Green Coffee Bean

Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I think (and I could be wrong) a lot of it has to do with God creating the world basically and then evolution being what takes place. .
I could live with that theory. God designed a plan that managed itself. There's no biblical evidence that God actively continued to create and work after humans. His only active force is holy spirit.
 
Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I could live with that theory. God designed a plan that managed itself. There's no biblical evidence that God actively continued to create and work after humans. His only active force is holy spirit.
Obviously as an agnostic I don't necessarily buy into it (yeah I take that hard line stance of not buying into anything :)), but I was trying to show him that many people believe the two can coexist.
 
bigdavid

bigdavid

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Ohh I'am sorry I ment GREAT APES. Does that clarify it better for you?

If we evolved from The Hominidae family then how come Chimps, Orangs, Gorillas still exist? Why haven't they turned into us? They continue to breed and make the same species and we continue to breed and make the same species. I've never seen a human give birth to a chimp or have seen a chimp give birth a human. Have you? Even if a human tried to breed with a chimp the chimp would not give birth to a half-human/ half-chimp hybrid. No conception results at all.
Evolution takes place over the time span of thousands, millions, billions of years, not the <100 years that you have been alive. I am not going to reply anymore. I am sorry, but the statements you are making show you have absolutely no idea what you are even discussing. Take a few courses in genetics, evolution, or any biology for that matter and then maybe we will have something to talk about.

Edit: I suppose I should say evolution always takes place, because that is technically correct. But, you cannot see actual changes in species over a 100 year time period, that is the point. Also, you need mechanisms for change. Evolution happens in waves. Very large changes separated by periods of little change. Something has to push the evolution to occur.
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Evolution takes place over the time span of thousands, millions, billions of years, not the <100 years that you have been alive. I am not going to reply anymore. I am sorry, but the statements you are making show you have absolutely no idea what you are even discussing. Take a few courses in genetics, evolution, or any biology for that matter and then maybe we will have something to talk about.

Edit: I suppose I should say evolution always takes place, because that is technically correct. But, you cannot see actual changes in species over a 100 year time period, that is the point. Also, you need mechanisms for change. Evolution happens in waves. Very large changes separated by periods of little change. Something has to push the evolution to occur.
Your saying something that has not been proven. If you read my other post you would see I acknowledge microevolution but There's no solid evidence of macroevolution. It's not that I don't understand what your saying, it's that scientifically I can't agree. It's psuedoscience. Look up the scientist Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig and his findings. Data of 100 years of mutation and 70 years of mutation breeding offered this only conclusion. "Mutations cannot transform an original species into a entirely new one"- Lonnig.
 

Roniboney

Active member
Awards
0
Ohh I'am sorry I ment GREAT APES. Does that clarify it better for you?

If we evolved from The Hominidae family then how come Chimps, Orangs, Gorillas still exist? Why haven't they turned into us? They continue to breed and make the same species and we continue to breed and make the same species. I've never seen a human give birth to a chimp or have seen a chimp give birth a human. Have you? Even if a human tried to breed with a chimp the chimp would not give birth to a half-human/ half-chimp hybrid. No conception results at all.
oh for the love of........................................
 
bigdavid

bigdavid

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Your saying something that has not been proven. If you read my other post you would see I acknowledge microevolution but There's no solid evidence of macroevolution. It's not that I don't understand what your saying, it's that scientifically I can't agree. It's psuedoscience. Look up the scientist Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig and his findings. Data of 100 years of mutation and 70 years of mutation breeding offered this only conclusion. "Mutations cannot transform an original species into a entirely new one"- Lonnig.
It is not pseudoscience. But like I said I am not going to go back and forth it won't accomplish anything. Evolution is a theory​ (theory in science is supported by fact), it is supported by the vast majority of scientists (~99% if not more), and if you do not then that is fine it doesn't really bother me. But the evidence for evolution is >>>>>>> than any evidence for creationism.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Ohh I'am sorry I ment GREAT APES. Does that clarify it better for you?

