Jewish. I believe in God but not that everything is controlled by creationism. One who believes in God cannot believe that he created man to be too stupid to do some of the great things we've done by ourselves.