Genesis v Evolution

[edwest2]

With all due respect for the religion of evolution and those faithfully entrenched in it, I present the following quandary:

At the root of evolutionary theory we have the principal that higher-order organisms evolved from lower-order organisms via lower-order organisms responding to stimulus in a manner that would favor their survival and improvement. But, who or what is responsible for this innate, built-in “wisdom” of an organism to “know” to turn, move, or react in a self-preserving, beneficial manner, rather than in a way which would cause the organism to degrade or self-destruct? The evolutionist might say, “The Laws of Nature.” But where did these profound, immutable “Laws of Nature” come from? The only answers evolutionists provide seem to imply that, for them, nature itself is their God."

Remember, even Albert Einstein, himself, became convince there was a superior, creative intelligence or God; he just couldn’t come to grips with the idea of a personal God. And, on that issue, all I can say is: If the story of Jesus and all his works are nothing but historical fiction and (as the apostle Paul voiced in 1 Corinthians 15:14) Christ be not risen, then our preaching is vain, and our faith is also vain.

Quite true. God and the Bible comes first, man, and his limited understanding, come second. All of us has a belief system which we act upon every day. The unbeliever uses his limited personal experience. The believer begins with the premise; “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.”

I assure my Catholic brothers and sisters, that there is not a word about God in the theory, which is complete, for some, in itself. Those who say one could attach God to it would find it impossible to do so. We are faced, once again, with the old sayings: “Man invents himself.” And “Man is the measure of all things.”

God bless,
Ed

 

[drpmjhess]

I assure my Catholic brothers and sisters, that there is not a word about God in the theory, which is complete, for some, in itself. God bless,Ed

Right, Ed, nor should there be a word about God in the theory of evolution. There should not be a word about God pushing continents around in the theory of plate tectonics, or about God pulling heavy things downward in the theory of gravity. The Nicene Creed does not being with the words, “We believe in one God, micro-manager of heaven and earth…” as the previous two posts would seem to imply.

Petrus sum

 

[cyberjacques]

I’m not against a process of evolution - but I won’t pretend it’s the one taught by science educators.

If you believe pro-Evolution poster-boys like Dawkins then God’s a dead idea

There is no need for you to pretend, because only the most intellectually dishonest people would do so. And I can tell from your many posts that you don’t qualify as such. I simply feel that it’s important that others understand that there is a difference between the atheistic farce taught in schools and the actual theory of evolution. And Dawkins is an idiot, no question.

As for the rest of you, I’m done with this particular thread. I’m sorry that so many of you have been poisoned in one direction or another against either God or science, and this thread is going nowhere. 54 pages of valid arguments and those content to ignore them. If it follows the typical pattern of arguments such as this, it will soon turn into a name-calling contest and be closed by a moderator. Please excuse me if I bow out early.

God bless!

 

[Montalban]

There is no need for you to pretend, because only the most intellectually dishonest people would do so. And I can tell from your many posts that you don’t qualify as such.

Thanks for your projection.

I am totally against Darwinism. Unless you think that this is the only form of evolution, then you’d be right in saying that I am really against evolution. But as I already noted its not the only one, then you’ve simply given projection based on misreading of what I’ve said.

God bless!

I find it so strange that there’s so many people here who insult others then add “Blessings” or “God bless” at the end. It’s a total lack of introspection on their part.

 

[edwest2]

Right, Ed, nor should there be a word about God in the theory of evolution. There should not be a word about God pushing continents around in the theory of plate tectonics, or about God pulling heavy things downward in the theory of gravity. The Nicene Creed does not being with the words, “We believe in one God, micro-manager of heaven and earth…” as the previous two posts would seem to imply.

Petrus sum

Well then, evolution, as promoted here, is atheistic naturalism. Thanks for the confirmation.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

Well then, evolution, as promoted here, is atheistic naturalism. Thanks for the confirmation.

God bless,
Ed

Would you, then, also agree that atomic theory is athiestic?

Peace

Tim

 

[cyberjacques]

I find it so strange that there’s so many people here who insult others then add “Blessings” or “God bless” at the end. It’s a total lack of introspection on their part.

I’m sorry that you feel I’ve been insulting. It was meant as a diagnosis, not an insult. If someone cannot have a discussion about science without letting it stray dangerously close to becoming an argument over who’s the better Christian, I think it’s because something or someone has damaged their ability to approach the subject rationally. It’s not their fault, so it’s not an insult. I’m confident that a review of my other posts, in this thread and others, will demonstrate that I only get insulting when someone is caught in a blatant lie. That being said, I am also not one to sugar-coat unsavory truths. Doing so strips the truth of its meaning. I realize that it’s inevitable that someone will eventually take offense at that, but please realize that that’s not my intention.

Montalban, I pray that your opinion of me has not diminished as a result of this. I have a great deal of respect for you, and I would be saddened if such a misunderstanding led you to think less of me.

Again, God bless!

 

[inthecloud]

Evolution is not observable or reproducible.

Come on, look youself into a mirror. Human racial features are a by product of evolution. Thats why you can spot a Scandinavian or a subsaharan african inmediatly.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

With all due respect for the religion of evolution and those faithfully entrenched in it, I present the following quandary:

At the root of evolutionary theory we have the principal that higher-order organisms evolved from lower-order organisms via lower-order organisms responding to stimulus in a manner that would favor their survival and improvement. But, who or what is responsible for this innate, built-in “wisdom” of an organism to “know” to turn, move, or react in a self-preserving, beneficial manner, rather than in a way which would cause the organism to degrade or self-destruct? The evolutionist might say, “The Laws of Nature.” But where did these profound, immutable “Laws of Nature” come from? The only answers evolutionists provide seem to imply that, for them, nature itself is their God."

