[_ Old Earth _] Is Evolution "Mindless"?

[Arch Angle]

I don't mind.

True colors come out when the tide gets high.

Now I know.

 

[cupid dave]

Here's Cuvier:

...if the species gradually changed, we must find traces of these gradual modifications; that between the palaeotheria and the present species we should have discovered some intrmediate formation; but to the present time none of these have appeared. Why have not the bowels of the earth preserved the monuments of so remarkable a genealogy, unless it be that the species of former ages were as constant as our own...

Which raises the fascinating point: where are these intermediates today? Why are there none to be seen, evolving away happily?

As far as man, we allagree that they went extinct in a flood out of Africa.

But the Russians have shown that the Fox can be selected in accord with hormonal tendencies such that in a few generations they become dogs.

This is what they had hypothesized about wolves evolving into the first dogs in China about 20,000 years ago.

 

[Arch Angle]

They key to his phrase, also, is " ... must find traces ... ".

as you have shown cupid, they do. Let me offer more places. It is in DNA too. The fact that they can predict changes from DNA means there is a "trace".

Then, as more support to barb and Dave, like they even need it at this point. More "traces" can be seen when you line up, or look, at the fish in the lakes in the great rift valley. This "micro" evolution is "probably"closer to how macro works than "poof there it is".

although, I must point out. That when the parent species can't breed with the offspring, that is a "poof". I belief the process of, that jump, it coded in.

 

[cupid dave]

They key to his phrase, also, is " ... must find traces ... ".

as you have shown cupid, they do. Let me offer more places. It is in DNA too. The fact that they can predict changes from DNA means there is a "trace".

Then, as more support to barb and Dave, like they even need it at this point. More "traces" can be seen when you line up, or look, at the fish in the lakes in the great rift valley. This "micro" evolution is "probably"closer to how macro works than "poof there it is".

although, I must point out. That when the parent species can't breed with the offspring, that is a "poof". I belief the process of, that jump, it coded in.

Yeah,...

And then there is the incontroversial example of the evolution of man through the act-of-god wherein by the mutation that fused two of the 24 ape chromosomes together, producing the "missing link" we all can call Adam, the very first new species that separated man from his ape cousins.

 

[Arch Angle]

for me, the last "trace" was looking at the production of atp using oxygen from singular, to multi cellular organisms. The atp was shut off, then has to be turned on again to support the the energy requirements.

also, we can look at star formation. hydrogen into helium. At the end of the process, the helium is unlike like the hydrogen. To the person that sees only hydrogen and helium, they can't fathom what process could have formed one from the other. "that is impossible" they claim.

So we see "traces" everywhere". It was like when they looked up at the sky and saw a round moon, round sun, everything else they saw was round. But some people insisted the earth was flat.

this evolution is supported by almost everything we see around us. so when it comes to statements

"which is more likely".

"poof" or "process"

yes, we don't know everything, that's a given. so let's layout what we got.

 

[stovebolts]

Tell me, does Science show that it is possible to walk on water? Is it possible to heal the sick, to cause the blind to see and the deaf to hear? Do we accept that Jesus can raise the dead back to life, yet demand that creation be explained in scientific terms with scientific explanations?

What I see is that people who reject Christianity today use these very things you mention as the reason that they doubt the Bible,... BEFORE they have throughly read it, and, (much more important) BEFORE they have met Jesus in the gospels.

To those people who set religion aside as Bull, I say maybe they need read first, and think about these reports.

Did Jesus make the whole wedding party think water was great wine because he had the rather common power of Mass Hypnosis in his grasp, something unknown to us until the last century, when Mesmer re-discovered it?
Was Mesmerism the force that had believers heal themselves the same way this happens today?

Does the Near death Experience explain the resurrection of Lazarth and even Jesus?

Science and knowledge today seems useful in poising possible answers for people who have delayed reading the bible, based entirely upon their assumption that what it says just defies modern knowledge when that is not true.

I am not having a conversation with those that doubt the Bible. Tell me Cupid Dave, do you believe Jesus walked on water? Do you believe Peter got out on the boat and walked on water until he lost his faith and started to drown? What about all of the miracles like feeding the 5,000? Do you believe Science can account for all of these?

