I'll do so.
I wouldn't exactly call that a non-biased source.
I did not say this came from a non-biased source. No offense, but I don't know too many scientists out there who are non-biased. But at the very least, the guy is not an idiot, and knows something about the topic of which he speaks. Even Darwin himself admitted that there were not anywhere near the amount of intermediate 'links' that one should expect, if his theory on evolution is true, and Richard Dawkins, an obvious proponent of evolution, states in the article, ""It is as though they (they being fossils and the like, I assume) were just planted there, without any evolutionary history."
Well there you go. Proof that evolution is right and creationism is wrong. I guess I'll have to go give up all my beliefs.Originally posted by LeatherFace
So no one here believes that we are descendants from Apes? Or you believe that Adam and Eve were the first "people." I remember when I was in 3rd grade, I turned to Miss Fabac and asked "If Adam and Eve existed, what about cavemen?" I went to Catholic school, mind you....And you know what? She didn't have an answer for me
But isnt there physical "proof" of evolution (i.e. fossils, bones, pottery, tools, camps), whereas the only "proof" of creationism is the Bible?Originally posted by fourgivn1
Well there you go. Proof that evolution is right and creationism is wrong. I guess I'll have to go give up all my beliefs.
(I'm obviously kidding.)
I never said (nor will anyone - or they shouldn't, unless they're on crack) that there's 100% proof for both arguments. That's where the whole 'faith' thing comes in. But that's my point...just as much 'faith' is required to 'believe' in evolutionism.
My thoughts exactally, so I guess if its written it MUST be true. So I'm going out on a ledge here...........I'm going to write......LeatherFace & Brian HCM#1 are two of the finest people to EVER walk the planet!!!!!
Yes...and now there is proof, thus says Brian HCM#1!Originally posted by Brian HCM#1
My thoughts exactally, so I guess if its written it MUST be true. So I'm going out on a ledge here...........I'm going to write......LeatherFace & Brian HCM#1 are two of the finest people to EVER walk the planet!!!!!
Everyone take note, this is true because its been written.
Eeeeats true
There's not exactly concrete proof specifically concerning ONLY creation. Creation was/is a one time event...unless someone was on hand with a camera or such, you're not going to find much about it. The absence of proof is arguably just as important as the presence of it.
What I think the point is, there is more proof in evolution than what has been written. How did humans come to earth? Was it a abra kadabra *poof* there was man? Then if there was one Adam & Eve, how do you explain different races? Then if were only Adam & Eve that started the whole thing and they reproduce thats incest. Maybe thats were all the Jerry Springer guests are from...............InbreadOriginally posted by fourgivn1
That would really depend upon how you look at it. You're not going to find a plaque anytime soon that says "I, God, created the world, on this date/time/place."
Keep some things in mind, too. One, I am NOT and never will say evolution is a lie. It's been proved that species/cells and such can evolve, I believe. I don't argue that. But it's almost exclusively on a microscopic scale. It's my thought that if there was as much evolution going on as the theory would suggest, there would be one HELL of a lot more fossils and bones and such, from all the different mutations (good or bad). Two, creation and evolution are not necessarily opposite in all ways. It is obvious that different units of time are used in the Bible, and that at different times, the same unit is used to describe different lengths of time. A good example would be the prophecy of 69 weeks, concerning the future history of the Jews, the inauguration of God's kingdom, etc. , in the book of Daniel. Although it talks about a period of 69 'weeks' it is obvious that the actual time length is not weeks. Some research reveals that the word behind 'week' as used in the Bible is the Hebrew word signifying a heptad, which is used to mean a series or group of 17.
I could go on about that, but my point is that God did not necessarily create the world in 7 days. He's not limited to time, I would have to believe, since he's God. *L* People who think he was/is aren't doing their studying. He could have taken millions/billions of years to do so. This being said, a proponent of evolution can't say "HAH! We've got fossils bazillions of years old, and THAT proves the world isn't only 6000 years old!" People seem to think that since the entire line of people, from Jesus back to Adam, stretches only a few thousand of years, the whole freakin' earth was only created a week before Adam was made. I'm NOT saying evolution is crap...only that while it may have taken place on a much smaller scale, I do not believe at all that humans evolved from one cell.
):
Thanks *L* I could NOT find the words for that, for some reason; thankfully someone else did. But last week was a LONG week for me. I would like to clarify 2 things though. First, if I'm not mistaken, the Bible is THE most backed up documents ever written in classical literature. I think Plato comes in at a distant 2nd with like 600 original manuscripts (to the Bible's 24000 or so). I could be wrong; Josh McDowell wrote the exact numbers in his books.
That totally changes the meaning of the sentence. *LOL*You'd have to be a complete dil to NOT believe in evolution.
It's because they capitalize incorrectly.
Originally posted by fourgivn1
Thanks *L* I could NOT find the words for that, for some reason; thankfully someone else did. But last week was a LONG week for me. I would like to clarify 2 things though. First, if I'm not mistaken, the Bible is THE most backed up documents ever written in classical literature. I think Plato comes in at a distant 2nd with like 600 original manuscripts (to the Bible's 24000 or so). I could be wrong; Josh McDowell wrote the exact numbers in his books.
Second, I think you sort of misspoke. You put "if we can show......then we have no reason to at least put our faith...." and so on. I think you forgot the 'not.'
Thanks to you
That's why I said "I think" for the first 2 words, because I figured if I was pulling it from my head I'd pick the wrong philosopher. I should know this too since I'm reading this book right now. Oh well.
Gee, we Christians have this same problem when speaking to people about our beliefs/faith who are unwilling to listen (wasting our breath).Originally posted by Toshi
It's because they capitalize incorrectly.
