Archived - A thread about nothing....

[Xyress]

Originally posted by Wayfinder
I have a question for folks here to consider. It's a rhetorical question, intended just to make each one of us think about our position in life:

In your debate in the creation vs evolution concept... have you even attempted to consider the information presented by the opposing side, or have you just automatically discounted whatever has been stated because it disagrees with your current opinions?

Any time we refuse to even consider the possibility that even our most deeply entrenched convictions just MIGHT have flaws, then we close ourselves off to the potential realities of the universe around us.

The concept of an Intelligent Designer creating man is not such a far-fetched idea as some would have us believe. So no matter how much you believe in evolution, to immediately and totally discount even the possibility of creation seems to me very, very limited in scope. Tunnel vision.

Yes, I've considered the opposite side ... I even believed it until I was about 12 and started to question some of the more outlandish claims of the Bible. Am I correct to assume that you were Christian your entire life? Have you examined the other side with an open mind, or have you just tried to find holes in it to support your theory that the Bible is true?

You ask us to consider the possibility that there was an intelligent designer. Yes, I admit that it is a possibility. The whole point here is that we don't know ... but we can make intelligent hypotheses for things that we will never know for sure. But you, on the other hand, state in the very same post where you ask us to consider the possibility of an intelligent creator:

The problem with the "infinite time and space possibility" concept is that although it sounds really neato nifty, it is a man-made philosophy that is without proof and which is lacking in common sense, logical reason and a basis in reality. Some things ARE impossible, no matter how much time and space you have. My studies have indicated to me that the concept of evolution is one of them.

... so you are saying that we must consider something to be a possibility, but stating outright that evolution is impossible? Even though you just argued that Noah didn't need all species of animals because they could "produce" the different varieties of animals from just a few? Animals "producing" other, different animals is kind of the point of evolution - how does it differ in your mind?

Circular logic? Noah's story could be true because the Bible said there was an intelligent creator and he could do anything to make it true?

Back to the infinite time and space possibility - you have such a hard time swallowing that "energy" could always be there or that an enzyme could by chance be created ... but a divine, all-powerful being suddenly appearing or always existing is clearly the best statistical probablility?

[Xyress]

Originally posted by ajcuenca
Isn't it a possibility that evolution is a creation of GOD. As I believe GOD loves changes (for the good) and evolution (as I know) is just that --- a series of changes which results in an improved being.

Yes.

[ajcuenca]

So now this very very involved topic ends up to which idea is most statistically "possible".



I'm loving this even more

:love:

I'm not trying to irritate everybody here, but it just seems to me that both ideas overlap. Although it makes more sense if you put it together.

God creates evolution and (since he is omnipotent) intervenes every so often if things are not going according to his plan.

See makes sense right?

So now everyone is correct and no one is wrong, everybody's happy.

[Wayfinder]

Originally posted by Jwilker
I think you meant to say a statistical IMPROBABILITY, which is very different.

No, I meant impossibility.

An improbability is when something has an insignificant chance of occuring, but can still occur.

An impossibility is when the chance is so abysmally small that there is no logical reason to assume it would ever happen.

The idea of valid DNA coming into existence through the function of chance circumstance is about as probable as the Little Mermaid coming to life and marrying me next week and a year later we give birth to red herring (which I think in this case is an apropo illustration). It's a fantasy which has no chance of happening.

If you check my website, I cite the statistical probability of "accidental" DNA there. I would believe that any reasoning individual should be able to draw realistic conclusions based on that information.

[Wayfinder]

Originally posted by Xyress
So ... you do believe in evolution?

See... this is the problem with lop-sided viewpoints and not thinking things through. I really shouldn't even respond to this, but you know me... lean into the sucker punch...

Evolution teaches that species evolve into new species.

The expansion of type within a species is a whole different thing. When a husband and wife have a brunette child and a blonde child, we are NOT witnessing the concept of evolution.

When they give birth to a winged quadruped... now then you might have an interesting argument.

[Wayfinder]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by star50fiveoh
[B].
.
[COLOR=]I hope you're proud of yourself Wayfinder!!![/COLOR]


[COLOR=]I woke up this morning to find that I had de-evolved into a [COLOR=][COLOR=]Sheep[/COLOR][/color]!!![/COLOR]

Hey, that's cool. You should do well when Jesus separates the sheep from the goats!

[ajcuenca]

How small is abysmally small? Is it as small a million to one? Two million? How small is small before you consider it impossible?

[Jwilker]

Originally posted by Wayfinder
No, I meant impossibility.

An improbability is when something has an insignificant chance of occuring, but can still occur.

