1. 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!

Featured Evolution My ToE

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by nPeace, Oct 12, 2019.

  1. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    Using objectively-derived evidence, such as that which is the basis of all science, please show that there is only one god? Remember, that the Bible is subjective, not objective, much like all other holy books in all the other major religions.

    Many of us here, including moi, have done so with the ToE, so I'm not asking you to do anything that we haven't done ourselves.
     
  2. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    I would say that is right. I quoted accurately.
     
  3. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
  4. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    By the way..I can show you what the Bible says. Do you accept what the Bible says?
     
  5. shunyadragon

    shunyadragon shunyadragon
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2017
    Messages:
    16,805
    Ratings:
    +8,015
    Religion:
    Baha'i Faith
    The question is why you selectively cited what you did, and did not read the primary research.
     
  6. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    The info I cited is true, it was accurately drawn, and a reasonable comprehension of the articles it was defining. Have a good night.
     
  7. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    As expected, you won't answer my one simple question, thus probably aware that you can't but not being honest enough to admit it. Instead, it's your disingenuous tactic of "deflection" that you continue to use.

    The OP deals with science, thus not "what the Bible says". On top of that, discounting the Creation accounts as possibly being allegorical is terrible Biblical scholarship as one should always look and consider other options than just what their own opinion or bias may be. As being a response to the much more widespread and earlier polytheistic Babylonian, this makes sense allegorically, but to take the Bible Creation accounts as being real history and science doesn't make any sense whatsoever now based on what we know.

    IOW, one can use the Bible as "enlightenment" or as a set of "blinders" to reality, and you have chosen the latter, unfortunately. All scripture should be put into perspective, and you have failed to do that. Thus, let me recommend that you find a church that teaches "enlightenment" and not as a set of "blinders".
     
  8. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    If scripture is to be put in perspective, then you first must look at scripture.
     
  9. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    As I do more than once every single day of the week.
     
  10. Astrophile

    Astrophile Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    364
    Ratings:
    +325
    Religion:
    Atheist
    Fossils are not dated directly. The ages of igneous rocks can be obtained directly by radiometric dating, and the ages of the sedimentary rocks and fossils between two dated igneous rocks are obtained by interpolation. For example, if a Santonian (Upper Cretaceous) lava flow or ash bed is dated at 84.5±1.0 million years, and a Campanian (also Upper Cretaceous) lava flow or ash bed is dated at 76.0±2.0 million years, then a Campanian fossil ammonite or bivalve in the sedimentary rocks between the two lava flows or ash beds is between 76 and 84.5 million years old. As the ages of more igneous rocks are measured, and as the boundaries of geological stages are defined more accurately by their fossil content, a more nearly complete geological time scale can be built up, and the age ranges of different fossil species can be established more precisely.

    If you want to learn more about radiometric dating and the geological time scale, and how the possible sources of error are dealt with, you can try googling on such words and phrases as 'geochronology', 'geological time scale', 'the age of the earth', how old is the earth?', and 'radiometric dating', or you can read books on the subject. 'The Age of the Earth', by Brent G. Dalrymple, is a good introduction.

    If you want to understand the fossil record, you will have to learn about stratigraphy, and about biostratigraphy in particular; this is not my field, so I am afraid that I cannot give you much help here. However, if you are an Australian, you will find the Timescales Project within Geoscience Australia - Biostratigraphy | Geoscience Australia - of interest.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. Astrophile

    Astrophile Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    364
    Ratings:
    +325
    Religion:
    Atheist
    The sentence you quoted from your link said that scientists may by forced 'to rethink theories of human descent from the trees'; it did not say that scientists are figuring that our hominid ancestors did not descend from the trees at all. You must understand that human evolution was a very complex business, and that modifications in the theory can't be completely explained in a single sentence.
     
  12. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    I was asking, in response to one of your posts, how can someone believe in the Bible (claim to be a Christian) and then say evolution not creation, is true. That's how this started. I am basically asking questions about evolution.
     
  13. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    Ah, thank you!! I shall look at this closer later.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  14. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    You didn't answer mine, thus I have no interest in answering yours.
     
  15. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    So then again I ask you, which is the basis of the discussion between you and me, do you believe Jesus or do you think he was the truth, as he said, was he created or came about by evolution without intervention from ... God...I know, it's a rather hard question for some to answer. And yes, since I have answered your question, but you say I have not, it's ok if you do not want to talk to me any more.
     
  16. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes, the "layman's" article (or report on the report) asserted that scientists may be forced to rethink their 'tree to earth' theory. That last one is my recap of it. I know there was more written about the foot and toe formations. Phalanges? Ok I refer back to original "layman's" article again.
    It says, "evidence that suggests the curved phalange in apes is an inherited trait, not one that comes about from climbing." Suggests...the curved phalange does not come about from climbing. Suggests. Maybe next year a new fossil will be discovered that suggests something else back to original hypothesis.
    https://phys.org/news/2020-05-chimp-human-child-phalangeal-genetic.html
     
    • Useful Useful x 1
  17. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    Yes, we're not speaking of what the OP said right now in this conversation. I'm simply asking of someone who says he's a Christian, yet claims the theory of evolution is correct. I'm sure many teach the creation account is an allegory. For purposes of enlightenment, here is one definition of allegory. "a literary device, an allegory is a narrative in which a character, place, or event is used to deliver a broader message about real-world issues and occurrence." One would have to wonder what's allegorical about the Genesis account of creation, if someone claims it is an allegory.
     
    #5497 YoursTrue, May 21, 2020
    Last edited: May 22, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
  18. YoursTrue

    YoursTrue We know gravity by happenstance. (Newton)

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2017
    Messages:
    6,005
    Ratings:
    +1,000
    Religion:
    Christian
    Is it that you want me to show using what you deem as "objectively-derived evidence," that there is only one god? First of all, it's good to know what the word god means. God certainly can have several contexts as well as meanings, as I'm pretty well sure that you, as a teacher, are aware of.

    Taken from God | Definition of God by Lexico
    1. (in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being
    2. **(in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity "a moon god"
    Please note the second definition there. Do you agree with that as a possibility? There are more definitions to consider, so in order to come to any understanding, it would be good to realize what the word god means.
     
  19. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    The question was can you provide objectively-derived evidence that there is only one god. The Bible is not objective as it is subjective.

    If you can't, then at least admit you can't.
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  20. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    34,077
    Ratings:
    +15,993
    Religion:
    ecumenical & naturalistic Catholic
    I've posted why I think it's allegorical several times already here, namely to probably rebut the polytheistic Babylonian creation narrative.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Useful Useful x 1
Loading...