Was reading a coupleA threads where they were talking about evolution.
And I was just wondering ??? What is the difference ;? scientiically ,
in a thing transforning its apearance in a single lifetime and something evolving within a coupleA generations (or hundreds).
For example, poison Ivy can be transplanted onto an Oak tree, and its apearance changes (transorms) ??? This, due to a change of nutrient intake.
How much greater 100,000 years or two may make? especially considering world wide enviromental changes.
Evolution gotta be true to some extent.
Had to post this while the question remains on my mind, or, I'd forget to.
but? sorry I do gotta run off for a while.
I recently read a book "The language of God" by Francis Collins. He was the director of the worldwide human genome project which spent ten years mapping the human genes. After a career spanning many years in genetic research he came to the conclusion that the theory of evolution is absolutely proven in our genes. Now he also states he is a Christian and came to this position from atheism in his 20s.
The choice is, do we go with the professor who has many years of objective research to his name, or do we go with the Christian fundamentalist literalists who hold their ill informed views on principle but haven't experienced science since leaving high school?
As for me I'll go with the scientist every time. By accepting the evolutionary model of the creation of man we can still find theistic truths on the nature of man and relation to God from the allegorical genesis account. The two are not mutually exclusive.
first I would like to apologize to everyone for my poor attendance after posting comments.
I won't go into detail except to say It CAN'T be avoided.
This too will pass.
Disappearinghead I have to agree with this comment completely.
I gotta ask! It is mentioned many times in scriptures how God cast his wrath upon the Hebrew people for not following HIS laws.
It is written in Daniel 9:24
Seventy weeks are determined unto thy people, to finish the transgression, quit sinning, make restitution, and to anoint the most Holy.
They didn't do it!
SOooo God brought about the end of that Hebrew Nation!
How is it that immediately upon its conception, The church in Rome began committing atrocities much greater than anything perpetuated by the Hebrew peoples?
- - - -
James .. "I mean, who knows what is planned for after this metamorphosis, this reunification".
me ... I could be wrong? But I think that by the time that happens? we will have gone Full Circle.
For it is written that our names were written in the book of life BEFORE the foundation of the world was laid.
For He knew us BEFORE we were knitted into the womb. ??? The point being, Church has been teaching interpretation of scripture for SOooo long that we have become blinded by them. When we read scripture …. These interpretations jump to the forefront of our minds and we miss the true messages as they were originally intended.
From cover to cover, imo, the biblical text shows the evolution of humanity.
Isn't this what Immanu El showed by evolving from mesa mortal to eternal mortal?
Isn't this where the controversy really exists regarding the purpose of humanity, its inception?
An evolving/transforming from the stasis of limitation to one of totality, perfection, completion -at least as far as this natural location is concerned. I mean, who knows what is planned for after this metamorphosis, this reunification.
That is something beyond the present scope of scientific and sensation consideration.
Good thought Jerami.
Not really. Everything we know about evolution must be discarded if there was a developmental destination planned - which is what you tell us god dun.
Sadly - just more word salad to defend an irrational belief.
Now, that is an ALL or Nothing approach.
Why does it have to be either or?
Either you/us are totally correct or totally wrong?
I guess that makes ALL of us totally wrong!
Because we need to throw away our understanding of evolution - all of it - it it was all planned ahead and there was a developmental destination already decided.
It is kinda like when we go on a trip.
We may already know the destination, and not know how many times we are going to stop and smell the roses, or picnic under a tree.
It is nothing like that at all. Unless you are saying that your Invisible Super Being did not know that one animal that would develop and appear was human beings with self awareness - that would make sense.
It is nothing like that at all. Unless you are saying that your Invisible Super Being did not know that one animal that would develop and appear was human beings with self awareness - that would make sense.
Not at all; Evolution did happen to some degree.
AND THEN ... with just a little intervention, Mankind was steered down a different path. Or something like that!
Ah - so your Invisible Super Being did not know what was going to develop and did not do all the development - no creation, no plan? When did it do the majik?
That's a sweeping statement there and I'm not sure that observing evolution supports it. Evolution describes the changes; it does not purport to answer any question of why or purpose if any.
Besides which play the game here. You have long ranted against believers who hold onto to a literal view of creation, yet when others state they are comfortable with eviction, you are still not happy.
