• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The biogeographic evidence for evolution

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
The theory that life came from the process of evolving is not based on anything but belief actually.
Except physical evidence. There is that also.

Written records tell us about the past of course.
Often unreliably, though.

Only Scripture tells us of the past before the flod though of course, since it is God's record piped to man, and He was there.

That is your opinion. The actual, physical evidence does not show the existence of a flood.

Your religious beliefs foisted and imposed and smeared all over evidences is reliably unreliable! Count on it!

I consider physical evidence to be more reliable than written accounts because I know that people lie, are ignorant, like to exaggerate, or just like a good story (whether it is true or not). Physical evidence can't lie.
 

dad

Undefeated
Um, no.

You should really try to understand it before commenting on it. I know you don't want to look foolish. ;)
The Toe does posit that man came from animals, and that more distant ancestors were flatworms and etc. Try to learn your religion before attempting to publicly defend it.
 

dad

Undefeated
Have you forgotten this already?


Evolution isn't a world view. It's a description of a process that takes place in nature.
Since it claims to explain how animals and man and life on earth world wide got here, it is a world view.



But let's go with what you've said here ... we are related to flatworms, bananas, dogs, cats, deer, lions, bats, trees, and guess what else, human beings! In other words, we're all in this together. I would say that the idea that everything on earth is related would have a positive affect on society, because it puts us all on equal footing with other human beings, and also with all other living creatures on the planet.
Think of yourself on equal footing with worms if you like. Count me out.

It sure beats the "I believe in the right God and I'm going to heaven while you go to hell for not believing" attitude we see from some, wouldn't you say? That's not a very uniting message now, is it?

God offers salvation to all. However since many people are children of Satan, not all will want or accept the gift He died to give man. So now the idea is to let the weeds grow with the wheat, till they get separated at harvest. It will not be one happy wheat family only at harvest, but also the chaff..the weeds...the goats. No big happy brotherhood of all man.
 

dad

Undefeated
I don't have any need to "console".
And it seems you, unsurprisingly, completely missed the point.

What you described, is a description of socio- and psychopathy.

Psychopaths need a perceived authority (could be a god, but could also be a parent or a therapist or teacher or...) to tell them what's right and wrong, because they are unable to figure out by themselves.
People of history who believed in God cannot be labelled nutball psychos by you. Nor can it be denied that animals and life world wide are taught to have come about as a result of adapting/evolving including man by the TOE.
 

dad

Undefeated
You are so far gone, it's not even funny.
serveimage
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
People of history who believed in God cannot be labelled nutball psychos by you. Nor can it be denied that animals and life world wide are taught to have come about as a result of adapting/evolving including man by the TOE.
That depends upon what they believe. If they run away from reality those epithets appear to be quite accurate.
 

dad

Undefeated
Except physical evidence. There is that also.
Except there in none of that, only your beliefs sprayed on to evidences. That cheap one trick pony gag no longer works.

That is your opinion. The actual, physical evidence does not show the existence of a flood.
Not when only filtered through and looked at in the colored lenses of your belief set.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Except there in none of that, only your beliefs sprayed on to evidences. That cheap one trick pony gag no longer works.

Yes, we assume that the laws of physics, because they *are* natural laws, don't change. And, we can tell if they change *too* much because such changes would leave effects we could detect NOW.

It looks to me like you are the one using a cheap pony trick: every time someone brings up evidence, you resort to last thursdayism.

Not when only filtered through and looked at in the colored lenses of your belief set.

You mean, not when exposed to the actual evidence as opposed to what was written by biased sources?
 

dad

Undefeated
Yes, we assume that the laws of physics, because they *are* natural laws,
Yes, they are...now.

don't change. And, we can tell if they change *too* much because such changes would leave effects we could detect NOW.
False. If it was THIS nature that changed that may be true. If it was another unknown nature that changed that is false.

You mean, not when exposed to the actual evidence as opposed to what was written by biased sources?
I mean get your beliefs off of the evidence.
 
Top