Evolution or Creation?
- Thread starter Dark[NSF]
- Start date
-
Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.
shadow_dragon said:
Yea I know that...I was answering the 'how else is God meant to present the Bible to us' point...
...but thinking about it, why the hell wouldn't it be like that? Leave it to faith and let everything fragment? That's not a test, that's just sadistic.
And I don't see much freedom in the choice if youre going to be punished if you get it wrong for whatever reason...and punished for eternity at that.
If the God of the Bible is real, then he is a sadistic petty *******. Not that i'm bitter or anything.
Growler said:Can Evolution explain a caterpillar turning into a butterfly?
I didn't think so
that's MY answer
You mean we litterally don't know? I never thought about how a caterpillar could turn into a butterfly so i'm completely clueless on this subject. But now that you bring it up I would like to know.
tool said:
I was merely proving that not everything in this Universe can be explained by this so-called 'Evolution' "theory".
anyway, for all those who wants to know the SCIENTIFIC proof that Creation is the Truth, look at these links below, and read for yourself:
whetever subject that interests you the most, you can find out tonnes of things from there!
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/qa.asp
authority of scripture:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2/4306apol_v3n21994.asp
Origin of Life:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/origin.asp
'Young’ age of the Earth & Universe:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/young.asp
Design features:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/design.asp
Last edited:
I wasn't the one who said:Sam_The_Man said:
The whole IDEA of evolution has been CREATED by man, up to this point there is very little proof (naturally) that Evolution even exists on grand scales. All that scientists have been able to prove is that THEY CAN MAKE a species duplicate into 2 new species. They haven't proven that they WILL do it on their own, especially not outside of their "ancestry" (i.e. Apes->Humans). In other words, scientists have not found evolution occuring naturally, even on the scale of the fruit flies. They have only MADE it happen.
I'm not saying Evolution is false, because that's not true. Adaptation is a form of evolution that is necessitated by changes in habitat (which many species of creatures do). I'm only saying why can Ren NOT contend a man-made theory with a man-made naming convention?
Dus said:
Dus - you and I agree on everything you posted, we just view it from a different perspective, or interpretation, if you will. You believe that it supports your theory, and I believe it supports mine.
Again, it goes back to what I said about having a pre-determined philosophy, then seeing the facts and interpreting those facts in light of what you believe.
This also supports my stance that it takes just as much faith to believe in evolution as it does creation.
shadow_dragon said:
Freedom of choice only works when there is as much information as possible. Clearly God has failed in that regard. He could tell us all that he exists, and is responsible for our existence, and maybe even that worshipping him will be rewarded. Or he could leave us as we are.
But according to the main religions, he's come up with this stupid halfway house whereby he tells only a few members of some obscure Middle Eastern tribe that he exists, lets them all get almost completely wiped out of existence several times, then (according to Judaism 2.0) many thousands of years later he impregnates a human virgin with his son, only tells his son, the virgin and some random shepherds that the boy actually is his son, and then leaves his son to get on with the business of performing miracles and spreading the word.
When his son gets nailed to a plank for not shutting up every once in a while, he leaves it to his followers to spread the word further, most notably one of the biggest as*holes ever to walk the planet, and to write the holy book of the laws he has given to mankind, thousands of years after he actually set them. And there are no reliable accounts of his having directly communicated with mankind since (except Islam? but then you have to count the Mormons, and then you have to count every schizophrenic loony that ever claimed to have heard God).
Result? No-one really knows whether he exists or not, or whether we're supposed to worship him or not, or how. About the worst case scenario for a god, I'd've thought.
maybe God created life playing Civilization, you know he started off with a planet and a single cell, then he set up his first city (bacteria) then after building a granary and a temple, he created another settler that was slightly different from the first, this second settler then went on to make more settlers, eventually creating civilization..
I personally believe the theory of eveolution is correct that man and animals evolved into different creatures, however i beleive the evoloution was controlled by someone or something
I personally believe the theory of eveolution is correct that man and animals evolved into different creatures, however i beleive the evoloution was controlled by someone or something
It doesn't help the argument, that the cited example was a mis-translation that has already been traced back and purged from more recent translations.Sir_Brizz said:
Historically, the bulk of human effort has been to MAINTAIN the text rather than dilute it or re-write it. Modern translations are not based on translations from 100 or 200 or 500 years ago, but from the thousands of extant manuscripts currently in existence. You can't argue for progressive misinterpretation ("telephone") when the translators are not relying on the last generation of texts.