Sorry typo above. My Apple rendered eviction for evolution without my permission.
No - evolution describes the reasons and driving forces for the changes as well as the changes themselves. It documents the whys and wherefores, and recognizes that there is not a predetermined development planned. If there were - evolution would need every single step of the way to be controlled - every single thing that happened on the planet - every one. Thus - if you are now saying god dunnit wiv evolution and he controlled every single step - this makes all of our knowledge worthless and your god rather stupid.
Early on in my college career, I often wondered why people thought of Evolution and "Creation" as mutually exclusive...that there is an intelligent creative force for all of life from the beginning of time...a spirit who still helps us along now...with other spirits who also do the same...that the creator has also given us guides in the unseen world as we have on the physical plane...for..."nothing is impossible with God." I do like to call God "Great Spirit" because it is a name that encompasses both the male and female nature of our Creator.
I think that evolution happens in fits and starts...and still does. So sad that some beautiful species have become extinct as a result of human carelessness.
just my 2 cents
I like the way you expressed that.
Logic of science in one of it's simplest forms!
Cause and affect! Something causes everything that happens.
When something happens ... there will always be an affect.
When we intelectualize this too much; it becomes difficult to understand.
No - it is real simple to understand. I Think what you mean is - when you think about it - your beliefs are impossible.
What caused god? Seeing as something causes everything that happens?
Can you name one thing that didn't have a cause or one thing that doesn't have an affect?
You are claiming there is one - not I.
Could you please tell me where I said such a thing?
I do not understand how your answer (?) to my question is an answer?
Could you explain please?
You keep saying that everything has a cause - yet seem to be saying - correct me if I am wrong - that god was not caused by something else?
Is that correct?
What caused god?
This is the question YOU avoided - and instead asked me a question.
Ha! Marcus. Egregiously erroneous, as always.
You see, I distinctly and deliberately equated Evolution with the present compiled text called biblical. A purpose you so often overlook in angst -perhaps haste- instead of genuine interest.
I did, in fact, say that everything regarding the Theos called evolution must be dismissed, as should the same Theos of many theologies. Why? Simply because "what you know" was predestined. That predestination is presently called your brain, which houses a superbly complex system of light energy, uniquely whizzing amid the seemingly infinite catacombs within that semi solid glucose ball between your ears.
It is a genetic compilation that insures you "know". The plan for transformation is inevitable. Evolution and theology are both proving that beyond a shadow of any doubt. You seem inept and disturbed by this, for reason, it seems, which only magnifies the point. You do not have-to transform. No sir, you may join the elite "know it all's" in the same location -dust- if you so choose ( innt choice sublime? ).
I believe evolution calls that survival of the fittest? Transform or nature will transform you -and you may not make it out alive.
Transformation is inevitable. According to the theory, humanity has been evolving since its inception (approximately 250 thousand years; according to the Judaic, a little more than 6000 years). So, according to the Judaic, either you will transform into what you were truly created to be, by exceeding the choices of your assumed evolutionary truth or transform back into the dust (carbon base) your body came from. As your evolution has preset, either you transform according to practically the same as the Judaic mention, else you will be transformed according to natures desire. either way, if you leave it to either mention, you have no control. That "gluconean" mass will stop and melt into "nothingness". Every shred of thought, memory, arc between synapse will never, ever, exist in the present state you have come to exist in, for these x- number of "years". You will, for lack of a better word, become extinct.
Both the Judaic and the Evolutionary Theories state precisely the same.
The irony of evolution is brilliant, no?!
Cheerio and pip-pip.
Ok evolution guy I give in. If God planned it he's stupid and if he didn't he couldn't know what the outcome would be, so he's stupid again. Ah well that just about wraps it up for God then. Let's watch Him disappear in a puff of your logic.
Yes - logic will destroy the idea of a god every time.
Well, not really (maybe specific conceptions of G-d, yes).
Logic would seem to destroy the idea of a universe, too. And yet...
No, logic dictates that what is actually here and measurable is real. There is no concept of god that can exist within a logical frame work.
We already have a word for the one that could - it is called "existence."
Yes, I've got that. Given the specificity of your religious upbringing and the way you characterize religious thought, I would argue you do have a very specific concept of G-d in mind.