Most of all Cupid, do you believe Science can rationalize the Risen Christ? I mean to say, do you believe that Jesus was really dead, and rose again? This is to simply say he came back to life. If so, how does Science explain these things? Does Science have to prove these things to be true?

 

[Arch Angle]

now we are at the meat bolts. It always takes a few post, but we get down toit.

Axioms.

That is the biggest problem bolts I have with some people. They bully people with this kind of stuff. Not you, right, I believe you are trying to help. I mean that.

it gets down to "do you believe he walked on water?"

really?

that's not science and Christianity.

"eat this apple, and everything else I tell you is real". That is not "christ".

science and Christianity states. what is the traits of god using what weknow?

"historical" context is important. "how they wrote back then". My magic is bigger than your magic. That's science and Christianity? no way.

science and Christianity is:

"why should I follow you?"

"show me where god is telling you that you have it right?"

science and Christianity is

"here, use everything you know, and choose for yourself, you will see ... Christ .... because he is the truth".

 

[cupid dave]

Tell me Cupid Dave, do you believe Jesus walked on water? Do you believe Peter got out on the boat and walked on water until he lost his faith and started to drown? What about all of the miracles like feeding the 5,000? Do you believe Science can account for all of these?

I believe them, sure.

Do I know of ways that the same things coild be explained rationally to people who would demand rationality since they rightly do not believe in magic, and have not yet found any reason to believe in a book we bang on the table before them?
Sure.

I see the churches today feeding millions of people by the same method Jesus used.
He sent out a free will offering of seven fish and 5 loaves of bread, and watched what people will do, as they also add to that offering and see that there is enough for all.
Jesus was demonstrating how man inherently has a nature that would see them all eat and drink together.

And the skeptic might believe that Jesus hypnotized the people in the boat,...

But I have come to believe that Jesus walked on water and had power because he was the Elijah who had come down from heaven where he had previously gone up.
Both walked on water as easily as had Moses.
Both were the prophet promised by Deuter 18:15.
Both were in spirit, the son-of-god that had come down in 32AD and alighted upon Jesus, a mere son of man until then.



13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven (as we read about what happened in 32AD), but he, (The Elijah), that came down (asThe Christ, after 800 years: [Matt 3:16,17]), from heaven, even the Son of man, (Jesus), which is (now, after 33AD), in heaven (again: [Luke 24:51).

 

[Sparkey]

Walking on water is different from walking near a cliff. We are getting dangerously close to a precipice that will invoke a thread warning about staying on topic. This isn't about 'Elijah-ism' (if such a thing exists) nor is it about how churches operate today. What was the topic again? Remind me please with your future comments and spare me the trouble of multiple edits. I don't care for that. It makes me look like a censor or a nit-picker. That's okay, but I don't have to like it.

I don't at all mind the mix of Christianity and Science, but don't want to lose track of where we are as we consider such things. Walking near the edge is okay for a moment or two, but we're not gonna build our house there. How to say this better? I'm unsure but can trust we already know and I don't need to.

 

[stovebolts]

Walking on water is different from walking near a cliff. We are getting dangerously close to a precipice that will invoke a thread warning about staying on topic. This isn't about 'Elijah-ism' (if such a thing exists) nor is it about how churches operate today. What was the topic again? Remind me please with your future comments and spare me the trouble of multiple edits. I don't care for that. It makes me look like a censor or a nit-picker. That's okay, but I don't have to like it.

I don't at all mind the mix of Christianity and Science, but don't want to lose track of where we are as we consider such things. Walking near the edge is okay for a moment or two, but we're not gonna build our house there. How to say this better? I'm unsure but can trust we already know and I don't need to.

Sparrow,

With all due respect, the topic is "Is Evolution Mindless". My comment to Cupid was to simply say that Miracles can and do happen which are outside of conventional Scientific explanation. Actually, some of them go against Scientific explanation. Lazurus was in the grave how many days? And what did the text say other than, "He stinketh". Science has to come to the conclusion that Lazurus was dead and we observe people dying every day. What we don't see is somebody coming back to life after they've been dead for more than 3 days.