A side note on religion as a subjugation of the masses by those in power: I would submit that the progenitors of the New Testament were hardly men of power or influence, the primary subject was a man whose teaching was CONTRARY to those who held religious sway over the Jews, nearly all of them died a gruesome death in an effort to quash the religion, and over the course of time it actually USURPED the Roman Empire under whose oppression it was first proclaimed. It seems to me the reverse model of subjugation through superstition.
Growler: the point of the theory of evolution is not to explain the origin of the universe -- that would be creationism. I'd also recommend that if your desire is to convince people of the scientific validity of the Christian version of origins not to draw all your links from one site, which itself is called answersingenesis.com.
Last edited by a moderator:
shadow_dragon
is ironing his panties!
Sam_The_Man said:
Thus retaining our position of having a free chocie in what we do.
Though as you said we are not aware of all the facts so, how do you know everything you just said is all there is too it?
It's also worth remembering that he did tell us about it and told us to choose, believe or chow down on forbidden fruits, we chose the fruit and now we have uncertainty and difficult choices to make, or atleast that's how i understood such things, the fact that he let us have Jesus to kill was quite a ncie gesture when you think about how we've already screwed up.
How manys econd chances would you give if you were a god and if you were going to give one would you simply trot on down there and explain what everyone had to do? Or would you test them via an entirely more subtle method?
Sam_The_Man said:
Why? I imagine if there is a God there would be a whole knew realm of scenarios that we couldn't possibly presume to know of.
_Zd_Phoenix_ said:
Ofcourse if you chose not to believe it then the concerns of being punished for all eternity wouldn't bother you, atleast untill they presented themselves so it is still a choice, most of the christians i know tihnk punishment i for the evil not the non believers, it's the people that think that the non believers are evil that think as your example states.
Last edited:
Well regardlessly, the Latin Vulgate is probably the most "diluted" of all of the scriptural texts available today.\/\/0RF said:
Additionally, no man has ever claimed God's divine intervention in their retranslation of the KJV (NIV, NAB, etc, etc, etc). Mostly it has been modernizing the speech, so any mistranslations that may NOT have been found (based on Erasmus' Greek manuscript and several of the remaining manuscripts he used to form his) would not have been edited or removed from newer version. The reason the NIV leaves the passage out, is because their is significant proof that the passage was added AFTER the manuscripts were written.
Really all I'm saying is because there is no pure "original" of any of those books, there was plenty of room for mistranslation. Especially when Clement was forming the Roman Catholic church out of Pagan and Christian belief. I would argue that historically the effort has been about maintaining the text. Before communication was as wide spread as it has become, alot of men's power depended on how the bible was interpreted (and translated). And they were usually the ones in charge of the interpretation or translation.
But nobody is writing translations from the Latin Vulgate today. AFAIK only the KJV is derived from the Latin Vulgate. PLUS we have prior translations to compare language so the Latin Vulgate and the KJV in particular is its own animal in terms of translation difficulties.Sir_Brizz said:
with the whole speciation thingy, shouldn't the total amount of species be increasing not decreasing...
bob-the-wise said:
Hmm, good question, but if I recall correctly, I believe it IS increasing. Yes, there are certain species that are now extinct, but overall, it's my understanding that there are many more species then there once were (and when I say that, I mean variance of kind, such as new species of birds, insects, etc.). Of course, I've been out of this field for a while, so my memory may be slipping.
On that same note, if you believe in the Genesis Flood, this can further explain how Noah was able to get two of every "kind" on the ark. He may not have had to get two of every sparrow, hawk, eagle, etc., but maybe he just took two birds, and the various species of birds were decendants of these.
Of course, this is just a hypothesis in some of the Christian circles of how the Flood ocurred. Many of you feel it's just a fairy tale anyhow.
Exactly, but most trasnslations are BASED on the KJV even though they incorporate changes as necessary from other manuscripts. However, there is no way to verify any manuscripts earlier than Erasmus' manuscript of 1581 (?).\/\/0RF said:
Although, the Dead Sea Scrolls could prove useful in that regard.
Anyways, I only brought it up because CatFuzz was expecting it
i think the increase in species is more due to discovering them rather than new ones being created