How does logic account for the universe (i.e. the matter and energy that exist now)?
What do you mean "account," for it. It is measurable and exists. Logically - that is enough.
If you want an explanation that includes "why," or "how," then you need quantum physics.
Yes, I mean everything that's observable should have an origin that is logically consistent with what we know, too. The matter and energy that exist in the universe do not have an origin that logic can explain, and neither can quantum physics.
Origin? Please explain how you know that there was a time when matter and energy did not exist and these "originated," some how.
Quantum physics has a perfectly logical explanation as well.
I don't know anything about it, I'm trying to work through a paradox.
Your explanation that matter and energy have already existed certainly helps keep what we know about existence consistent with the laws that explain other phenomena. But it still does not explain where matter and energy came from. Saying "it's always existed" seems unsatisfactory.
Why? This is the default. It exists. You are the one stating that is has not always existed. How do you draw this conclusion?
I don't know. You're right - it's the default position, and at least it's consistent with the physical laws. Like I said, it seems unsatisfying to me to say that matter and energy have always existed.
Why? You need it to have been created?
Will that validate your beliefs?
My unease at the thought that matter and energy have always existed predates any religious belief of mine.
Yes - I am reasonably sure that this unease is the source of all religious belief.
Maybe. It's probably also the primary instigator into continued scientific inquiry into the nature of existence. They're not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Yes they are. A few scientists are capable of compartmentalizing (all religious belief requires this) to the extent that they can be a believer and a scientist. But - they all agree a god is unnecessary to the processes they investigate.
Compartmentalization isn't necessary if you don't believe belief is necessary.
About your last sentence: What I said doesn't contradict that. I guess we're in agreement.
Compartmentalization is a vital ingredient in any religious belief. Especially certain monotheistic ones. Christianity simply makes no sense whatsoever and the obvious contradictions and teachings that go against the natural order of things make it impossible to cling to this belief without some degree of denial or compartmentalization.
God killed himself (or his son - or he became his own son - depending) and he came back to life and this was some sort of sacrifice? Sure. No contradiction in this.
If you're talking about Christianity, this is true. This is why "Christian science" is often laughed at as a contradiction in terms, and why "Christian science" never seems to stand up to peer review. (And why it's obsessed with "proving" stories from the Bible, and affirming doctrine)
But even though Christianity is the religion you're most familiar with, it's not the only religion on the planet. There are non-dogmatic religions and they don't (or can't) take issue with scientific discovery.
The other major religion I am familiar with (Islam) also requires the same denial. With something like 2.1 billion people claiming to be Christian and another 1.6 billion claiming to be Muslim - that is a substantial portion of mankind in denial.
Other non-monotheostic religions do not offer up the same contradictions and therefore do not clash with science or reason in the same way. You hardly ever hear of a Shinto devotee flying a plane into a building or some other irrational act.
I am familiar with a number of other religions - I just have no issue with them. Fine with me if you want to worship and praise the animals you eat. Fine with me if you want to not eat meat because you value all life.
Tell me you follow the scribblings in a book that clearly tells you to murder non-believers and we have a problem.
Well, Judaism is monotheistic and does not believe in killing non-Jews ("believer" is kind of a meaningless concept in Judaism since it is not dogmatic). It doesn't believe in killing people in general, having abolished the death penalty in 70 CE.
But any religion can be the basis for tribalism. The Hindu religion is peaceful, but as an ethnic identity in a conflict over land, it can be made to be the basis of violent conflict (look at Sri Lanka). The same is the case for Judaism (in Israel/Palestine), and there are plenty of secular nationalist groups that engage in terrorism. And those kamikaze pilots in WW2? They were Shinto.
Maybe engaging in violence/terrorism for land isn't irrational? It certainly is the story of human history, and has nothing to do with religion.
One thought: It seems that anyone who wants to witness to a "power greater than ourselves" is more in charge of the world than humanity is has been made fun of and considered stupid...and the entity that we call "God" called these people to be witnesses...and to take risks.
Risk-takers who "succeed" are considered geniuses and Risk-takers who "fail" are considered stupid in society...throughout the ages.
On both accounts...when we put ourselves out there...we take the risk of looking like fools...in the image of the "higher power" who "rules us all" (waxing Tolkein, here :0) ).
