Wirey
Fartist
If you only think it and aren't 100% certain, doesn't that make it a theory?
-
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!
Why is the theory of evolution...still considered a theory?
- Thread starter Deidre
- Start date
If you only think it and aren't 100% certain, doesn't that make it a theory?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
as a good explanation.....oh yeah
and certainty will hold sure....until...
an anomaly blows your reality all to hell
psychoslice
Veteran Member
Man ?, I was there, its nothing to do with me, is this god so vengeful that he needs to make the rest of the entire world suffer, just because of two gullible people ?.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
nay.....I believe the first couple passed the test of the forbidden fruit
and then the specimens were released back into the environment
and suffering has always been a part of this life
God gave Man dominion
it is Man that forms the suffering
psychoslice
Veteran Member
I personally don't believe in the garden, maybe as metaphor, but certainly not literally, we all come from the Source, or Consciousness, and the body we have while we are here is only for a short time, because we are separated from the Source we are seen as carnal. Whole we are a mind body organism most of us forget our true Home, Consciousness. Because of this we suffer, we get attached to the body and make up all sorts of stories to please ourselves, not wanting to ever die. We make up religions, and the stories within those religions help us to feel better, they act as our crutch throughout our life.
Hi Thief
I agree in part, but I'm thinking that the ''forbidden fruit'' was a metaphor and not a literal story. Are you a creationist, or support creationism?
I think the one crucial aspect of evolution that science cannot provide is the purpose and meaning of our existence. How we live is conditioned by what we think our purpose is. Are we an animal here just to dominate and control each other and satisfy our base appetites or are we just an accident of nature meant to get as much out of life then disappear and be annihilated for good?
Science can say we evolved but that doesn't give meaning or purpose to our lives. Are we just beasts who have now defined our territory as the world and are all seeking world domination or are we spiritual beings meant to live side by side in peace?
These are the questions in need of urgent resolution.
As our world is at a cross roads with things like war, the collapse of the world economy, global warming and the refugee crisis and world poverty, we find ourselves with a paralysis of will.
On the one hand we say we want peace but on the other we are not willing to erect a system where we can all have it because of our belief that man is intrinsically an animal and will always be warlike and aggressive so we don't try.
I'm building a world civilisation on the ground because I believe in humanity. I believe we are spiritual beings not animals, that can rise to great heights and establish peace so I have full confidence in humanity and no paralysis of will. So I build brick by brick.
But the hopelessness and despair that's out their reflects this conflict of identity of who we are. Are we an animal that can never change or are we primarily spiritual beings who have great potential?
Science can say we evolved but that doesn't give meaning or purpose to our lives. Are we just beasts who have now defined our territory as the world and are all seeking world domination or are we spiritual beings meant to live side by side in peace?
These are the questions in need of urgent resolution.
As our world is at a cross roads with things like war, the collapse of the world economy, global warming and the refugee crisis and world poverty, we find ourselves with a paralysis of will.
On the one hand we say we want peace but on the other we are not willing to erect a system where we can all have it because of our belief that man is intrinsically an animal and will always be warlike and aggressive so we don't try.
I'm building a world civilisation on the ground because I believe in humanity. I believe we are spiritual beings not animals, that can rise to great heights and establish peace so I have full confidence in humanity and no paralysis of will. So I build brick by brick.
But the hopelessness and despair that's out their reflects this conflict of identity of who we are. Are we an animal that can never change or are we primarily spiritual beings who have great potential?
interminable
منتظر
When they accepted evolution and denied god there is no need to think about these metaphysical subjects
Just eating and drinking would be their ultimate goal and purpose of life
Actually they don't want to think about these matters otherwise who can deny the existence of an intelligent creator behind it???
They look for any cause and why
But when we talk about cause of human body why he's here
They say evolution and natural selection
Last edited:
Thief
Rogue Theologian
I do believe in a Creator.Hi Thief
I agree in part, but I'm thinking that the ''forbidden fruit'' was a metaphor and not a literal story. Are you a creationist, or support creationism?
I do believe He brought life to this world.....with strong intent
and I believe He is free to manipulate His creation as He sees fit
Thief
Rogue Theologian
not wanting to die is the pivot.
we know we must...but do not want to and will go to great effort to continue breathing
but we won't
breathing is a guarantee.....you won't
I believe Man as he walked on Day Six was little more than self centered animal
moving in numbers as other herds do......safety in numbers
but each one passing before the spirit within could gel
dying without intention of continuing in spirit
not having considered
not having determined
The garden event is a manipulation
Adam is a chosen son of God
in body and mind....a long walk with God
and then to keep it going.....
Adam was given his twin sister for a bride.
This is completely false.
Really? Completely false? Some scientists haven't rejected the ToE?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Well classical physics was once considered so well established and widely accepted as to represent 'immutable laws'- and was far more directly observable, testable, i.e. scientific than evolution ever was. So I think 'theory' is being more than generous for evolution considering it's problems and lack of general support
Nothing in evolution denies any deities. It just fails to presume any.
interminable
منتظر
Since they can't see complexity and perfect designs they already believe in chance
And u know well that chance is substitute for god
And ignoring all of phenomena is considered '''intentional denial''''
I told in my previous post a kind of whale travel about 22000 kilometres to find food
Evolution told them to do so???
Evolution is a modern ignorance
Not sure what you mean to say here. Is that a way of saying that they should presume divine intent?
Sure. Not everything that happens was meant to.
No, I don't. I don't think God is at all a necessary concept, not even enough to need a substitute.
You mean, such as the evidence for evolution? Or the existence of hydrocephalus and anencephaly in nature?
Yes, I would say that qualifies as intentional denial, and is a major reason to criticize what is usually called "Creationism".
Evolution has no will. Are you aware of natural selection? Would you feel like describing it in your own words, perhaps?
I am sorry that you think so. Among other reasons, because you are quite wrong.
interminable
منتظر
This forum is atheist's forum I suppose
U understand what I mean
In our philosophy there is a rule
It say:
Something/somebody that doesn't have something it/he can't give that to others
Just Reverse this rule
thinking, love, being alive ,knowledge , power must come from something that has them otherwise it can't share them
This rule is meant to be about god's perfect attributes
For a seeker after the truth one single point is enough
Not exactly, but that is not really relevant either. Nor should it be. Science is science, with or without atheism.
I don't really. I do make some educated guesses at times, but it is a risky business.
Even if I did know exactly what you mean, it is not proper for me to put words in your mouth when I disagree with you, don't you think?
Is that supposed to apply to biology?
You will find some scientists among the millions who reject any position whatsoever. Your contention that
"evidence has mounted against the theory, and some scientists are openly rejecting the theory outright, based on that evidence." - Is completely false.
When 98% of all scientists and 99% of all scientists with PhDs say evolution happened (91% say by natural selection, 8% also add divine guidance in evolution) and when this position show no uptick or down-tick over time, I call it a consensus. In fact it is the largest consensus in the entire poll (more than vaccination!) .
http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/07/AAAS-Members-Elaboration-7-16-15-FINAL-Appendix-A.pdf
You failed to reply to my invitation about knowing about the science first before making criticisms . From this I infer that you are here mere to air your views and not to have genuine conversations. Do I infer correctly?