Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Spirituality

Spirituality

  1. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    28 Mar '14 16:24
    I'm just curious. I'd like to get a head count of which theists believe in evolution, and which do not. When I say 'believe in evolution', I mean embracing all of it. Millions of years; common descent of all life, etc. People who 'only believe in micro-evolution' will not be considered pro-evolution in my tally, but anti.

    I'd like to know, by percentage, how many theists are fine with evolution. I have a theory that the majority of them are OK with it, but the anti-ev's shout louder.

    So, here's what I remember so far. If I have placed you in the wrong category, feel free to correct me. If your name is not on the list, feel free to add it.

    Pro-evolution:
    whodey
    suzianne
    divegeester

    Anti-evolution:
    dasa
    RJHinds
    FreakyKBH
    sonship (this is an educated guess; he supports a literal Noah's ark.)
    RBHILL

    Pro evolution so far : 37.5%
  2. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    28 Mar '14 16:46
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    I'm just curious. I'd like to get a head count of which theists believe in evolution, and which do not. When I say 'believe in evolution', I mean embracing all of it. Millions of years; common descent of all life, etc. People who 'only believe in micro-evolution' will not be considered pro-evolution in my tally, but anti.

    I'd like to know, by percenta ...[text shortened]... ducated guess; he supports a literal Noah's ark.)
    RBHILL

    Pro evolution so far : [b]37.5%
    [/b]
    Whodey is not a pro evolutionist, I remember him getting all excited about an alleged discovery of Noah's Ark, which of course turned out to be a hoax. Neither is robbie, nor Galveston75 nor menace71 (I think). CalJust is pro evolution.
  3. 28 Mar '14 16:59
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    I'm just curious. I'd like to get a head count of which theists believe in evolution, and which do not. When I say 'believe in evolution', I mean embracing all of it. Millions of years; common descent of all life, etc. People who 'only believe in micro-evolution' will not be considered pro-evolution in my tally, but anti.

    I'd like to know, by percenta ...[text shortened]... ducated guess; he supports a literal Noah's ark.)
    RBHILL

    Pro evolution so far : [b]37.5%
    [/b]
    I don't think I believe in evolution as the origin of live. To be frank "believe" is not the right word as I'm not sure how to "believe" in this matter.
  4. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    28 Mar '14 17:15 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    Whodey is not a pro evolutionist, I remember him getting all excited about an alleged discovery of Noah's Ark, which of course turned out to be a hoax. Neither is robbie, nor Galveston75 nor menace71 (I think). CalJust is pro evolution.
    Yeah, there are going to be some tough decisions. I thought I recalled whodey being an old-earther and common-descenter. I think I will hold my nose and allow Noah's arkers to be pro-evolution as long as they allow for common descent and the proper length of time for life to evolve from a simple single-celled organism.

    Of course, whodey himself can deny being pro-evolution if he wishes.

    Pro-evolution:
    whodey
    suzianne
    divegeester
    CalJust

    Anti-evolution:
    dasa
    RJHinds
    FreakyKBH
    sonship (this is an educated guess; he supports a literal Noah's ark.)
    RBHILL
    menace71
    robbiecarrobie
    galveston75

    Pro evolution so far : 33%
  5. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    28 Mar '14 17:18
    Originally posted by divegeester
    I don't think I believe in evolution as the origin of live. To be frank "believe" is not the right word as I'm not sure how to "believe" in this matter.
    Evolution is not an origin theory; it assumes a simple single-celled organism to start. It does not go back any further. Science has drawn a blank on the origin of life so far.
  6. 28 Mar '14 20:57 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    Evolution is not an origin theory; it assumes a simple single-celled organism to start. It does not go back any further. Science has drawn a blank on the origin of life so far.
    If push comes to shove (as it does here), I'd say I am a creationist. That's not to say I don't see evolution in natural selection.

    I guess I'll get darts from both directions.
  7. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    28 Mar '14 22:14
    Originally posted by divegeester
    If push comes to shove (as it does here), I'd say I am a creationist. That's not to say I don't see evolution in natural selection.

    I guess I'll get darts from both directions.
    IMO evolution does not rule out creation (despite the adamant protests to the contrary). It only rules out young-earth creationism.
  8. 28 Mar '14 22:38
    Originally posted by divegeester
    I don't think I believe in evolution as the origin of live. To be frank "believe" is not the right word as I'm not sure how to "believe" in this matter.
    Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life
  9. 28 Mar '14 22:42 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    Whodey is not a pro evolutionist, I remember him getting all excited about an alleged discovery of Noah's Ark, which of course turned out to be a hoax. Neither is robbie, nor Galveston75 nor menace71 (I think). CalJust is pro evolution.
    I'm not pro evolution nor am I anti-evolution. I have no problem with the scientific findings. This is because God cannot be found in the material findings because he is not a material God. I also have at lenght tried to discuss my interpretation of Genesis in terms of creation, but much to my chagrin, it appears it has all gone in one ear and out the other.

    So you are once again wrong Mr. Knob.

    As for Noah's ark, I have no idea what that has to do with evolution. From a secular point of view, all ancient myths in that region talk of a great flood, so obviously there was one. Now whether it was world wide is another think altogether.
  10. 28 Mar '14 22:44
    Originally posted by divegeester
    I don't think I believe in evolution as the origin of live. To be frank "believe" is not the right word as I'm not sure how to "believe" in this matter.
    nobody believes in evolution as the origin of life because it has nothing to do with that.



    back to the topic, i too am a theist that accepts evolution as fact. (i don't like "believe" when it comes to proven scientific fact)
  11. 28 Mar '14 22:45
    Let me just say that no matter your position, Godless or God mediated, most of what occured to bring about life is a mystery and always will be. It is rather irritating when people on either end of the spectrum are so full of themselves that they are so cock sure that any view other than their own could have any validity.
  12. 28 Mar '14 22:46
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    nobody believes in evolution as the origin of life because it has nothing to do with that.



    back to the topic, i too am a theist that accepts evolution as fact. (i don't like "believe" when it comes to proven scientific fact)
    I think many people of faith think evolution deals with the origins of life. This is a common misconception.
  13. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    28 Mar '14 23:44
    Originally posted by whodey
    I'm not pro evolution nor am I anti-evolution. I have no problem with the scientific findings. This is because God cannot be found in the material findings because he is not a material God. I also have at lenght tried to discuss my interpretation of Genesis in terms of creation, but much to my chagrin, it appears it has all gone in one ear and out the othe ...[text shortened]... t flood, so obviously there was one. Now whether it was world wide is another think altogether.
    So do you accept common descent?
  14. 29 Mar '14 00:08
    Originally posted by Proper Knob
    So do you accept common descent?
    I have no bone to pick with the theory. Essentially, I think that mankind became "human" once God breathed life into "Adam". The physical material structure is not as consequential as the spiritual.

    What I can tell you is what both the Bible and science tell us. We were made from the dust of the earth.
  15. Subscriber Proper Knob
    Cornovii
    29 Mar '14 00:13
    Originally posted by whodey
    I have no bone to pick with the theory. Essentially, I think that mankind became "human" once God breathed life into "Adam". The physical material structure is not as consequential as the spiritual.

    What I can tell you is what both the Bible and science tell us. We were made from the dust of the earth.
    So you accept common descent, is that what you're saying?