If we evolved from The Hominidae family then how come Chimps, Orangs, Gorillas still exist? Why haven't they turned into us? .

i dont think these species turned into us, i think a common ancestor turned into them and us

some species survive a long time, others dont
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Edit: I suppose I should say evolution always takes place, because that is technically correct. But, you cannot see actual changes in species over a 100 year time period, that is the point. Also, you need mechanisms for change. Evolution happens in waves. Very large changes separated by periods of little change. Something has to push the evolution to occur.

this last bit is key. often it takes extreme environmental stress to cause natural selection to occur. most of a species die but the ones with the right mutation that helps them survive carry on. this happens over and over again over large expanses of time and you end up with evolution
 
vidapreta

vidapreta

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I would've never guessed that green coffee bean was such a very delicate an intensely religious subject.
 
truthornothin

truthornothin

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I would've never guessed that green coffee bean was such a very delicate an intensely religious subject.
Coffee has always been sacred to me but I prefer mine roasted nectar of the Gods for sure :)
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
Your saying something that has not been proven. If you read my other post you would see I acknowledge microevolution but There's no solid evidence of macroevolution. It's not that I don't understand what your saying, it's that scientifically I can't agree. It's psuedoscience. Look up the scientist Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig and his findings. Data of 100 years of mutation and 70 years of mutation breeding offered this only conclusion. "Mutations cannot transform an original species into a entirely new one"- Lonnig.
Please refer your bolded section to the comments that were made above them. The process of mutations and/or evolution works on a time scale of far greater than 70-100 years. Your comment here truly does not apply to this discussion. That is like a kid saying they are an A student throughout their educational career based on an A they received on a 1st grade spelling quiz
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
oh for the love of........................................
It is not pseudoscience. But like I said I am not going to go back and forth it won't accomplish anything. Evolution is a theory​ (theory in science is supported by fact), it is supported by the vast majority of scientists (~99% if not more), and if you do not then that is fine it doesn't really bother me. But the evidence for evolution is >>>>>>> than any evidence for creationism.
"you're saying something that has not been proven" *sigh*

How does one unsub from a thread?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KayBys8gaJY
i dont think these species turned into us, i think a common ancestor turned into them and us

some species survive a long time, others dont
Where is this common ancestor? What is it?

I love how you guys are so willing to teach :) If you know something you think I don't then why won't you take the time to explain it to me? Why do you have to act as if you just know and I should just accept your theorys without showing me any evidence? Someone taught you what you know and probably had a lot of patience doing so.

I'am still waiting for the evidence of macroevolution..

What are some FACTS of evolution?
 

D3Baseball

Member
Awards
0
Looking at what we know and concluding that there is no such thing as evolution is clearly a product of selecting data to fit your hypothesis. It's like reading a product write up for a supplement.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Where is this common ancestor? What is it?
?
the apes split off from chimps and humans and the primates before that were the common ancestors
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Where is this common ancestor? What is it?

I love how you guys are so willing to teach :) If you know something you think I don't then why won't you take the time to explain it to me? Why do you have to act as if you just know and I should just accept your theorys without showing me any evidence? Someone taught you what you know and probably had a lot of patience doing so.

I'am still waiting for the evidence of macroevolution..

What are some FACTS of evolution?

We are not hear to teach you a science which is well documented. you are starting to be a jerk
 
Whacked

Whacked

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
We are not hear to teach you a science which is well documented. you are starting to be a jerk
How is this NOT a justified question given the progression of this thread? Given the previous comments from the Atheist crowd attempting to "prove" we evolved from apes, shouldnt they provide a smoking gun and back up such "proof" with scientific fact?

Where is this common ancestor? What is it?

I love how you guys are so willing to teach :) If you know something you think I don't then why won't you take the time to explain it to me? Why do you have to act as if you just know and I should just accept your theorys without showing me any evidence? Someone taught you what you know and probably had a lot of patience doing so.

I'am still waiting for the evidence of macroevolution..

What are some FACTS of evolution?
 
Jiigzz

Jiigzz

Legend
Awards
5
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
  • First Up Vote
Why are you arguing about evolution? Its clear that noone knows, even in the scientific community of what really occured. You guys are just putting up the same arguments and rebuttles as everyone else. This kind of discussion will literally go nowhere unless evolution is either disproved or regarded as fact. Of which neither has occured. Yes, people have done studies and experiements yet these have been flawed in more ways than one, often not recreating the exact conditions on the earth as it was, or producing the same outcomes as it was.