**Where do you get this? only Ed tries to actively promote everyone who believes in evolution as a model are atheists. He has given up on all rational arguments and now just name calls. I’ve not seen anyone on this thread who says they are an atheist. We know of course that you wish us to be, but we are not. **

Remember, even Albert Einstein, himself, became convince there was a superior, creative intelligence or God; he just couldn’t come to grips with the idea of a personal God. And, on that issue, all I can say is: If the story of Jesus and all his works are nothing but historical fiction and (as the apostle Paul voiced in 1 Corinthians 15:14) Christ be not risen, then our preaching is vain, and our faith is also vain.

Your remarks about Jesus and his works being historical fiction having zero to do with this discussion.

 

[edwest2]

Go ahead, answer the question. How does a gene know which way to go? How to evolve?

God bless,
Ed

 

[drpmjhess]

Well then, evolution, as promoted here, is atheistic naturalism. Thanks for the confirmation. God bless,
Ed

Ed, would you join me in anathematizing atheist plate tectonics? We could argue that thermal convection columns in the mantle are not sufficiently strong to separate the mid-Atlantic ridge and push apart Africa and South America – only a godless scientist would argue thusly. We contend that it is God-the-bodybuilder with divine brute strength who is forcing the continents apart. If any should argue for naturalistic geology, let him be anathema!

Petrus

 

[drpmjhess]

Go ahead, answer the question. How does a gene know which way to go? How to evolve? God bless,
Ed

How does a continent know which way to go? How does the Indo-Australian plate know to move northwards to crash into Asia so as to create the Himalayas, so that an Indian subcontinent can be formed for St. Thomas to evangelize? The intelligence of tectonic plates is mindboggling! Even more troubling is how wheat seeds know how to grow, and how grapes know how to fement, so that they can become the elements that will be transformed into the body and blood of Christ. Isn’t this astonishing?

Petrus

 

[edwest2]

Nice dodge. Since the word play continues, I have no reason to change my argument, which is based on Church teaching. The atheists are the next minority group to seek normalization. And by atheists, I mean atheist scientists and others.

That’s a fact.

Ed bless,
Ed

 

[drpmjhess]

Nice dodge.

Thanks, Ed – the Dodge is a great truck, although sometimes we have problems starting it on cold winter mornings.

Petrus

 

[Orogeny]

Nice dodge. Since the word play continues, I have no reason to change my argument, which is based on Church teaching. The atheists are the next minority group to seek normalization. And by atheists, I mean atheist scientists and others.

That’s a fact.

Ed bless,
Ed

What ever you do, Ed, make sure you don’t answer my question in post #825. Continue on with your name calling and holier than thou attitude, but please, please don’t answer my question.

Peace

Tim

 

[Orogeny]

Go ahead, answer the question. How does a gene know which way to go? How to evolve?

God bless,
Ed

It doesn’t, Ed. I’m sure you can give us a scientific reference that claims that genes know how to evolve.

Peace

Tim

 

[edwest2]

Hi Tim,

I’ve heard more than enough of the evidence and since God is nowhere to be found in the mountains of evidence, theistic evolutionists will be left out in the cold when atheist scientists begin their “rational” call to atheism. I’ve been reading about the “second enlightenment” as well.

I’m not calling anyone here an atheist but I have read too many posts that are too similar to posts written on secular forums, which, by the way, appear to be populated primarily by atheists, leftists and anarchists.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Orogeny]

Hi Tim,

I’ve heard more than enough of the evidence and since God is nowhere to be found in the mountains of evidence, theistic evolutionists will be left out in the cold when atheist scientists begin their “rational” call to atheism. I’ve been reading about the “second enlightenment” as well.

I’m not calling anyone here an atheist but I have read too many posts that are too similar to posts written on secular forums, which, by the way, appear to be populated primarily by atheists, leftists and anarchists.

God bless,
Ed

Where is God in the evidence for germ theory, Ed?

Peace

Tim

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Hi Tim,

I’ve heard more than enough of the evidence and since God is nowhere to be found in the mountains of evidence, theistic evolutionists will be left out in the cold when atheist scientists begin their “rational” call to atheism. I’ve been reading about the “second enlightenment” as well.

I’m not calling anyone here an atheist but I have read too many posts that are too similar to posts written on secular forums, which, by the way, appear to be populated primarily by atheists, leftists and anarchists.
God bless,
Ed

Course your’re not calling anyone names Ed, you would never do that. But it is a bit much to call all secular forums filled with atheists, leftists, and anarchists? You think the NAC is filled with those folks? How on earth would you know? All secular forums takes in a lot of territory. Is NBC full of em? How about the website for the library of Congress?

Perhaps you might focus a bit less on who’s making the argument when as you say, atheists, scientists, most believing Christians, most other religious groups, all seem pretty much in agreement…so perhaps the argument is better?

I like however, how you continue with the obfuscation. Since you know science doesnt deal with God, and you deal with God, therefore science as it relates only to evolution and other stuff I find in the bible, is false…I like how you constructed that so there could only be one logical outcome. Proves the danger of syllogsm doesn’t it? It can be manipulated and used to make something appear true which is not.

 

[drpmjhess]

I like however, how you continue with the obfuscation. Since you know science doesnt deal with God, and you deal with God, therefore science as it relates only to evolution and other stuff I find in the bible, is false…I like how you constructed that so there could only be one logical outcome. Proves the danger of syllogism doesn’t it? It can be manipulated and used to make something appear true which is not.

Nice response, SpiritMeadwow!

Petrus