1. Jo'Burg South Africa
    Joined
    20 Mar '06
    Moves
    45384
    30 Jan '12 22:16
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution. I was recently asked if I would believe in theistic evolution.

    Not even knowing that theistic evolution was such a big deal I did the logic...I checked it out. My findings may surprise some
    of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    No human has actually observed the process of how life really has transformed. However, humans have done controlled experiments on
    the theory of evolution and those experiments were observed and only really proves part of the theory, nothing more. It is not good
    enough to assume the controlled environment to be the same as the un-controlled environment without proof. Further more it is
    also assumed that tests done on the theory of evolution, is also the process humans for example underwent. No human has observed
    life transformation from an ape to a human as we see ourselves today, and because our scientist have created environments to prove
    the theory of evolution, they think this is also what happened to us, without the real evidence. This is speculating at best
    and not the truth as there is no proof that humans for example underwent the same process, nor can anyone prove we did. A lot of
    you will through fossil arguments my way. I'll just say this, our skeletons may look alike but that doesn't give anyone the idea
    that it was evolution that was involved...only a fool would believe this. The other lot of you will say there is overwhelming evidence
    from molecular biology and genetics and I will say this is only by scientific methods that scientist have picked up that humans and apes have something
    in common. It means nothing and proves nothing that evolution was involved. Again if you do, you're a fool spec-cu-la-ting!

    Now, like I said, for some this may be surprising...I do believe in some small limited part of evolution, and that part is where scientist
    have created a controlled environment where tests have been done and the changes/adaptions has been observed of bacteria, insects, animals
    or whatever the lucky specie was. With this type of scientific method, no one can disagree. This is a very small and limited part of evolution.

    The bigger part of evolution is that it is unobserved, unproven and untestable...with the exception of the above paragraph.

    Lets take a look at the bigger picture of evolution from a Christian point of view.
    The fundamentals of evolution denies God. This is a main concern for any Christian and those Christians who believe in evolution
    should think again about this. Yes, above I also said I believe in the theory of evolution, but bare in mind that it is on a very
    specific and limited part of it which I also said no one can deny. If anyone is unsure what I meant, please don't make your assumptions
    but rather ask me for specifics if I wasn't specific enough.

    There is a big risk in believing in theistic evolution according to my findings. If you are a Christian that believes the same as I
    as by my example above then we are bout a view.

    If you are a Christian, and believe God creates through evolution, and that we as humans were part of this transformation (Human Evolution)
    then you are not a fake Christian. What are my reasons for being so blatant? Bare in mind that I have said so already and you have to keep this
    in mind...The fundamentals of evolution denies God! It conflicts with the Bible! Ask yourself this...
    1. Did God create Adam or did evolution?
    2. God took one of Adams' ribs and created Eve, did He really or did the Bible lie as evolution created Eve?
    3. If we were made in the image of God, and Jesus was made in the image of God, God would not have had that image taken on another effect
    as it makes no sense why.

    I do believe that humans are undergoing changes right now, we are adapting to the circumstances around us, thus we are evolving, but we have
    not evolved from an ape to a human being, and nor will any human being evolve in to the next best thing. Some people "evolve" (sex change) from man to woman
    and vise versa, but this unfortunately is a sick thing.

    My conclusion to theistic evolution is that people are trying to put God into evolution where there is a clear conflict between God and evolution in its entire capacity.
    I will agree to believing that God has created evolution for specific transformations as the evidence is overwhelming in some instances, but on the rest for example
    human evolution, evolution is taking a big fat chance.

    Would I mind if my kids become involved in school with evolution experiments like for example how a virus has evolved into something more aggressive
    and stronger and how it has overcome medicine that was suppose to kill it, hell no, who would want to miss out on that? Would I mind if my kids get told
    in school that no God exists and that life formed from none life and after this life was formed evolution took a stand to evolve the muddy soap into
    millions of different species, hell YES!


    To googlefudge...
    "Life on Earth originated and then evolved from a universal common ancestor approximately 3.7 billion years ago."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

    Logically, large-scale evolutionary theory depends thoroughly on specific notions of abiogenesis.
    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IAorigintheory.shtml
    http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionabiogenesis/a/evolution.htm - Focus especially on the 4th and 5th paragraphs.

    I have done my bit of research and you could do the same. I guess with a bit more research I can "really" prove to you that abiogenesis
    and evolution are related, but I think I have done so already.
  2. Joined
    29 Dec '08
    Moves
    6788
    30 Jan '12 22:55
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution. I was recently asked if I would believe in theistic evolution.

    Not even knowing that theistic evolution was such a big deal I did the logic...I checked it out. My findings may surprise some
    of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    No huma ...[text shortened]... ou that abiogenesis
    and evolution are related, but I think I have done so already.
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution.