And yes, gravity is just a theory however evolution is a lot different. Gravity can be measured, it effects can be witnessed whereas evolution cannot be. Compare the two all you like, it doesnt mean everything that is a theory should be taken as fact.
 
Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
I'am still waiting for the evidence of macroevolution..

What are some FACTS of evolution?
Part of the problem with this debate is that anyone can turn anything around and we remain at square one.

I'm still waiting for the evidence of creationism.

What are some FACTS of creationism? Hint: Won't accept Genesis as evidence or fact.


I'm by no means an expert when it comes to evolution and most of what I could show would be via google anyways. It's been over 15 years since I was in a class that talked about it and I likely skipped most of those sessions anyways :)

Plenty of scientific information about evolution is on google would be my response. Undoubtedly more scientific evidence than exists for creationism. Googling On the Origin of Species should lead you to plenty of scientific evidence for what shaped Darwin's theory. I hope someone can clarify your question better, but I certainly cannot nor will pretend I can. Still asking for facts is a bit lame as evolution as already mentioned is a theory. A fact is something that we know is demonstrably true. Evidence exists for evolution, but since it cannot be fully proven how can you expect "facts" to exist?
 

saggy321

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Einstein was never a theist.It is a common myth.Check your evidence more carefully.Newton,Boyle and Faraday weren't in an age that could have accepted and actually thought of this belief.Did you know that Descartes was an atheist.He was threatened to change I think therefore I am to I think therfore I am therefore God under pretty unscrupulous circumstances.

Did I ever say that I 100% think we're not created?Nope because I would never say it because it's not provable.It would not be logical.Just how the belief in a single God,whats more the Christian God is the one true God is not logical.

None of you creationists have answered my question about how your religious beliefs is just a matter of geography.But oh no of course that one true God would have come to you some way or another right.

If we understand the mechanics we're getting closer to the answer.If it ends up being God I'll believe but don't try and belittle the guys in labcoats who are trying to look for an answer instead of blindly saying this is what we should believe because we can't answer the question and apologise for being human every Sunday.Anyone who does that has a screw loose.
But you've got me wrong. I am not a Christian nor do I belittle guys in labcoats. I'm a scientist by background. My honours degree is biochemistry, so please don't take this as an attack on science or any work that attempts to understand the world in which we live. My point only is that we cannot discount the existence of God because we as humans have a process for understanding the world around us. I just don't think science and God are mutually exclusive...that's all.

And the point about Einstein...its not a myth....Einstein didn't believe in a personal God, but he did believe in one due his theory of relativity pointing towards the Universe having a beginning. I've pasted his quote regarding this below...

"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."


 

Roniboney

Active member
Awards
0
But you've got me wrong. I am not a Christian nor do I belittle guys in labcoats. I'm a scientist by background. My honours degree is biochemistry, so please don't take this as an attack on science or any work that attempts to understand the world in which we live. My point only is that we cannot discount the existence of God because we as humans have a process for understanding the world around us. I just don't think science and God are mutually exclusive...that's all.

And the point about Einstein...its not a myth....Einstein didn't believe in a personal God, but he did believe in one due his theory of relativity pointing towards the Universe having a beginning. I've pasted his quote regarding this below...

"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings."


Deism is completely dfferent to theism or atheism.Just because you believe in a force doesn't mean it's a God.He attests to that.Through his compendeum of writing.Some of the major quotes is in ''The God Delusion''.


According to Einstein, God is "a product of human weakness''.Deist,maybe ,theist ,never.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
agreed. Einstein was not a theist by any means. Eventhough the universe had a beginning, it was not pointing towards an involved creator. It is 2 entirely different concepts
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
How is this NOT a justified question given the progression of this thread? Given the previous comments from the Atheist crowd attempting to "prove" we evolved from apes, shouldnt they provide a smoking gun and back up such "proof" with scientific fact?
ok you win. i am unable to give you guys a comprehensive education on the theory of evolution therefore it is a myth or doesnt exist and the bible is correct

give me a break. u sit back and throw these lame stones at science while offering no evidence to support your religious beliefs on the universe
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Why are you arguing about evolution? Its clear that noone knows, even in the scientific community of what really occured. You guys are just putting up the same arguments and rebuttles as everyone else. This kind of discussion will literally go nowhere unless evolution is either disproved or regarded as fact. Of which neither has occured. Yes, people have done studies and experiements yet these have been flawed in more ways than one, often not recreating the exact conditions on the earth as it was, or producing the same outcomes as it was.

