Creation vs. Evolution Debate

[Jim Parker]

Data from Science comes from wanting to believe something first.

Data from science comes from asking, "Why did that happen?" or "What is that?" or other similar questions which are then followed by investigation to find the answers.

Then we make up the data to present that belief.

No. Then we form a hypothesis (our best guess) and test it to see if it is accurate.

The world follows the satanic narrative because the World does not have the equipment to do the experiments themselves.

Wrong again. We make machines like microscopes, telescopes, accelerators (CERN) sensors, etc. to observe natural phenomena. It is based on common sense, logic, and reason.
I have no idea what a "Satanic Narrative" might be to you.

People follow those that pretend to sound more informed and smarter than they despite the fact they are lying and and less informed.
People can't or don't back what they are told, but take the given brainwashed narrative.

Ah!
That is a very good example of the "Poisoning the well" logical fallacy.

The rest of your post appears to be the logical fallacy I refer to as "babble."

Again:
The objective of the OP is to help people avoid logical fallacies when presenting their apologetic.
You apparently mistook it as an opportunity to display your favorites.

 

[Jim Parker]

God said He created everything in 7 days so I believe it.

You have taken a literary device (a genealogy and creation myth) and used it as a source of historical data.
You have taken God's self revelation and made it into a calendar.
If you want to believe that Gen 1 is a history book or a calendar or a cabbage, it is your choice.

I figure you can trace back this event.

I can't, no. I didn't say I could.
I didn't even suggest that it would be worthwhile to do so.
What I did say is: The objective of the OP is to help people avoid logical fallacies when presenting their apologetic.

God said He rested on the 7th day.

Do you think God was tired from all that creating and needed a day off?
Of course you don't

But honestly, I've never understood the argument. In as much as against a young earth.

Google "red shift."

I see evolutionary creation as a way to try and sucker in believers.

"What you see is what you get." Flip Wilson (Geraldine)
If you see all scientists as frauds and charlatans then you will never "get" science.


ONCE MORE:
The objective of the OP is: to help people avoid logical fallacies when presenting their apologetic.

I originally focused on the "Straw Man" and "Red Herring" fallacies but posters have added the "Poisoning the well" fallacy as being very popular among those who wish to discredit that of which they have little or no knowledge.

If people use these fallacies when attempting to present your beliefs to people who hold other views based on their own opinions and studies, it opens the probability of being dismissed as an ignoramus because of basing one's beliefs on illogical thought processes.

 

[Jim Parker]

Science has nothing to do with Logic it has to do with being blinded spiritually to accept false sciences.

oi veh That statement is absurdly ridiculous.
I urge you to please never say anything like that to anyone to whom you wish to present the Gospel.
They will very likely dismiss anything you say as ignorant and foolish babbling and be turned away from the Gospel thinking it to be the nonsense of someone of low intelligence or of a member of some kind of cult.
You would be better off not saying anything than to say that out loud, in public, where people could readily identify you as the person who said it.

Please! Be careful what you say out there.

 

[Elisha]

Science has nothing to do with Logic it has to do with being blinded spiritually to accept false sciences.

oi veh That statement is absurdly ridiculous.
I urge you to please never say anything like that to anyone to whom you wish to present the Gospel.
They will very likely dismiss anything you say as ignorant and foolish babbling and be turned away from the Gospel thinking it to be the nonsense of someone of low intelligence or of a member of some kind of cult.
You would be better off not saying anything than to say that out loud, in public, where people could readily identify you as the person who said it.

Please! Be careful what you say out there.

We should talk about the attack on science by Evolutionists. When they try to conflate the elements of their godless faith with science, they damage the public's opinion of science.

 

[Nathan]

You have taken a literary device (a genealogy and creation myth) and used it as a source of historical data.
You have taken God's self revelation and made it into a calendar.
If you want to believe that Gen 1 is a history book or a calendar or a cabbage, it is your choice.