    The rest is commentary.
  3. Joined
    16 Jan '07
    Moves
    93319
    30 Jan '12 23:24
    i bet you wont be questioning the theories of scientists next time you need to go to hospital, oh no, you'll be thanking them, not picking and choosing which bits you want to believe in.
  4. Joined
    10 Jun '11
    Moves
    3829
    31 Jan '12 01:081 edit
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution. I was recently asked if I would believe in theistic evolution.

    Not even knowing that theistic evolution was such a big deal I did the logic...I checked it out. My findings may surprise some
    of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    No huma ou that abiogenesis
    and evolution are related, but I think I have done so already.
    actually, that first link about "abiogenesis" you posted refutes your claim.

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IAorigintheory.shtml

    from that link:


    Misconception: “Evolution is a theory about the origin of life.”

    Response: Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed after its origin. Science does try to investigate how life started (e.g., whether or not it happened near a deep-sea vent, which organic molecules came first, etc.), but these considerations are not the central focus of evolutionary theory. Regardless of how life started, afterwards it branched and diversified, and most studies of evolution are focused on those processes.

    and your second link also:

    http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionabiogenesis/a/evolution.htm

    "As if evolution and evolutionary theory were not already confusing enough, many creationists complicate matters even further by promulgating the mistaken idea that evolution is the same as abiogenesis."

    and later...

    "The important thing to remember is that evolutionary theory is a scientific theory about how life has developed — this means that it begins with the premise that life already exists. It makes no claims as to how that life got here"

    so yeah, they are related in that they are both scientific theories, but the relation ends there.
  5. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12692
    31 Jan '12 03:351 edit
    Originally posted by VoidSpirit
    actually, that first link about "abiogenesis" you posted refutes your claim.

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/misconceps/IAorigintheory.shtml

    from that link:


    Misconception: “Evolution is a theory about the origin of life.”

    Response: Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed [b]after its origin.
    Science does try to inves , they are related in that they are both scientific theories, but the relation ends there.[/b]
    You say, "Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed after
    its origin." But since evolutionists do not understand how life started,
    they have made wrong assumptions that invalidates the whole theory.
    Atheistic evolution can not afford to consider the posibility of God in
    the origin of life so they must ignore any evidence that points in this
    direction and assume another naturalistic explanation that the hope
    is abiogenesis will solve. So they are unable to show that there is a
    common ancestor for all life. All they can do is show there are certain
    small adaptive changes that have occurred due to hereditary changes
    during reproduction between the created kinds. There is no knowledge
    in evolution as to how these created kinds suddenly originated. This
    knowledge has been revealed from the Creator, Himself, in the pages
    of the Holy Bible. All evolutioninst can do is draw fictional pictures of
    how they think they might have evolved from a common ancestor,
    because there is no fossil proof that one kind of animal evolved into
    another. So to convince others of evolution they have to reclassify
    hereditary adaptation as evolution. As Dasa would say, "dishonesty."
    😏
  6. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91531
    31 Jan '12 03:431 edit
    You're tackling a real tough subject here.
    As I understand you are trying to fit your christianity into a scientific framework.
    Gutsy, indeed!!

    Unfortunatly you and most of the christians fail at even getting to the "right ballpark" when discussing such deep subjects as God.
    God is not a being.
    God is the all, the everything, the alpha and the omega, etc,etc.

    If you tried studying the bible as if God was not a separate being from the rest of creation, but (as I said just above) tried to FORM A CONCEPT of "God" that viewed all of life ,and indeed everything that we can perceive and that which we cant as being God, then you would be entering the right ballpark. You would see that "God" ,(with a big "G" ) is actually something more like the "force of animation" which/who "breathes life" into all beings, but Itself is non-existent from a 'separated view"

    You need to form a wholistic view of the world/universe/etc. , on your own, without external influences, then you would see your self as also being a tiny bit of "God".
    That "God" cant be perceived using normal methods.
    I suggest reading some quantum theory. Get into the nuts and bolts of it, and see that you are indeed just another "cog" in the "God Machine".

    Just trying to help. One day you will die-like all of us, and then we will see the wholistic nature of God, which is actually what we were "bred" for. To understand. To use our brains and central nervous system as an "antenna" (of sorts), for getting in touch with "God" . That is what we are here for. The first step can often be the hardest 🙂

    Peace
  7. Standard memberkaroly aczel
    the Devil himself
    Brisbane,QLD
    Joined
    11 Apr '09
    Moves
    91531
    31 Jan '12 03:46
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    You say, "Evolutionary theory deals mainly with how life changed after
    its origin." But since evolutionists do not understand how life started,
    they have made wrong assumptions that invalidates the whole theory.
    Atheistic evolution can not afford to consider the posibility of God in
    the origin of life so they must ignore any evidence that points in this ...[text shortened]... ve to reclassify
    hereditary adaptation as evolution. As Dasa would say, "dishonesty."
    😏
    Is this some sort of joke?
  8. Joined
    11 Nov '05
    Moves
    43938
    31 Jan '12 05:41
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    No human has actually observed the process of how life really has transformed.
    If this is the reason that evolution is not true, then by the same reason there was never any creation. Why?