And yes, gravity is just a theory however evolution is a lot different. Gravity can be measured, it effects can be witnessed whereas evolution cannot be. Compare the two all you like, it doesnt mean everything that is a theory should be taken as fact.
evolution can be pretty accurately measured through genetic analyses actually
 
TheSwanks

TheSwanks

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Absence of understanding is NOT proof of god. Books are not in themselves proof of the text they contain.

The argument that the bible or any other religious text is proof of god simply because they exist is preposterous.

If you'd like to base your life on unrepeatable magic tricks done and written about before the average person knew the earth revolves around the sun be my guest.

I don't deny a possibility of god but anyone who thinks they know the truth about that is deluded at least if not plain crazy.

In my experience, those who reserve a place for the possibility of god are typically decent people, while those convinced of gods existence thinking they know gods thoughts and wishes tend to be arrogant, bigoted, irrational people.

My 2 cents
 
Whacked

Whacked

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
To be clear: No one is attemptring to make that case.

Christians flat out ADMIT we have no "tangible proof" as faith is the cornerstone and at the epicenter of our existence. It is who we are and what we ascribe to beliefs-wise.

Conversely, Atheists that take the position of denying the existence of a Creator/GOD have to hang their hats on tangible proof provided by scientific fact as faith is irrelevant to them.

Since no such proof exists, an Agnostic position makes more sense (think about it). To be so convicted about the NON-exisitence of a Creator/God, without scientific proof, is a quantum leap of faith in and of itself, is it not?

Similarly, Christians take a leap of faith that God exists, as for us, we have a sort of spirtitual proof. Our proof cannot be explained away as fact or tangible evidence either; but that is the essense of faith.

The dymanic of faith is not a luxury or cop out, it is just reality for us.

Christians do not claim to be able to provide scientific factual proof of a Creator/God BUT Atheists take the stance on claimning anything and everything can be explained away thru/by science.

So, then, DO IT is all we're saying. It can't be done. So, when an Atheist attempts to explain away a GOD-LESS creation, they will always fall short.

At the end fo the day, ANY HUMAN'S belief comes down to adopting/fostering a personal view of a THEORY. For a Christian, theory becomes FACT to US when we accept the doctrines of Christianity as it makes sense to US and provides MORE proof than science can for an Atheist and hence, becomes fact.

Absence of understanding is NOT proof of god. Books are not in themselves proof of the text they contain.

The argument that the bible or any other religious text is proof of god simply because they exist is preposterous.
 

saggy321

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Deism is completely dfferent to theism or atheism.Just because you believe in a force doesn't mean it's a God.He attests to that.Through his compendeum of writing.Some of the major quotes is in ''The God Delusion''.


According to Einstein, God is "a product of human weakness''.Deist,maybe ,theist ,never.
I know what deism is....my point is that you can all it a life force or mother nature, but the implication is the same, ie an intelligent force being that designed, created and ordered the Universe. The term God is a word and like all words its symbolises a deep meaning by being associated with it. You can attach whatever word you want to the underlying mean.

Interestingly you've quotes from 'The God Delusion'....which the author of admitted the following in an interview on the BBC called Hard Talk...

that we were likely created by other intelligent beings, aliens of sorts, and left here on Earth.