An impossibility is when the chance is so abysmally small that there is no logical reason to assume it would ever happen.

The idea of valid DNA coming into existence through the function of chance circumstance is about as probable as the Little Mermaid coming to life and marrying me next week and a year later we give birth to red herring (which I think in this case is an apropo illustration). It's a fantasy which has no chance of happening.

If you check my website, I cite the statistical probability of "accidental" DNA there. I would believe that any reasoning individual should be able to draw realistic conclusions based on that information.

Unless you're rewirting the dictionary: (from dictionary.com)

im·pos·si·ble ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-ps-bl)
adj.
Incapable of having existence or of occurring.
Not capable of being accomplished: an impossible goal.

So just because the odds are against something you can't acknowledge that it can happen? Nice viewpoint.

as long as there is a chance, even an abysmally small chance, then it's not impossible.

I really can't see how you were able to look at any scientific evidence since you seem to just dismiss everything as so unlikely god had to have done it.

As to you and the little mermaid, I hope you two are happy :)

I'm afraid if i checked your site, I would be so lost in inane nonsense I'd have a headache :)

[Xyress]

I read the whole thing, Jwilker - it's the same that you've read here. He's done the math and "proved" that it's impossible for DNA or enzymes to happen by chance. That's basically his entire point. He accuses those who don't believe in an intelligent creator of being close minded, yet says that evolution is impossible.

Apparently, it's easier for him to believe that a supernatural being just happened to be than an enzyme or DNA. Because clearly, the Bible states that God always was. Enzymes and DNA strands just scream of intelligent design, but a supernatural being does not. Should we do the math and prove that it is impossible for a supernatural being to appear out of thin air? I could make up some numbers too.

Look, I don't know how life started on Earth, but saying that an almighty creator started it does not make things any simpler! Intelligent design requires intelligent design which requires intelligent design ad infinitum ... where does it end?

[Wayfinder]

Originally posted by ajcuenca
Isn't it a possibility that evolution is a creation of GOD. As I believe GOD loves changes (for the good) and evolution (as I know) is just that --- a series of changes which results in an improved being.

K... I didn't have time to answer this one before, but this is a very valid and well-thought question. One particular reason that I like it is because it shows a mind truly open to possibilities. Another reason is because I considered the same possiblity myself.
:p

How did the Universe come to be? The Bible doesn't specifically provide details. Is it possible that God used the Big Bang to actually start things rolling? Maybe He generated a bunch of energy, blew it up, and then picked the best spot to place man.

Of course, it would also be equally possible that he individually created every star and solar system. So I keep my mind open in this. Either would seem to work (although interesting evidence discovered recently at this time tends to bend toward the later explanation).

But as far as evolution? There are a couple of things. Since I've come to trust the Bible as God's Word and it states that he created man directly, that's what I believe as a spritually-minded Christian.

From a physical standpoint, even if God used evolutionary concepts, we would still have that problem of the impossibility of life just "happening" from a chance result of chaos. It would still have required a direct action of God to get all the items together in the same place at the same time and cause them to work and DNA would still have had to have been directly designed... and there we get back to creation again. In which case, we might as well accept that what the Bible says is the way it was. Each life form was created directly, by the same intelligent designer. Which is why there are so many similarities in lifeforms. Occam's Razor.

See guys... I really do consider these possibilities. Fortunately, I'm not one 'a them Christians who suddenly jumped up one day, shouted Hallelujah! and was instantly saved. It took some convincing and some careful thought.

Great question. Valid point. Worth thinking through.
That's exactly what the Bible says God wants us to do: question, think, arrive at the correct conclusion.

[Jwilker]

mind truly open

At least there's one :)


Damn cut-n-paste

[Wayfinder]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Xyress
Yes, I've considered the opposite side ... I even believed it until I was about 12 and started to question some of the more outlandish claims of the Bible.

Question: were they the outlandish claims of the Bible... or outlandish claims of the religion you were brought up under? I think I've kinda proven there's a big difference between the two. I have great disrespect for those religions that claim to be Christian but teach others things that they know to be falsehoods.

Am I correct to assume that you were Christian your entire life?Have you examined the other side with an open mind, or have you just tried to find holes in it to support your theory that the Bible is true?



Nope, incorrect. Like you, I was raised in a Christian household. When I got older, I went my own way. Spent about 7 or so years in college. Studied science, evolution, the whole shebang. Later on, when I started examining life's experiences and the world around me, several things didn't make any sense. So I did some intense praying to "whoever might possibly be out there", picked up six different Bible translations, sat down and started studying. I read literature, spoke with people, discounted most of modern religious claims, studied some more, started learning about what the Bible itself says. By the time I'd read through the Bible twice, things started making sense. Then when I went back and started really examining the evolution concept, I began to discover the back-alley stuff that you never read in the textbooks. I read about the shams and the falsehoods and hidden data and I examined this and compared it with what I'd learned in school, and I came to the conclusion that the evolution theory just did not hold water. That's an abbriviated version of my story.