    Because (your own wordings): "No human has actually observed the process of how life really was created".

    So, congratulations, you've just proved that creationism is wrong.
  9. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    31 Jan '12 05:44
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    Now, like I said, for some this may be surprising...
    No, it is not at all surprising that you, being a Young Earth Creationist Christian feel the need to pretend you know enough about science and biology to make all those claims about them. The fact is however, that anyone who does know some science and biology can see that you are making it up as you go along (or, as is often the case, coping it off someone else who did). If you really want to disprove evolution, you are going to have to do a bit of actual learning and try to understand what the theory is all about and what science is all about. I warn you though, you will, if you study it, come to the inescapable conclusion that the scientists have it right.
    If you need help in your endeavours there are many here who would be ready to teach you some of it and give you references to further reading material.

    If you want an actual critique of what you wrote, let me know and I will point out some of the errors you made. We could start with this one:
    No human has observed life transformation from an ape to a human.

    Humans are apes. In this light, the above sentence makes no sense.
  10. Joined
    01 Jun '06
    Moves
    274
    31 Jan '12 13:33
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution. I was recently asked if I would believe in theistic evolution.

    Not even knowing that theistic evolution was such a big deal I did the logic...I checked it out. My findings may surprise some
    of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    No huma ...[text shortened]... ou that abiogenesis
    and evolution are related, but I think I have done so already.
    My findings may surprise some of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    I haven't read the rest of the thread but certainly your first post was no surprise at all!

    --- Penguin.
  11. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    31 Jan '12 14:19
    Originally posted by karoly aczel
    Is this some sort of joke?
    why dont you address the points he was making rather than mocking the post?
  12. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    31 Jan '12 14:312 edits
    Originally posted by Nicksten
    As some may know, I am Christian and in fact against evolution. I was recently asked if I would believe in theistic evolution.

    Not even knowing that theistic evolution was such a big deal I did the logic...I checked it out. My findings may surprise some
    of you, but to the other people believing in theistic evolution, I will surprise you too.

    No huma ou that abiogenesis
    and evolution are related, but I think I have done so already.
    the problem that these so called theistic evolution faces is that there is no scriptural evidence
    which supports the hypothesis, in fact, the teachings of Jesus Christ are very clear that
    humans were created. What in fact has transpired to my mind is that a relegation of
    Biblical teaching has occurred and materialism has supplanted it in the guise of
    attempting to merge the two which are in essence mutually exclusive. The folly of the
    materialist is that he has limited his search for truth to unintelligent agencies and by
    taking the supernatural from the equation he cannot put the constituent parts together
    so as to form a whole, thus anomalies exist and variations need to be 'invented', to
    take care of these anomalies.
  13. SubscriberProper Knob
    Cornovii
    North of the Tamar
    Joined
    02 Feb '07
    Moves
    51426
    31 Jan '12 15:06
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    the problem that these so called theistic evolution faces is that there is no scriptural evidence
    which supports the hypothesis, in fact, the teachings of Jesus Christ are very clear that
    humans were created. What in fact has transpired to my mind is that a relegation of
    Biblical teaching has occurred and materialism has supplanted it in the g ...[text shortened]... thus anomalies exist and variations need to be 'invented', to
    take care of these anomalies.
    So says the man who thinks humans have only been on the planet 6,000 years and who also believes that the human race was reduced to 8 people around 3,000 years ago. Yet you talk about 'anomalies'?!
  14. Joined
    06 Aug '06
    Moves
    1945
    31 Jan '12 15:12
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    the problem that these so called theistic evolution faces is that there is no scriptural evidence
    which supports the hypothesis, in fact, the teachings of Jesus Christ are very clear that
    humans were created. What in fact has transpired to my mind is that a relegation of
    Biblical teaching has occurred and materialism has supplanted it in the g ...[text shortened]... thus anomalies exist and variations need to be 'invented', to
    take care of these anomalies.
    You talk about the folly of limiting your search for truth, while dismissing the work of tens of thousands of biologists because it contradicts a 2000 year old book. I could find better people to teach that message.
  15. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    31 Jan '12 17:12
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    the problem that these so called theistic evolution faces is that there is no scriptural evidence
    which supports the hypothesis,
    That is hardly surprising considering that the vast majority of science was discovered/developed over the last 2000 years, and since the Bible inexplicably stopped being written about 2000 years ago it could not possibly contain information about current science.
Back to Top