I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately.
But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before sea life. That is not correct. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea."
I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above.
what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be
it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way
an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things"
there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself
Thanks for your post Raf. It's obvious that you have spent time researching evolution which is great. There is so much information about it out there, all of which never interested me in the past. But now that I no longer believe a god exists and that the bible is not his word, what's left is how do I make sense of the natural beauty of life on this planet. Just to observe it, to interact with it and to appreciate it, for me, begs an answer to the question of how did it all come to be.
I'm surprised by how emotional this topic is turning out to be. I can't explain why, so I'm calling it a night and will see what the morning brings.
what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be
it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way
an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things"
there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself
You know cman, I really appreciate this post of yours. Thanks
I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately.
But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before aquatic life. That is not correct. Sharks have been around longer than trees. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea."
Birds. Meanwhile, descended from reptile like ancestors. So did mammals. Which means you can't say [as Genesis 1 does] that birds preceded land animals.
I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above.
Would this be appropriate to post on WordWolf's thread? Maybe. But it doesn't feel very sportsmanlike.
When I let go of my belief in God and "his word," other than feeling a brief loss over there being no life after death as described in the bible, only a feeling of relief existed. I could stop trying to figure out god, and I didn't have to worry about people going through the great tribulation and other such nonsense.
But letting go of God as the creator had a lot of emotions attached to it as I discovered last night. Without having anything to do with the bible, the love that I have for nature and the awe at what are bodies are capable of doing always made God seem real to me.
I've decided to stop focusing on what Christians have to say about evolution and their attempts to make it fit with creation. I figure it's better to spend that time learning about evolution for myself. I have heard people who have studied how life evolved as part of their career say there is a wonder to it.
So, I took out several books from the library today, none that are heavy reading to get me started.
"I don't know" is a perfectly legitimate answer to "God", or anything to do with said god. It's a much better answer than relying on what others have written about it, including scripture.
Well, I'm contemplating evolution for the first time. Watched a video called "The Whole History of the Earth and Life." It began with how the earth came into being and continues to humans evolving. I could see how it was possible in the way it was explained, but I did have a lot of questions when done. Also looking at books as well. So, we'll see how it goes.
Well, I'm contemplating evolution for the first time. Watched a video called "The Whole History of the Earth and Life." It began with how the earth came into being and continues to humans evolving. I could see how it was possible in the way it was explained, but I did have a lot of questions when done. Also looking at books as well. So, we'll see how it goes.
nice....keep your wit about you, wisdom will guide
The problem from an unbeliever's perspective is that some believers tend to hide God in "I don't know."
Where does thunder come from?
I don't know.
GOD!!!
Actually, there's a natural explanation.
Does it account for hurricanes?
No, I don't know where...
GOD!!!
Actually, there's a natural cause for hurricanes.
Evolution answers a lot of questions and challenges a lot of preconceptions. But it doesn't answer a LOT. Nor does it claim to. How did life begin? Evolution does not answer. The answer does not affect evolution at all.
So even if it was God who got the ball rolling, that does not change the FACT of evolution. It happened. It's how we arrived at the variety of species we have today. It's why there are more species of birds on earth than there are verses in the New Testament.
Some creationists are fond of asking questions that lack foundation and comprehension. Why is evolution "only" a theory? Because so is gravity. Theories don't graduate into laws. Theories in science are conclusions, not hypotheses. You don't experiment to prove a theory. You experiment, get the results and incorporate them into the theory.
Evolution is not a hypothesis. It's not a preconception. It's the opposite of a bias. It's what you get when you ditch the biases and let the evidence speak for itself.
But there will always be questions to which we don't have the answer. And we will answer "I don't know." And the Ken Hamms of the world will say aha! GOD is THERE!
I did some moderating here even though I am involved in the discussion.
The above post is not directed at anyone on GSC until and unless they accept that it describes their feelings. No one here is being accused of fitting that description. It was describing other Christians on other sites, one of whom is specifically named. If you do not feel this way or act this way, the post is not talking about you.
The offending posts were hidden, as were the responses. Another mod may or may not decide what to restore.
In the meantime, this thread is about evolution v creation in the context of a person seeking to examine evolution without religious preconceptions.
Make it about me again and the post gets deleted. Do it as often as you want and it's gone.
Evolution answers a lot of questions and challenges a lot of preconceptions. But it doesn't answer a LOT. Nor does it claim to. How did life begin? Evolution does not answer. The answer does not affect evolution at all.
From the 6:00 to 11:00 mark on the video, an explanation is given for the beginning of Proto-life, but the question is how do they know this for sure?
I did some moderating here even though I am involved in the discussion.
The above post is not directed at anyone on GSC until and unless they accept that it describes their feelings. No one here is being accused of fitting that description. It was describing other Christians on other sites, one of whom is specifically named. If you do not feel this way or act this way, the post is not talking about you.
The offending posts were hidden, as were the responses. Another mod may or may not decide what to restore.