So when it all comes down to it.....most believe in some intelligent being or beings or life force having created and ordered creation. Some 'rational' individuals call them aliens whilst others a life force and others a God. I suppose believing in aliens or a life force as a creator frees you from the having to act within the framework of religion...you are then able to define you're own right, wrong and morality.
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
We are not hear to teach you a science which is well documented. you are starting to be a jerk

Where is this documentation? I'd like to learn. I'am not trying to be a jerk but if you wanna tell me I'am wrong and not educate me otherwise whose really being the jerk here? If your offended in any way it's only because you take offense to someone not agreeing with you. In science you have to take that emotion out of it don't you? You have debates and you don't get offended when someone disagrees with you. If you got offended by every opposing view how is your research ever going to progress? If every influencial scientist that ever existed let that person or persons who called them crazy and dumb for their ideas affect them.. well..they never would of been labled influencial.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
At the end fo the day, ANY HUMAN'S belief comes down to adopting/fostering a personal view of a THEORY. For a Christian, theory becomes FACT to US when we accept the doctrines of Christianity as it makes sense to US and provides MORE proof than science can for an Atheist and hence, becomes fact.
so why cant theory become FACT for the atheist too?

Just takes one saying "I am right and it is fact and that is all there is to it"
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
I know what deism is....my point is that you can all it a life force or mother nature, but the implication is the same, ie an intelligent force.being that designed, created and ordered the Universe. The term God is a word and like all words its symbolises a deep meaning by being associated with it. Interestingly you've quotes from 'The God Delusion'....which the author of admitted the following in an interview on the BBC called Hard Talk...

that we were likely created by other intelligent beings, aliens of sorts, and left here on Earth.

So when it all comes down to it.....most believe in some intelligent being or beings or life force having created and ordered creation. Some 'rational' individuals call them aliens whilst others a life force and others a God. I suppose believing in aliens or a life force as a creator free you from the having to act within the framework of religion...you are then able to define you're own right, wrong and morality.

so before god created creation (as you put it) what was he doing? Hanging out in a vacuum? Or did god spontaneously start to exist at one time? And if that can happen, than why cant the universe spontaneously start to exist (sans god). Sounds just as plausible
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
Where is this documentation? I'd like to learn. I'am not trying to be a jerk but if you wanna tell me I'am wrong and not educate me otherwise whose really being the jerk here? If your offended in any way it's only because you take offense to someone not agreeing with you. In science you have to take that emotion out of it don't you? You have debates and you don't get offended when someone disagrees with you. If you got offended by every opposing view how is your research ever going to progress? If every influencial scientist that ever existed let that person or persons who called them crazy and dumb for their ideas affect them.. well..they never would of been labled influencial.
any university in the united states offers science classes that will teach you the science of evolution. If really would like to learn than sign up for a course. Its a very detailed and complicated subject and beyond something i can summarize in a post
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Part of the problem with this debate is that anyone can turn anything around and we remain at square one.

I'm still waiting for the evidence of creationism.

What are some FACTS of creationism? Hint: Won't accept Genesis as evidence or fact.

And here is the deflection. Yes you could turn things around and deflect it to the opposing view but that's not making a defense for your belief. All it does is take the pressure off you. If someone is so confident about their belief they should be able to tell me why and EASILY tell me why they believe what they do. I'am not trying to discuss this in a evolution vs creation way. I'am strictly talking science. I just wanna know why "YOU" believe what you believe. I've told you why I don't support macroevolution. The research and evidence we have available cannot prove it. The "tree of life" Darwin designed is full of broken branches. To even have drawed a Image that looked like a tree is funny. It is only theory, it's not scientific fact. If someone is gonna talk about it as a fact then they aren't speaking science.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
And here is the deflection. Yes you could turn things around and deflect it to the opposing view but that's not making a defense for your belief. All it does is take the pressure off you. If someone is so confident about their belief they should be able to tell me why and EASILY tell me why they believe what they do. I'am not trying to discuss this in a evolution vs creation way. I'am strictly talking science. I just wanna know why "YOU" believe what you believe. I've told you why I don't support macroevolution. The research and evidence we have available cannot prove it. The "tree of life" Darwin designed is full of broken branches. To even have drawed a Image that looked like a tree is funny. It is only theory, it's not scientific fact. If someone is gonna talk about it as a fact then they aren't speaking science.
It is by far the best theory we have to explain the diversity of life on earth. Because it is not perfect you find justification for saying it is no more valid than creationism

A very plausible explanation for why there are "holes" in it is because we have not been able to identify all the evidence needed to patch those holes up. Its sort of hard when you are looking for things that have not been roaming the earth for millions of years
 
Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
And here is the deflection. Yes you could turn things around and deflect it to the opposing view but that's not making a defense for your belief. All it does is take the pressure off you. If someone is so confident about their belief they should be able to tell me why and EASILY tell me why they believe what they do. I'am not trying to discuss this in a evolution vs creation way. I'am strictly talking science. I just wanna know why "YOU" believe what you believe. I've told you why I don't support macroevolution. The research and evidence we have available cannot prove it. The "tree of life" Darwin designed is full of broken branches. To even have drawed a Image that looked like a tree is funny. It is only theory, it's not scientific fact. If someone is gonna talk about it as a fact then they aren't speaking science.
Where has someone talked about it as fact? If you are only going to accept fact you won't accept the theory of evolution. Of COURSE we can't prove it and if you need it to be proved then you're out of luck. It has scientific evidence backing it up, but it isn't an established can't be proven wrong fact. Hence calling it a theory. A theory is something unproven, but with scientific evidence. It's really not as complicated as you're making it. If you're waiting on someone who believes in evolution to show undeniable fact of it then you're going to be waiting a long time, it simply doesn't exist. Anyone who knows what a theory is should already understand that.

Evolution: Theory with scientific evidence supporting it, but still just a theory.

Creationism: No scientific evidence supporting it, really old book where people tell the same stories in different ways supporting it.

Honestly you keep asking people to do something that cannot be done. None of us can prove evolution. If I could right now I wouldn't share it on AM, I'd go win the Nobel. The reason for the bolded was to show how the need for undeniable facts can't be used to automatically dismiss something as having no merit....unless you want it to dismiss creationism and evolution.

Edit: What PA said.
 

saggy321

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
so before god created creation (as you put it) what was he doing? Hanging out in a vacuum? Or did god spontaneously start to exist at one time? And if that can happen, than why cant the universe spontaneously start to exist (sans god). Sounds just as plausible
If the creation could understand God then God would cease to be God for soon as something understands something he has a certain mastery over it and if something is mastered then it is not God by definition. God is uncreated, transcending time and space. It's impossible for us to understand as our experiences are limited entirely within the framework of created dimensions. How we perceive things is in turn entirely influenced by the structure and function of receiving organs and the neurochemical structures in the brain. So how can a created mind fathom an uncreated being....its impossible. Temporal, causative sequence of events don't apply to God. How can the creation understand God? Could a piece of music, art or technology actively understand its creator or does the creation simply reveal particular characteristics or attributes of the creator. Quantum mechanics for example does not behave 'rationally'. How can light be both a wave and a particle? How can one sub-atomic particle exist in two places at the same time? So you can't simply apply your current frames of reference to a whole other reality and understand it.

All man can do is come to know God through his attributes which he has manifested in his creation and revealed in the form of religion. Finally God transcends time and space and therefore is not subject to either, so Him past, present and future is the same. For Him there was no before the universe was created.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
If the creation could understand God then God would cease to be God for soon as something understands something he has a certain mastery over it and if something is mastered then it is not God by definition. God is uncreated, transcending time and space. It's impossible for us to understand as our experiences are limited entirely within the framework of created dimensions. How we perceive things is in turn entirely influenced by the structure and function of receiving organs and the neurochemical structures in the brain. So how can a created mind fathom an uncreated being....its impossible. Temporal, causative sequence of events don't apply to God. How can the creation understand God? Could a piece of music, art or technology actively understand its creator or does the creation simply reveal particular characteristics or attributes of the creator. Quantum mechanics for example does not behave 'rationally'. How can light be both a wave and a particle? How can one sub-atomic particle exist in two places at the same time? So you can't simply apply your current frames of reference to a whole other reality and understand it.