I would say that at the core of Christianity is the hope of the resurrection, to be raised with a new body and to be with our creator. All of this bucks against what Science can prove. Do some call us fools for believing in fairy tales? Even Paul admits as much. (1 Cor 19:19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied).

The topic at hand is Evolution. Some would explain the earth as billions of years old, and that's fine. It is well within their right, but by doing so, I don't think we have to try and explain something with Scientific evidence that the evidence at best is murky while maintaining it as fact. In short, it ought not be a crime to say, "It's a miracle" and Science can't explain it because it's outside of modern science.

Really, that was the simple point I was trying to get across.

Thanks for your time

 

[Arch Angle]

that's right.

science is data collection process. and then drawing reasonable conclusion from that data. As best we can.

the observations that nobody has walked on water, means, we can claim that nobody has walked on water. thats science.

A book (2000 years ago) said somebody walked on water. applied to science,means a book claimed one person walked on water 2000 years ago.

that's science.

Then, we ask reasonable people to make reasonable claims.

more science:

1) one book from 2000 years ago said a man walked on water.

2) 7 billion people never seeing aperson walk on water.

3) every time we tried to have somebody walk on water, it could not be done.

more science:

it more reasonable to conclude that somebody did or did not walk on water?
Is it more reasonable a magic event happened or that a person over stated what they saw?

science cont:
The choice is a lookinto the soul.


more science about miracles,

where are miracles happening? In hospitals ... that's science. :yes

 

[Sparkey]

The topic at hand is Evolution. Some would explain the earth as billions of years old, and that's fine. It is well within their right, but by doing so, I don't think we have to try and explain something with Scientific evidence that the evidence at best is murky while maintaining it as fact. In short, it ought not be a crime to say, "It's a miracle" and Science can't explain it because it's outside of modern science.

Really, that was the simple point I was trying to get across.

I think you already know that I have no problem with the idea of miracles. Even extraordinary miracles. Inexplicable. The problem that sometimes happens though, that I've seen, is when one side takes a rigid position (no, that's not the problem - we all do that sometimes) and then makes pronouncements about the "other side" while losing track that each of us was formed in the womb by one and only One God, the ultimate father of us all. It's a matter, for the Christian (self included) to be reminded occasionally that we do not battle against flesh and blood -AND- that we are given weapons that are mighty unto the pulling down of strongholds.

Now, to me, I doubt that my well worded statements or even my rashly formed utterances might do the job. There are better ways. Okay, I know. Sometimes the the first blow comes from the other side? Yes, that's true from all perspectives. All but one. Looking at people from God's point of view while discussing ideas is not easy. It takes practice and I know that you have practiced this. I can see it.

I fail to follow your trail if what I hear is that because Peter indeed walked on water this necessarily means that God created the earth in a period of six days. Yet, I personally believe that is what happened and that God gave us the best description of what He did when He spoke about it via the anointing in Moses. Just not sure that one thing demands the other. That's all.

 

[Sparkey]

I am not sure we are on topic here, since Sparrow reprimanded Stove for bring this up.

I spoke to the thread and to the topic, when Stovebolts replied, I spoke to him. But there has been no official warning, just a general caution that was addressed to thread. When I ponder Stovebolts reply to me, I see that my warning also applies to me. Such things are difficult but I will continue to trust they are understandable, especially by astute minds like the ones gathered here.

 

[Sparkey]

We, the frequenters, will collectively let you know if we sense a trolling offense.

And I, the Moderator will inform you when I feel a rule (such as taking a disagreement with a Moderator public) is broken beyond the grace that I have kept in store for such things.

 

[Sparkey]

Closing this thread for multi-moderator discussion. I will have other Staff members review me and other comments within before it is reopened.

 

[cupid dave]

Wow..

three regulars and three overseers, Free, Reba, and Sparrow.

Bye guys...

 

[Barbarian]

Ever seen an ape inventing or using a mobile phone? Or a car? Or producing a recognisable painting? Or a musical composition?

By this standard, the vast majority of people on Earth would not be considered to be human.

 

[Asyncritus]

Now there's an intelligent comment if I ever heard one!