In the meantime, this thread is about evolution v creation in the context of a person seeking to examine evolution without religious preconceptions.
Make it about me again and the post gets deleted. Do it as often as you want and it's gone.
One more offense and the poster will be put on moderator approval, where EVERY post gets vetted to ensure it's on topic prior to anyone else seeing it.
Ken is an idiot of the highest order, and I could see taking offense if you think he's right,
To say Ken Hamm is an idiot of the highest order is not an insult. It is an observable, demonstrable fact. How idiotic is the highest order? It’s at the level of flat-earth and four-crucified stupidity - the highest level.
That someone would be offended by another’s description of a third person is difficult for me to understand. I can conceive of it, but it’s hard to understand.
I don’t mean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write “four-crucified stupidity.”
Over the years, posters here have said victor paul wierwille is The Man of God, The Seventh The Man of God, and The Teacher.
Consider for a moment how offensive those words must be to those who love God and to teachers. How offensive? N-word-with-hard-R offensive, that's how!
No one has ever asked those posters to self edit in order to mitigate the risk of offense.
I don’t mean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write “four-crucified stupidity.”
"I don’tmean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write 'four-crucified stupidity.' "
I have to say that I was THE anti-"evolutionist" in my high school, and today I am really embarrassed about it.
I remember submitting a science project asking why horses and cows have different kinds of teeth when they eat the same kinds of grass. Or something like that. It was 40 years ago.
I used to blame evolution and its doctrine of survival of the fittest for the rise of Hitler.
Hitler, who, by the way, was not an atheist. And not a proper Christian. An evil SOB whose "God" was a hateful corruption of the Christian God. But not an atheist.
Anyway, as I educated myself, I realized certain truths that, to be honest, quite surprised me.
1. Evolution does not have an endgame. It's not headed somewhere.
2. No species is more "advanced" than any other. We are where we are, when we are. Gorillas are just as advanced as man... it's a matter of their suitability to survive in their environment.
3. "Survival of the fittest" isn't about who's strongest. It's about who lives long enough to reproduce.
Recommended Posts
Raf
I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately.
But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before sea life. That is not correct. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea."
I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
what or who is god, if prelearned ideas of god are eliminated then what could it be
it's fine to not believe in god, it's mostly someone else's idea of what god is that has been introduced in some sort of biased way
an old Indian/survival book I read once called it "the spirit that moves through all things"
there will always be the old back and forth between ideas, but really what is god and what is it that is believed or not believed, something that should be answered to yourself
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Thanks for your post Raf. It's obvious that you have spent time researching evolution which is great. There is so much information about it out there, all of which never interested me in the past. But now that I no longer believe a god exists and that the bible is not his word, what's left is how do I make sense of the natural beauty of life on this planet. Just to observe it, to interact with it and to appreciate it, for me, begs an answer to the question of how did it all come to be.
I'm surprised by how emotional this topic is turning out to be. I can't explain why, so I'm calling it a night and will see what the morning brings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
You know cman, I really appreciate this post of yours. Thanks
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I made a deliberate decision not to reply to WordWolf's thread in doctrinal, because it's doctrinal, or here, because of the time investment that would be required to handle the material adequately.
But someone somewhere should point out: the notion that Genesis correctly outlines the progress of the appearance of life on earth is... not correct. I mean, Genesis has plant life beginning before aquatic life. That is not correct. Sharks have been around longer than trees. It fails [as most would] to recognize that some animal life went from land to sea, not just sea to land. Whales evolved from land mammals. But Genesis has "the great creatures of the sea" appearing before land animals. Hard to imagine whales were not included in "great creatures of the sea."
Birds. Meanwhile, descended from reptile like ancestors. So did mammals. Which means you can't say [as Genesis 1 does] that birds preceded land animals.
I don't need to nitpick Genesis. But I would not subscribe to the notion that it got anything "right" about the progression of the appearance of life on earth, ESPECIALLY after taking into account that plant life showed up before the sun, moon and stars were placed in the giant dome covering the earth and keeping it from being flooded by the waters above.
Would this be appropriate to post on WordWolf's thread? Maybe. But it doesn't feel very sportsmanlike.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
When I let go of my belief in God and "his word," other than feeling a brief loss over there being no life after death as described in the bible, only a feeling of relief existed. I could stop trying to figure out god, and I didn't have to worry about people going through the great tribulation and other such nonsense.
But letting go of God as the creator had a lot of emotions attached to it as I discovered last night. Without having anything to do with the bible, the love that I have for nature and the awe at what are bodies are capable of doing always made God seem real to me.
I've decided to stop focusing on what Christians have to say about evolution and their attempts to make it fit with creation. I figure it's better to spend that time learning about evolution for myself. I have heard people who have studied how life evolved as part of their career say there is a wonder to it.
So, I took out several books from the library today, none that are heavy reading to get me started.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
"I don't know" is a perfectly legitimate answer to "God", or anything to do with said god. It's a much better answer than relying on what others have written about it, including scripture.
