Irony of the evolutionary belief

[YoursTrue]

eh? Who told you that nonsense about Christians? The real claim is amigo, which you have no clue about obviously, is that Christianity at is foundational level is the only world view that best explains (through internal and external evidence) the "bad things" in this world.

I suggest you actually open a bible and read the first 3 chapters of Genesis. Then, once you have done that, read Matthew Chapter 27. Finally, read Revelation Chapter 21.

Unless you are actually willing to read the above 3 references...please do not waste this forums time with your errant wives tails about the origin of Sin and Evil!

evolution isnt a sudden voila and the next complete update appears...its claimed to be a slow process over very long periods of time (even for humanity).

Take a look around you next time you are out in a large shopping center...do you see any slow change to the next step in evolution for humanity?

The reason for my inclusion of cancer here is a simple one...our bodies are not finding solutions to cancer...we are spending billions of dollars each year around the world desperately trying to find artificial medical solutions to the problem that evolution clearly is unable to solve through natural selection! The additional dilemma is that cancer is found in animals as well...which is supportive of the biblical claim that this kind of disease is a result of sin and not a gain in the level of evolutionary achievement.

Not sure if you know this or not, but the concesus i have been given a few years ago by a medical researcher who worked in Newcastle University under a professor who was studying cancer was that given enough time, we will all die of cancer eventually!

Yeah well either way -- the outcome of humans by the theory of evolution is death, I'm sure the professor knew that. And further, the Doomsday Clock underscored by scientists say the human race is closer than ever to destruction. I believe only the Bible by means of God's spirit can give the answer -- which is life everlasting for some and -- death for some.

 

[YoursTrue]

This thread is about how evolution is ironic. What's ironic is that creationists insist that the universe was designed and fine tuned by a God, and all done deliberately. But you don't like having to explain the bad things like cancer and other diseases because you have trapped yourselves. "God is love, oh but he nature might kill your child with Leukemia, and won't intervene." Creationists built the trap without realizing it. You decided to use it without realizing it's a trap. And now you are upset that the trap is being pointed out to you. You would rather ignore and forget that creationism is a trap as an explanation, and you want to forget it.

The whole "chance" issue is not something that can be calculated and argued. The universe exists at 100%. What are the odds of a God existing? You didn't even bother to play with that math because you have no data, just obsolete cultural stoires that don't correlate to reality. If every person on the planet was issued a lottery ticket and soneone will win, the odds are highly against any of us winning, over 8 billion to 1. It's improbable that we will win. But when someone wins is it so improbable that they won that God is the only explanation? No.

The fine tuning idea is highly flawed, and you don't like acknowledging how it is flawed, you just want to believe it and write about it.

Actually, you don't get the picture. I won't fully explain it to you now, but think -- the Doomsday Clock doesn't say anything about God or no God. It talks about death by destruction by humans.

 

[Subduction Zone]

showing pretty pictures of modern humans is not answering the question.

show me a human with an evolutionary gain please...like a precursor to us growing wings, or with limbs showing an evolutionary advance towards the ability to jump like a flea, or what about the ability to swing through trees like a monkey (oh hang on, we've gone backwards there)!!!

The evolutionary image below shows physcial progresson...but it has clearly stopped...oh ****e, whats happened?
View attachment 90606


The problem is, there are no modern examples of the next level of progression or intermediatories between either...and there must be if the theory is true!

Your number one problem is that right now you are thinking of evolution as trying to attain a goal. That is never the case. Evolutionary changes are driven by the environment that one lives in. That is why when the environment does not change the rate of evolution is very slow. But if some catastrophe happens, say a giant asteroid hits the Earth and kills almost all of the dinosaurs and quite a bit of other land life. Once the immediate destruction is over there are all sorts of open ecological niches without any organisms filling them. The existing life immediately starts to fill those niches. And new traits that would have been lost in large populations are often preserved in the new one with much smaller populations and much higher pressures to adapt to the new environment. Evolution is rapid after major extinction events.

The above drawing is very old and we have many more fossils these days. When it comes to the earliest "Homo sapiens" there are significant differences to modern life. But you and I won't notice the slower changes occurring now. A thousand years is very little time to note any changes. And most of those changes will not show up in the skeleton. You are more than just bones.

There is no "progression" and evolution has not stopped. At best it has slowed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah well either way -- the outcome of humans by the theory of evolution is death, I'm sure the professor knew that. And further, the Doomsday Clock underscored by scientists say the human race is closer than ever to destruction. I believe only the Bible by means of God's spirit can give the answer -- which is life everlasting for some and -- death for some.

You seem to want to blame a theory for reality. The theory only explains reality. It is not as if the theory of evolution holds anything personal against you or anyone else.

 

[Eli G]

How do the priests of evolution predict the next posthuman species?

 

[Subduction Zone]

How do the priests of evolution predict the next posthuman species?

The what?

 

[YoursTrue]

You seem to want to blame a theory for reality. The theory only explains reality. It is not as if the theory of evolution holds anything personal against you or anyone else.

It's reality insofar as we personally see death and not everlasting life for humans. But aside from humans natural death (and realize I don't ascribe to the theory of evolution but I also don't think God created deformities either, so that in itself is a question for some--), another consideration is that humans are warned of self-destruction. I appreciate the reasoning here, given to the early Christians at 1 Corinthians chapter 15.

"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. 15In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised."

There's more in that chapter that talks about growth, but that certainly expresses the attitude of some.