My point is....the higher power we call "God" (I call "Great Spirit") doesn't need our approval to exist...or to influence the affairs of the planet.
But yes, I believe that nature does respond to human activity...such as pollution and the diminishing of the ozone later caused by it. Almost as many disasters are human-instigated as there are purely natural ones....so cause and effect has some bearing on the natural order of things.
How can a scientist of ANY sort deny cause in effect? In schools, the 'rules" of "cause and effect" guide science curriculum on so many levels....and then there is the idea of "correlation" (which does not imply "causation').
Just my 2 cents more.
You ask "what caused God"?
The only answer I have is to say ... The same thing that caused the "Big Bang" could have just as easily caused God to be.
Which came first the chicken or the egg?
Now you are saying something caused god?
What was it that caused god Jerami?
You ask the question ... then say that I asked the question.
I just ask what caused the "Big Bang"
It that could cause this universe to come into existence, why should it stop there? Why couldn't it create a God also?
I'm not saying it happened this way.
Just saying why not?
Answer the question please. What caused god? Don't bring the big bang into it please. Was it n even bigger n badder god?
As you say, don't keep sidesteping my question. Why don't YOU answer the question?
What caused the big bang? That is my answer also.
No wonder your religion causes so many wars Jerami.
I don't know exactly what caused the big bang - or even if it is correct. Current quantum theory does indeed state that the Universe created itself from "nothing" - although not what you would understand as nothing. And we have some extremely good models to show this.
Now - there are plenty of other options as well. The Universe could be eternal - my preference.
Now - please answer the Kwestion instead of simply defending your irrational beliefs. Firing questions at me that you have utterly no intention of listening to or investigating is simply rude.
What caused god? lololo Seeing as everything has a cause?
Are you sying that everything does not have a cause? You keep insinuating that "I" say that everything has a cause.
I do not know what "caused" God to be.
As I said before; Whatever your answer is to what caused the universe to be Formed .... that is my answer to your question also.
I take it you have not read your majik book Jerami. You have no idea what caused the Universe to form do you? Because we have answers to this question.
Nice to know that you think there was something that existed before god and made this god. I would worship that if I were you.
What caused that?
How many books (not counting texts books) have you read that you agree with EVERYthing that is contained in it?
Any of them ilogy books is what I'm talking about.
Do you believe ALL of any of them?
Do you understand and/or agree with ALL of what any of them say?
Exactly what does that have to do with you believing majikal nonsense?
You do not understand?
Well ... I'm too old now to try to teach you how to understand.
Understanding is much harder to learn than learning to reading a new language.
If you think something is magic? that just means that you do know how it works.
Yes. I Understand just fine thank you Jerami. You are the one who does not understand Goddunnit is the same as majik.
You just lie to yourself that you have answers for things you do not uinderstand and say "god" - and then lie to yourself that this is not the same as "majik."
And then insult me by claiming you are capable of teaching me understanding. How funny - considering your high levels of ignorance in so many areas.
This is why your religion cause so many conflicts. People like your claiming understanding when wot u got is majik. This makes you too lazy to bother gaining any true understanding.
by aka-dj6 years ago
I just posted the below in another thread, but, because it can get lost within all the other posts, I decided to repeat it in it's own new thread.Here it is:I am so amazed!!I look at the human body, and with what little...
by Eng.M7 years ago
with no assumptions madecould anyone write links to some experiments and results those agreed to be prooving natural selection mechanismsI believe we went through this before but with no satsifactory experimental proofs...
by janesix17 months ago
I have some questions about evolution.1. Random Mutation. Is it really random?"To determine how the bacteria had gained their tails, Dr. Xavier and his colleagues sequenced the DNA of 24 lines of hyperswarmers. In...
by AnnCee5 years ago
The House will vote, perhaps today, on Rep. Mike Pence’s amendment to the Continuing Resolution which would zero out taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood last year received $363 million in...
by superwags5 years ago
It was long regarded that humans have done the majority of their evolving and have largely stopped because of the cushy way in which technology has influenced out lives. In characteristics like skin colour, lactose...
by janesix16 months ago
The chances of life evolving by chance are less than one in 10 to the -1000. That's a ten with a thousand zeros. to compare the number, there are only 10 to the 80 atoms in the entire universe. So the number reaches...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.