All man can do is come to know God through his attributes which he has manifested in his creation and revealed in the form of religion. Finally God transcends time and space and therefore is not subject to either, so Him past, present and future is the same. For Him there was no before the universe was created.
what a convenient explanation
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
If the creation could understand God then God would cease to be God for soon as something understands something he has a certain mastery over it and if something is mastered then it is not God by definition. God is uncreated, transcending time and space. It's impossible for us to understand as our experiences are limited entirely within the framework of created dimensions. How we perceive things is in turn entirely influenced by the structure and function of receiving organs and the neurochemical structures in the brain. So how can a created mind fathom an uncreated being....its impossible. Temporal, causative sequence of events don't apply to God. How can the creation understand God? Could a piece of music, art or technology actively understand its creator or does the creation simply reveal particular characteristics or attributes of the creator. Quantum mechanics for example does not behave 'rationally'. How can light be both a wave and a particle? How can one sub-atomic particle exist in two places at the same time? So you can't simply apply your current frames of reference to a whole other reality and understand it.

All man can do is come to know God through his attributes which he has manifested in his creation and revealed in the form of religion. Finally God transcends time and space and therefore is not subject to either, so Him past, present and future is the same. For Him there was no before the universe was created.
So we cannot understand it? Well you jus explained it.....how could you do so if us mere mortals cannot understand it?
 
tWack

tWack

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
If you'd like to base your life on unrepeatable magic tricks done and written about before the average person knew the earth revolves around the sun be my guest.
I love this.. just beautifull! :beerchug:
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
So we cannot understand it? Well you jus explained it.....how could you do so if us mere mortals cannot understand it?
he understands it because he has been touched by the holy spirit
 
Flaw

Flaw

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Where has someone talked about it as fact? If you are only going to accept fact you won't accept the theory of evolution. Of COURSE we can't prove it and if you need it to be proved then you're out of luck. It has scientific evidence backing it up, but it isn't an established can't be proven wrong fact. Hence calling it a theory. A theory is something unproven, but with scientific evidence. It's really not as complicated as you're making it. If you're waiting on someone who believes in evolution to show undeniable fact of it then you're going to be waiting a long time, it simply doesn't exist. Anyone who knows what a theory is should already understand that.

Evolution: Theory with scientific evidence supporting it, but still just a theory.

Creationism: No scientific evidence supporting it, really old book where people tell the same stories in different ways supporting it.

Honestly you keep asking people to do something that cannot be done. None of us can prove evolution. If I could right now I wouldn't share it on AM, I'd go win the Nobel. The reason for the bolded was to show how the need for undeniable facts can't be used to automatically dismiss something as having no merit....unless you want it to dismiss creationism and evolution.

Edit: What PA said.

If you believe in something, you must believe it to be truth right?

I think the scientific evidence of evolution is getting ahead of itself. It's like watching 1 minute of a 120 minute film and telling me what the whole movie was about based on that 1 minute that you watched or reading 1 page of a 500 page book and telling me what the book was about. If someone told you what that movie or book was about would you believe them after finding out they watched 1 minute of the film or read 1 page of the book? I don't think you would.

I didn't think the answer was complicated, I thought it was exactly what you wrote "NONE of us can prove evolution". My point was if someone so passionately believes in evolution they should be able to tell me why and show me SCIENTIFIC evidence why they do. Like you said, the truth is , there is no evidence. It cannot be proven. It is more related to faith than science.
 

saggy321

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
he understands it because he has been touched by the holy spirit
lol....No not really. I'm not a Christian. It's quite simple really. I don't understand God, but what I know about God has been revealed to me by God in manner that I can understand. It's not that you chaps can't understand it..its fairly simple....you just have to accept that there are different types of knowledge. Sense knowledge, the one that can be empirically tested and proven and another knowledge that doesn't concern the senses. This particular knowledge is revealed to us because we can't come by it any other way. It transcends the senses. Concepts such as justice and honour exist and are real as the materials forms around us even though they have no material form themselves. This concerns a different aspect of being a human.

This is where belief comes in. You may mock faith or belief, but realise that even empirically based sciences rely on first principles. A set of unproven beliefs that serve as the basis upon which you can begin unraveling logical thought.

There is an element of blind belief in everything. But that belief is not blind per say. It is based upon on a certain evidence, logic and analysis. This is the same for both science and the belief in God.
 

AE14

Board Sponsor
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
lol....No not really. I'm not a Christian. It's quite simple really. I don't understand God, but what I know about God has been revealed to me by God in manner that I can understand. It's not that you chaps can't understand it..its fairly simple....you just have to accept that there are different types of knowledge. Sense knowledge, the one that can be empirically tested and proven and another knowledge that doesn't concern the senses. This particular knowledge is revealed to us because we can't come by it any other way. It transcends the senses. Concepts such as justice and honour exist and are real as the materials forms around us even though they have no material form themselves. This concerns a different aspect of being a human.