I can't, no. I didn't say I could.
I didn't even suggest that it would be worthwhile to do so.
What I did say is: The objective of the OP is to help people avoid logical fallacies when presenting their apologetic.

Do you think God was tired from all that creating and needed a day off?
Of course you don't

Google "red shift."

"What you see is what you get." Flip Wilson (Geraldine)
If you see all scientists as frauds and charlatans then you will never "get" science.


ONCE MORE:
The objective of the OP is: to help people avoid logical fallacies when presenting their apologetic.

I originally focused on the "Straw Man" and "Red Herring" fallacies but posters have added the "Poisoning the well" fallacy as being very popular among those who wish to discredit that of which they have little or no knowledge.

If people use these fallacies when attempting to present your beliefs to people who hold other views based on their own opinions and studies, it opens the probability of being dismissed as an ignoramus because of basing one's beliefs on illogical thought processes.

I'm an ignoramus. Guilty.

 

[Nathan]

oi veh That statement is absurdly ridiculous.
I urge you to please never say anything like that to anyone to whom you wish to present the Gospel.
They will very likely dismiss anything you say as ignorant and foolish babbling and be turned away from the Gospel thinking it to be the nonsense of someone of low intelligence or of a member of some kind of cult.
You would be better off not saying anything than to say that out loud, in public, where people could readily identify you as the person who said it.

Please! Be careful what you say out there.

Do you actually believe people come to believe based on human wisdom? It IS foolishness to those who are perishing. You can't reason with dead people......

 

[jasonc]

Do you actually believe people come to believe based on human wisdom? It IS foolishness to those who are perishing. You can't reason with dead people......

If i.was a scientific minded person I would find that insulting.while I'm not a old earth evolutionist,I do try not to poison the well.I can and I have posted the story about the oldest human remains and finding in the us.this Is something I can see and take a tour of.while the method of finding the age of things can be questioned ,let's not use fallacies.

 

[Nathan]

If i.was a scientific minded person I would find that insulting.while I'm not a old earth evolutionist,I do try not to poison the well.I can and I have posted the story about the oldest human remains and finding in the us.this Is something I can see and take a tour of.while the method of finding the age of things can be questioned ,let's not use fallacies.

I am speaking of the gospel. I've never read that human wisdom turns a heart toward God? How can one believe God created the universe if they don't believe in God?

 

[jasonc]

I am speaking of the gospel. I've never read that human wisdom turns a heart toward God? How can one believe God created the universe if they don't believe in God?

Do you want the government to make science the study of God instead of the study of the world around us?

Asking a scientific opinion on origins IMHO isn't science .we can't observe God to test how He created.that's an axiom ,but not science.Genesis wasn't written f I r the debate of evolution and old universe but a simple and quick origin history to the audience of the Hebrews. Pictographs are subject to the group of the time of the use.older Bibles used paleo hebrew which was a bit different then Modern Hebrew and not pictographic if I recall.

I prefer science to study what can be ,to be honest most scientific endeavor seldom involves origin theory.

 

[Nathan]

Do you want the government to make science the study of God instead of the study of the world around us?

Asking a scientific opinion on origins IMHO isn't science .we can't observe God to test how He created.that's an axiom ,but not science.Genesis wasn't written f I r the debate of evolution and old universe but a simple and quick origin history to the audience of the Hebrews. Pictographs are subject to the group of the time of the use.older Bibles used paleo hebrew which was a bit different then Modern Hebrew and not pictographic if I recall.

I prefer science to study what can be ,to be honest most scientific endeavor seldom involves origin theory.

If I wanted to know about something I would first go to the creator of it. Seems logical the creator would know more about it than anyone or anything.

 

[jasonc]

If I wanted to know about something I would first go to the creator of it. Seems logical the creator would know more about it than anyone or anything.

Where is the anatomy of the human body in full depth to be found in the bible?
Where is the distance to the sun,the number of the planets ,star sizes,classifications to be found?
The verses on the theory of electromagnetism?
The theory of gravity? Ie what is creating the pull?