 

[McBell]

Yeah well either way -- the outcome of humans by the theory of evolution is death,

The out come of humans even fore the theory of evolution was death.
Funny, isn't it, that your declaration is basically a "so what" statement...

the Doomsday Clock underscored by scientists say the human race is closer than ever to destruction.

What does this have to do with evolution?

I believe only the Bible by means of God's spirit can give the answer -- which is life everlasting for some and -- death for some

Seems to me you got this a bit wonkerjawled.
Shouldn't it be more along the lines of death for all, after which everlasting life for some...

 

[YoursTrue]

The what?

I understood the question. For those believing in the absolute process of evolution as projected by many, perhaps the next "species" would be in the ape family. You think? Well anyway, there may be no future for "mankind," according to scientists. Cockroaches, maybe. Back to 1 Corinthians 15.

 

[Eli G]

How do the priests of evolution predict the next posthuman species?

It seems that evolutionists, who talk so much about science, forget how it works.

The nine main characteristics of science are: Objectivity, verifiable, ethical neutrality, systematic exploration, reliability, precision, abstraction and predictability.

Each supposed new species, presumably arising from a previous species related to others and so, would offer evolutionists such an immense wealth of information that it would be very easy to predict what the next expected changes would be.

Or is the doctrine not so scientific?

 

[YoursTrue]

It seems that evolutionists, who talk so much about science, forget how it works.

The nine main characteristics of science are: Objectivity, verifiable, ethical neutrality, systematic exploration, reliability, precision, abstraction and predictability.

Each supposed new species, presumably arising from a previous species related to others and so, would offer evolutionists such an immense wealth of information that it would be very easy to predict what the next expected changes would be.

Or is the doctrine not so scientific?

Gotta wonder. But I'm sure some may have the "answer."

 

[blü 2]

I´ts obvious that you have no idea what FT means so how do you know that the idea is flawed?

Good point. What does FT mean, as you've been using it here?

 

[Pogo]

It's reality insofar as we personally see death and not everlasting life for humans. But aside from humans natural death (and realize I don't ascribe to the theory of evolution but I also don't think God created deformities either, so that in itself is a question for some--), another consideration is that humans are warned of self-destruction. I appreciate the reasoning here, given to the early Christians at 1 Corinthians chapter 15.

"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. 15In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised."

There's more in that chapter that talks about growth, but that certainly expresses the attitude of some.

Hey wow, something that is not an error in the Bible, @Subduction Zone will be so proud of you finding it.

 

[Pogo]

Good point. What does FT mean, as you've been using it here?

Fine tuning as abused in some forms of the anthropic principle.

 

[YoursTrue]

Hey wow, something that is not an error in the Bible, @Subduction Zone will be so proud of you finding it.

So glad you realize that it is not an error. It goes on, for your consideration:
"Nevertheless, someone will say: “How are the dead to be raised up? Yes, with what sort of body are they coming?” 36 You unreasonable person! What you sow is not made alive unless first it dies. 37 And as for what you sow, you sow, not the body that will develop, but just a bare grain, whether of wheat or of some other kind of seed; 38 but God gives it a body just as it has pleased him, and gives to each of the seeds its own body."
You don't have to believe it. I do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's reality insofar as we personally see death and not everlasting life for humans. But aside from humans natural death (and realize I don't ascribe to the theory of evolution but I also don't think God created deformities either, so that in itself is a question for some--), another consideration is that humans are warned of self-destruction. I appreciate the reasoning here, given to the early Christians at 1 Corinthians chapter 15.

"But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is worthless, and so is your faith. 15In that case, we are also exposed as false witnesses about God. For we have testified about God that He raised Christ from the dead, but He did not raise Him if in fact the dead are not raised."

There's more in that chapter that talks about growth, but that certainly expresses the attitude of some.

Why even bring that up? The theory of evolution says nothing about Jesus and his resurrection. Perhaps you know that that beliefs is false deep down inside and you want to blame evolution for it. I cannot understand why you want to blame evolution that way.

 

[McBell]

Why even bring that up? The theory of evolution says nothing about Jesus and his resurrection. Perhaps you know that that beliefs is false deep down inside and you want to blame evolution for it. I cannot understand why you want to blame evolution that way.

"Blame Canada!"

 

[Subduction Zone]

Fine tuning as abused in some forms of the anthropic principle.

The argument is a a combination of an appear to big numbers and an argument from ignorance. "We don't know, therefore God".


Worse yet the one number that was the biggest one has been refuted. It is not "finely tuned" as being some sort of choice. It is that value due to relativity.

All Hail Relativity!!

 

[YoursTrue]

Why even bring that up? The theory of evolution says nothing about Jesus and his resurrection.

That is correct.

Perhaps you know that that beliefs is false deep down inside and you want to blame evolution for it. I cannot understand why you want to blame evolution that way.

Nope. I'm just bringing to your attention that the resurrection has been testified to, whether you believe it or not. And--there were those in the first century who claimed to be Christian and did not know about Darwinian type evolution, but even then denied the resurrection. Evolution and the Doomsday Clock offer only the possibility of death by natural means and also at the hand of those purportedly evolved. The Bible says something else. Have a good one. Indeed, the resurrection is not something considered in the theory of evolution. This does not mean there will be no resurrection, or that death is the final result for everyone.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why even bring that up? The theory of evolution says nothing about Jesus and his resurrection. Perhaps you know that that beliefs is false deep down inside and you want to blame evolution for it. I cannot understand why you want to blame evolution that way.

That is correct. The scientific theory of evolution does not consider within its realm the possibility of everlasting life that I know about. I don't blame evolution for death. I also don't happen to believe that the theory (1) is true in all its aspects, and (2) there is and will be no resurrection.