So, where to go for answers?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Well, I'm contemplating evolution for the first time. Watched a video called "The Whole History of the Earth and Life." It began with how the earth came into being and continues to humans evolving. I could see how it was possible in the way it was explained, but I did have a lot of questions when done. Also looking at books as well. So, we'll see how it goes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cman
nice....keep your wit about you, wisdom will guide
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
The problem from an unbeliever's perspective is that some believers tend to hide God in "I don't know."
Where does thunder come from?
I don't know.
GOD!!!
Actually, there's a natural explanation.
Does it account for hurricanes?
No, I don't know where...
GOD!!!
Actually, there's a natural cause for hurricanes.
Evolution answers a lot of questions and challenges a lot of preconceptions. But it doesn't answer a LOT. Nor does it claim to. How did life begin? Evolution does not answer. The answer does not affect evolution at all.
So even if it was God who got the ball rolling, that does not change the FACT of evolution. It happened. It's how we arrived at the variety of species we have today. It's why there are more species of birds on earth than there are verses in the New Testament.
Some creationists are fond of asking questions that lack foundation and comprehension. Why is evolution "only" a theory? Because so is gravity. Theories don't graduate into laws. Theories in science are conclusions, not hypotheses. You don't experiment to prove a theory. You experiment, get the results and incorporate them into the theory.
Evolution is not a hypothesis. It's not a preconception. It's the opposite of a bias. It's what you get when you ditch the biases and let the evidence speak for itself.
But there will always be questions to which we don't have the answer. And we will answer "I don't know." And the Ken Hamms of the world will say aha! GOD is THERE!
Until we find the answer. Then God is elsewhere.
Every. Single. Time.
Edited by RafLink to comment
Share on other sites
modcat5
I did some moderating here even though I am involved in the discussion.
The above post is not directed at anyone on GSC until and unless they accept that it describes their feelings. No one here is being accused of fitting that description. It was describing other Christians on other sites, one of whom is specifically named. If you do not feel this way or act this way, the post is not talking about you.
The offending posts were hidden, as were the responses. Another mod may or may not decide what to restore.
In the meantime, this thread is about evolution v creation in the context of a person seeking to examine evolution without religious preconceptions.
Make it about me again and the post gets deleted. Do it as often as you want and it's gone.
Stay on the g-dam topic.
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
From the 6:00 to 11:00 mark on the video, an explanation is given for the beginning of Proto-life, but the question is how do they know this for sure?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Thanks!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Ken Hamm was mentioned.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Ken is an idiot of the highest order, and I could see taking offense if you think he's right, but unless you do, the shoe should not fit.
If it doesn't fit, no one's talking about you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
modcat5
An off-topic comment was deleted.
One more offense and the poster will be put on moderator approval, where EVERY post gets vetted to ensure it's on topic prior to anyone else seeing it.
FA,FO.
Thank you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
To say Ken Hamm is an idiot of the highest order is not an insult. It is an observable, demonstrable fact. How idiotic is the highest order? It’s at the level of flat-earth and four-crucified stupidity - the highest level.
That someone would be offended by another’s description of a third person is difficult for me to understand. I can conceive of it, but it’s hard to understand.
I don’t mean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write “four-crucified stupidity.”
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Nathan,
Because you have incomplete info. I am going to invite you to self-edit so the offending party does not feel the need to respond.
How you proceed is up to you.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Thanks for the invitation, Raf. Kind of you to consider me, but I must, on principle, decline the invitation at this time.
I can't offend anyone. The offended must choose to participate in the offense. Without that conscious participation, how can one be offended?
Edited by Nathan_JrLink to comment
Share on other sites
Nathan_Jr
Over the years, posters here have said victor paul wierwille is The Man of God, The Seventh The Man of God, and The Teacher.
Consider for a moment how offensive those words must be to those who love God and to teachers. How offensive? N-word-with-hard-R offensive, that's how!
No one has ever asked those posters to self edit in order to mitigate the risk of offense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charity
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
"I don’t mean to invite discussion of this. I missed some posts. Not sure what’s going on and it doesn’t really matter, but I couldn’t resist another opportunity to write 'four-crucified stupidity.' "
I would not dare ask you to refrain.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I have to say that I was THE anti-"evolutionist" in my high school, and today I am really embarrassed about it.
I remember submitting a science project asking why horses and cows have different kinds of teeth when they eat the same kinds of grass. Or something like that. It was 40 years ago.
I used to blame evolution and its doctrine of survival of the fittest for the rise of Hitler.
Hitler, who, by the way, was not an atheist. And not a proper Christian. An evil SOB whose "God" was a hateful corruption of the Christian God. But not an atheist.
Anyway, as I educated myself, I realized certain truths that, to be honest, quite surprised me.
1. Evolution does not have an endgame. It's not headed somewhere.
2. No species is more "advanced" than any other. We are where we are, when we are. Gorillas are just as advanced as man... it's a matter of their suitability to survive in their environment.
3. "Survival of the fittest" isn't about who's strongest. It's about who lives long enough to reproduce.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.