You Christians above who are trying to justify your faith by "proving" that the Bible is not all made up (by verifying facts) seem to be misguided. Matters of faith are just that. Furthermore, I believe it is impossible for a rational human being to accept everything in the Bible as being true at face value -- but anything I say won't convince you, so I won't waste my breath, er, hand strength.
hmm...I'm beginning to really like Toshi!
All other issues aside though, from your posts it is very evident that, despite your schooling which obviously exceeds many, you have never spent the time to delve into the validity of the Bible. But as long as you are confident in your "measured thought" (I loved that line) than I am pleased as well. I'm Air Sven, and I'm out.
but there hasn't been any "proof" out there that I have seen that could substatiate anything that has been written in the Bible, other than these people lived during that time. Example: the plagues of Egypt. The Egyptians were probably the most thorough civilization when it came to recording events, and yet no where is it written that these horrible plagues happened. Don't you think if the son of the Pharoh died, it would be recorded SOMEWHERE? And Toshi is right about the Resurrection--that is the basis of all Christianity. How do you "prove" that one?
enough to hold my current beliefs.
This is sort of my point. One, I don't recall saying a missing corpse and some stories constituted proof. By proof I do not mean stories. I mean proof that would be admissible in any court of law. Two, I also do not recall saying "There could be100% proof and TOSHI would not believe." This is why I used the word 'people.' Every DAY I encounter people who automatically throw up a wall to anything I say, once they learn what I believe, and no amount of 'proof' will do anything to tear that wall down.
I do not say this to be rude or mean at all, but have you really sat down and done any research as far as finds that have substantiated stories/people in the Bible? Again, I do not say this to be rude; I say it because I'm ALWAYS hearing about this find or that find that validates a person/place/event in the Bible. There are so many archaeological finds that have validated a particular person/place/thing in the Bible, and not one of them has contradicted anything the Bible says. Yet I keep hearing this. (I say again, please don't take this wrong. *L*)Originally posted by LeatherFace
I feel there is a difference between actual physical proof i.e. bones of our ancestors that date back hundreds of thousands of years than words written on a piece of paper. I don't know, call me a "doubting Thomas"
OK, first off, better make sure that your dating methods are correct if you want to base your decisions about eternity on them. That's all I'm gonna say of this issue, because the ignorance on this issue is so deep and cavernous, even Air Sven wouldn't attempt to jump that gap. But, if you believe everything you were taught in school no matter what, then don't bother pursuing this issue at all. Second, you made a very safe statement when you said "there hasen't been any proof out there THAT I HAVE SEEN that could substantiate." Obviously you haven't seen the evidence, because if had done so you would have never made such a bold and ignorant remark. In my own life, I figured I owed to myself to find out about these types of issues, WEIGH THE EVIDENCE, and make a decision on them, knowing that there was a lot of information I wasn't given at school. I really don't care what decision you make (still working on loving and caring about others spiritual well-being) but I find it odd that anyone could make a decision on something they have not weighed the evidence for. Its like missing half of a trial and still sitting on the jury and attempting to make a decision. The Judge wouldn't have it. You make a couple of other staemenst i could expound on, like the "Bones of our ancestors", (that was cute), But I'd only like to answer the question at the end "How do you prove that one?" Well, simple, haven't you ever sat on a jury? There are two types of evidence you use, Legal, and Historical. You can also use a small amount of physical evidence, but nothing that really clinches the deal. On that note, what forms of evidence do you think you would use to prove Evolution? Obviously you feel physical evidence is one, are there any others? Are you confident with the physical evidence, or lack thereof, for evolution to base such a weighty decision around? What pieces of evidence have helped you make that decision?Originally posted by LeatherFace
I feel there is a difference between actual physical proof i.e. bones of our ancestors that date back hundreds of thousands of years than words written on a piece of paper. I don't know, call me a "doubting Thomas"
thank you for your honesty, you may now be seated. I will not hold your current beliefs against you, unless you think I'm a lousy rider, then I get offended.Originally posted by Toshi
Sven,
I actually was responding to fourgivn1's "wasting your breath" comment. You are right about my not having delved into the validity of the Bible, tho; maybe later in life I'll have the time and inclination to do so. As for now, I'm still young and arrogant
)
Actually, I know a lot about the Bible. I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic school for 12 years which meant Mass twice a week and religion class every school year. I am baptised and confirmed (my confirmation name is Anastasia
) and have done the sacrament of reconciliation and communion more times than I can count. I have read the Bible extensively, and have taken it both literally and figuratively. When I was raised with religion, I believed everything that was written about God, Jesus, and everything else that happened in the Bible. I reiterate: I BELIEVED IT ALL. But as I grew older and had more questions that my religious mentors could not answer, that is when I stopped going to communion, doing reconciliation, etc because I felt like I was lying if I went through the motions.
At its most basic, evolution refers to the change in the gene pool of a population over time or descent with modification. Evolution is also frequently used to refer to common descent, the idea that all living beings are descended from a common ancestor. This is sometimes called the general theory of evolution. In addition, evolution can also refer to the theories about the mechanisms of change, that is the mechanisms by which change in populations of living organisms take place. If all living creatures must have a living parent, if living creatures are different, and if simpler forms were around before the more complex forms, then the more complex forms must have come from the simpler forms (e.g., vertebrates from invertebrates). There is simply no other way of dealing reasonably with the evidence we have.
Doesn't that really depend on the type of trial? In a criminal trial, such as a murder case, I was under the impression that physical evidence is the single most important component of the case. Especially now that we have reliable DNA testing methods.
