The End of Evolution

  • Thread starter Thread starter FindTruth7
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It is typical - I am a scientist, you are not, if you would learn science you would agree with me, etc…
Click to expand...
I hold a superior position - you do not, therefore you are ignorant and worse.
Click to expand...
But, is their position complete? No. Is it superior? No, because it is incomplete.
On the other hand, we must not hold onto superstitions. The other side holds that all non-scientific beliefs are indeed superstitious. Round and round we go.
Click to expand...
No, that is not an accurate characterization. For example, Stephen Gould has written approvingly of religious belief, and has even conceded that such faith could be true. Other scientists reject creationism as superstition, but acknowledge God as Creator and Lord of creation. Francisco Ayala, a Catholic, would be an example. It would be more accurate to say that non-creationists hold that non-scientific beliefs have no place in science, while but can still be valid ways of thinking.
 
cpayne said:
Not that I care too much one way or the other, but is anyone else a bit bothered at the waste of time and energy?
Click to expand...
Not at ALL a waste of time! It “sharpens” our thinking and helps us in how we defend what we believe and helps us see how others look at things…never a waste of time! Actually, I thought it was clever. Humor is different for everyone and you need to be hesitant to judge a person’s intentions for why they threw this subject out there. (I saw no arrogance, but that’s me)

In Him,
Mary
 
Nita said:
Hi lozeerose,
I guess the objection I was making was a little obscure. Will try to state it a little more clearly.

What upsets me with evolutionists and “old world” people is that they state their beliefs as absolute fact. The world IS ? years old; Man EVOLVED from…
The actual facts are:
  1. We don’t know how old the world is.
  2. We don’t know for certain whether or not man evolved.
By the way, I love science also. Physics and math were my favorites.

Nita
Click to expand...
Nita I will state that yes, there are some who speak with arrogant certainty; however, many speak with confidence that scientific analysis as bared out that the theories of evolution and “old” earth (and others) are almost certainly accurate and true.

Again, the Lord gave us the ability to explore our world and when we do so and remember that He is the creator of everything we stand in awe of His majesty and greatness.

So we may not know exactly how old the earth is we are fairly certain it is about 4b years. And although we may not know exactly how man evolved, we are fairly certain it happened by way of primate ancestors - not monkeys and not chimps - but other more primitive species.

Oh, and for those who seek the missing link…I think it will probably never be found because my personal theory on human evolution is that God is the missing link - without his intervention we would not be. This may also be the root to Satan’s anger that He would chose such lowly creatures to mold in His image.

That leads me to the Big Bang. Science will never be able to explain this with true certainty because it cannot be tested (at least I do not think). God is at the root of the creation of the universe. How else can you explain the creation of matter and energy in a vacuum when, to my knowledge, matter requires it to be held in something (we are on the earth, the earth is in a solar system, solar system in a galaxy, galaxy in space and space is in…space???)

Anyway, I am low on caffeine this morning so I may not make any sense…But I love these discussions simply because, like another member said “What does it matter?” Without God you got nothin’
 
I see I find Creationists on this site. This is good, I too am a literal Bible reader just as the Fathers of the Catholic Church were. But I go further, I also accept the geocentric interpretation of the Father also. Indeed I cannot understand how any creationist cannot apply the same logic to the geocentric reading that they apply to their 6-day creation.
Would any creationist like to comment?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top