Your are confusing how the universe moves,with came to be.we can't answer that later question scientifically. The bible gives little on it .seven days doesn't mean it's a full explanation. I don't try to make Genesis more then what it tries to say.

 

[Nathan]

Where is the anatomy of the human body in full depth to be found in the bible?
Where is the distance to the sun,the number of the planets ,star sizes,classifications to be found?
The verses on the theory of electromagnetism?
The theory of gravity? Ie what is creating the pull?


Your are confusing how the universe moves,with came to be.we can't answer that later question scientifically. The bible gives little on it .seven days doesn't mean it's a full explanation. I don't try to make Genesis more then what it tries to say.

I'm not saying that science has to be found and explored only from words in the Bible. I'm saying your not going to get unregenerate evolutionists to be convinced of intelligent design by a creator through scientific arguments.

 

[jasonc]

I'm not saying that science has to be found and explored only from words in the Bible. I'm saying your not going to get unregenerate evolutionists to be convinced of intelligent design by a creator through scientific arguments.

Why does the bible command us to give the reason to believe to sinners,aka apologetics?

That's the word uses and not just a testimony.some are going to be saved and scientists. You forget that many do go to college after conversion,I did. I guess we should ask for counter arguments and also adress valid points.we christians often over simplify the bible.sometimes we have a complicated answer.

What is the trinity? A not so simple concept ,why does God tolerate evil and allow freewill? Why did God not simply slay Adam then and eve and recreate man? There is always going to be objections and sometimes a reasonable answer can be given or can't. I'm not saying any word we say will in it self change hearts.but sometimes it can be used by God.

 

[Nathan]

Why does the bible command us to give the reason to believe to sinners,aka apologetics?

That's the word uses and not just a testimony.some are going to be saved and scientists. You forget that many do go to college after conversion,I did. I guess we should ask for counter arguments and also adress valid points.we christians often over simplify the bible.sometimes we have a complicated answer.

What is the trinity? A not so simple concept ,why does God tolerate evil and allow freewill? Why did God not simply slay Adam then and eve and recreate man? There is always going to be objections and sometimes a reasonable answer can be given or can't. I'm not saying any word we say will in it self change hearts.but sometimes it can be used by God.

I agree. We should always present the truth we know and let God work on the hearts. But if we contradict the seemingly simple things God has allowed us to know, in an effort to try and convince them, how will they believe anything else we tell them of God?

We become hypocrites it the truest sense.

By all means, explore and study the creation by any means possible. But never contradict what God has already revealed about His creation.

 

[jasonc]

I agree. We should always present the truth we know and let God work on the hearts. But if we contradict the seemingly simple things God has allowed us to know, in an effort to try and convince them, how will they believe anything else we tell them of God?

We become hypocrites it the truest sense.

By all means, explore and study the creation by any means possible. But never contradict what God has already revealed about His creation.

While i disagree with theistic evolution, since I don't know how God did it .in treat that like futurism,pre post mid trib .plausible not likely.

You were asked did God literally get tired on day seven .to a jew that's a silly statement ,but creationist will often not think that some will see that problem. I do see how God used a literal device to convey that he rested as he was finished in his desired work.the concept of Sabath of resting In the work God says to be done and provision by that is worthy of another thread.

Never thought to revisit that most Jewish idea.

 

[Pegasus]

oi veh - where to begin......
(1) Please go look up the meaning of the word "science" in a modern dictionary. That's what we're talking about, not the "science" of the ancient world which defined the four elements as earth, wind, fire and water. The modern meaning of the word "science" did not exist 3500 years ago.
(2) Israelites were never Bedouin. (Nomadic Arabs)
(3) There is not one single scientific statement in Genesis 1.

Your logical fallacy is essentially a straw man in which you have misrepresented the genealogy of the heavens and the earth which is presented in Genesis 1 as science. That is a false equation.