You ask us to consider the possibility that there was an intelligent designer. Yes, I admit that it is a possibility.

Then if you think it's a possiblity... considering what I've pointed out is at stake, I would present that objective study and examination of this possibility is the about the most important study a person could possibly undertake. Do you agree?

The whole point here is that we don't know ... but we can make intelligent hypotheses for things that we will never know for sure.

I agree that some don't know. But that we will never know? I believe a person can come to know the truth... if he/she makes the effort. However, it will require more effort than going to chruch on Sunday morning and listen to some guy tell us what HE thinks the Bible says.


Even though you just argued that Noah didn't need all species of animals because they could "produce" the different varieties of animals from just a few? Animals "producing" other, different animals is kind of the point of evolution - how does it differ in your mind?

Explained this in a prior message. I did not say that Noah ONLY took a couple of dogs aboard the ark. He took a coupla dogs, a coupla cats, a coupla rats, a coupla snakes, seven sheep, seven cows, seven goats, a couple elephants, a couple rhinos... from which all kinds of animals came today. Has nothing to do with cross-genetic breeding or evolution. Has to do with variety within kind. "Out of one man came all nations of men." Therefore, out of one type of dog came all types of dogs, etc etc. Even scientists will admit that todays domestic housecat is most likely a descendant of wild cat species rather than a whole separate class.

Circular logic? Noah's story could be true because the Bible said there was an intelligent creator and he could do anything to make it true?

As much as I hate to answer it this way... frankly, yes. If you believe in God, then you have to believe that he is not limited by your typical lab experiments. That's not circular logic. It's simply stating realistic fact. If there was a global flood... and if God caused that flood, then we have to realistically understand that it wouldn't be too hard for him to transfer a buffalo to America following the flood. I mean, what's the big leap of logic there?

Back to the infinite time and space possibility - you have such a hard time swallowing that "energy" could always be there or that an enzyme could by chance be created ... but a divine, all-powerful being suddenly appearing or always existing is clearly the best statistical probablility?

I'm sorry, you apparently didn't get the point I was making. I was making this precise point about evolutionary reasoning. They chide Creationist thinking because it accepts the eternal existence of God... but then evolutionists turn right around and swallow the concept of the eternal existance of energy. Kind of like the pot calling the kettle black.

If an evolutionist is going to accept that energy could have always existed-- then he has no reason to question my claim that God always existed. Ya can't have it both ways.

[Wayfinder]

Durn... keep getting the quote mixed up with the edit...

[Xyress]

Nope, incorrect. Like you, I was raised in a Christian household. When I got older, I went my own way. Spent about 7 or so years in college. Studied science, evolution, the whole shebang. Later on, when I started examining life's experiences and the world around me, several things didn't make any sense. So I did some intense praying to "whoever might possibly be out there", picked up six different Bible translations, sat down and started studying. I read literature, spoke with people, discounted most of modern religious claims, studied some more, started learning about what the Bible itself says. By the time I'd read through the Bible twice, things started making sense. Then when I went back and started really examining the evolution concept, I began to discover the back-alley stuff that you never read in the textbooks. I read about the shams and the falsehoods and hidden data and I examined this and compared it with what I'd learned in school, and I came to the conclusion that the evolution theory just did not hold water. That's an abbriviated version of my story.

So you were raised Christian, questioned some religious teachings, and then studied the Bible and finally accepted it as fact again. Sounds like you were always a Christian to me.

Why did you discount Judaism? What was it about the resurrection story that made it so convincing to you? What flaws did you find with Hinduism? Buddhism? Islam?

These are all texts written by man ... but you chose one of them and decided it was the only one that was written by God. Where did all of the other religions come up with their beliefs and morals? Could they just have made them up?

[Xyress]

If you're going to accept that energy could have always existed-- then you have no reason to question my claim that God always existed. Ya can't have it both ways.

I don't have any reason? How about that an all-powerful deity is much more complex than energy? Maybe energy is god in the sense that it created life - if you would like to use that definition, that's fine with me.

But the stories of God creating the Earth in 6 days and creating light and then the sun and then the stars (as if stars are different from the sun) is not logical. An intelligent source that created life is not an outlandish idea in itself, but the Bible's depiction of such an intelligent creator is outlandish at best.