This is where belief comes in. You may mock faith or belief, but realise that even empirically based sciences rely on first principles. A set of unproven beliefs that serve as the basis upon which you can begin unraveling logical thought.

There is an element of blind belief in everything. But that belief is not blind per say. It is based upon on a certain evidence, logic and analysis. This is the same for both science and the belief in God.
so you "understand" that which you claim cannot be understood? interesting
 
Geoforce

Geoforce

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
If you believe in something, you must believe it to be truth right?

I think the scientific evidence of evolution is getting ahead of itself. It's like watching 1 minute of a 120 minute film and telling me what the whole movie was about based on that 1 minute that you watched or reading 1 page of a 500 page book and telling me what the book was about. If someone told you what that movie or book was about would you believe them after finding out they watched 1 minute of the film or read 1 page of the book? I don't think you would.

I didn't think the answer was complicated, I thought it was exactly what you wrote "NONE of us can prove evolution". My point was if someone so passionately believes in evolution they should be able to tell me why and show me SCIENTIFIC evidence why they do. Like you said, the truth is , there is no evidence. It cannot be proven. It is more related to faith than science.
I can't tell if you're being purposefully obtuse or not. I NEVER said no evidence exists, no idea where you're getting that from. This should help, happy reading.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=scientific+evidence+for+evolution
 
TheSwanks

TheSwanks

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
lol....No not really. I'm not a Christian. It's quite simple really. I don't understand God, but what I know about God has been revealed to me by God in manner that I can understand. It's not that you chaps can't understand it..its fairly simple....you just have to accept that there are different types of knowledge. Sense knowledge, the one that can be empirically tested and proven and another knowledge that doesn't concern the senses. This particular knowledge is revealed to us because we can't come by it any other way. It transcends the senses. Concepts such as justice and honour exist and are real as the materials forms around us even though they have no material form themselves. This concerns a different aspect of being a human.

This is where belief comes in. You may mock faith or belief, but realise that even empirically based sciences rely on first principles. A set of unproven beliefs that serve as the basis upon which you can begin unraveling logical thought.

There is an element of blind belief in everything. But that belief is not blind per say. It is based upon on a certain evidence, logic and analysis. This is the same for both science and the belief in God.
Honor and justice are societal constructs and, as such, have no "truth" to them. Just like saying good and evil, they don't exist they are merely our perception of the world and not it's reality.

If your intention was to lead us to conclude that god is an idea created by man that doesn't exist in any real way, then you have succeeded admirably.
 
Patrick Arnold

Patrick Arnold

Featured Author
Awards
1
  • Established
lol....No not really. I'm not a Christian. It's quite simple really. I don't understand God, but what I know about God has been revealed to me by God in manner that I can understand. It's not that you chaps can't understand it..its fairly simple....you just have to accept that there are different types of knowledge. Sense knowledge, the one that can be empirically tested and proven and another knowledge that doesn't concern the senses. This particular knowledge is revealed to us because we can't come by it any other way. It transcends the senses. Concepts such as justice and honour exist and are real as the materials forms around us even though they have no material form themselves. This concerns a different aspect of being a human.

This is where belief comes in. You may mock faith or belief, but realise that even empirically based sciences rely on first principles. A set of unproven beliefs that serve as the basis upon which you can begin unraveling logical thought.

There is an element of blind belief in everything. But that belief is not blind per say. It is based upon on a certain evidence, logic and analysis. This is the same for both science and the belief in God.

so you had a vision. but while other peoples visions (like the son of sam, mohammed, charles manson) are delusional, yours is real. Because you know it to be real. Its all starting to make sense to me now
 
EasyEJL

EasyEJL

Never enough
Awards
3
  • RockStar
  • Legend!
  • Established
so the cliff notes are, we're not sure if green coffee extract evolved or was created by a higher power?
 
sidoious

sidoious

Banned
Awards
1
  • Established
2222.jpg
 

Similar threads


Top