(1) "in the beginning" refers to being before time existed since time did not exist until God created space-time.
(2) That God is the creator of all things visible and invisible is not a scientific fact since nothing of that truth can be proven by the application of scientific methods.

Are you suggesting that you are fluent in reading the "original Hebrew pictographs"?
Are you suggesting that you have studied Gen. 1 as it was written in he "original Hebrew pictographs"?
Pardon me if I am a bit skeptical.
The oldest surviving manuscripts of the Old Testament (Dead Sea Scrolls) are from 2100 to 2200 years old and are written in ancient Hebrew, not Hebrew pictographs.

And the thread is about logical fallacies.

iakov the fool

Now that's poisoning the well.

 

[Pegasus]

oi veh That statement is absurdly ridiculous.
I urge you to please never say anything like that to anyone to whom you wish to present the Gospel.
They will very likely dismiss anything you say as ignorant and foolish babbling and be turned away from the Gospel thinking it to be the nonsense of someone of low intelligence or of a member of some kind of cult.
You would be better off not saying anything than to say that out loud, in public, where people could readily identify you as the person who said it.

Please! Be careful what you say out there.

Thank you for the red herring.

 

[Brother Mike]

oi veh That statement is absurdly ridiculous.
I urge you to please never say anything like that to anyone to whom you wish to present the Gospel.
They will very likely dismiss anything you say as ignorant and foolish babbling and be turned away from the Gospel thinking it to be the nonsense of someone of low intelligence or of a member of some kind of cult.
You would be better off not saying anything than to say that out loud, in public, where people could readily identify you as the person who said it.

Please! Be careful what you say out there.

Faith comes by hearing the Word, not by logic. The difference between you and I is the power and the works that Back the Word. It's the power of the Holy Spirit backing the Word that changes hearts and reproves of sin. Through the Word God says I can help you overcome anything. Love is what draws people, not science so falsely called.

My hope is that you understand this someday.

 

[OzSpen]

I am speaking of the gospel. I've never read that human wisdom turns a heart toward God? How can one believe God created the universe if they don't believe in God?

Nathan,

Paul also was speaking of the gospel. What did he do?

• 'As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures' (Acts 17:2 NIV);
• 'As was his custom, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures' (Isa 1:18 NASB);
• 'Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And according to Paul's custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Christ"' (Acts 17:1-3 NASB).

What did Isaiah do?

• 'Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool' (Isa 1:18 ESV).
  
• 'Put Me in remembrance, let us argue our case together; State your cause, that you may be proved right' (Isa 43:26 NASB).

So were Paul and Isaiah off the mark when they reasoned with the people, argued their cases? Paul was so audacious as to reason with the unbelieving Jews from the Scriptures.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

Faith comes by hearing the Word, not by logic. The difference between you and I is the power and the works that Back the Word. It's the power of the Holy Spirit backing the Word that changes hearts and reproves of sin. Through the Word God says I can help you overcome anything. Love is what draws people, not science so falsely called.

My hope is that you understand this someday.

Brother Mike,

'Faith comes by hearing the word of Christ' is from Rom 10:17 (SBL Greek) which reads, ἄρα ἡ πίστις ἐξ ἀκοῆς, ἡ δὲ ἀκοὴ διὰ ῥήματος Χριστοῦ.

What does ῥήματος (from rhema) mean? Seems to me that you are missing the meaning of 'logic'. Unless one uses logical processes, there is no way to understand the meaning of a stated sentence.

We can't have a discussion about the the meaning of the construction 'faith comes by hearing' unless we use logical reasoning.

'Logic is to language and meaning as mathematics is to physical science. In order to understand how sentences – which are what compose language – work, it is necessary to learn to find their logical structure' (source).​

Therefore, to understand what the Scriptures state, even 'faith comes by hearing the word of Christ', we cannot chuck out logic. Logic is integral to understanding anything we say, hear or read.

Oz