Do you believe in evolution?

darknes

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
I am familiar with Schroeder's work. It reflects a popular compromise, that God created the rules, and evolution is one of the rules. I have no problem with that, although I don't believe it personally (notice I said believe, it is a personal view of belief, in the absence of compelling evidence). Evolutionary theory has no problem with that - science just tries to understand the rules of the game, and you don't have to know how the game came into existence to understand the rules. The problem comes with people who insist on a set of rules that don't explain the game.
Fair enough.
 

ophiura

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Lastly, if evolution could be observed as you pointed out it would no longer be a "theory". It would have become a "Law".
I think everyone would benefit from a review the scientific definitions of theory, law, truth and proof. And maybe the "scientific method" as well. Heck, even a wikipedia definition will do (in fact they are quite good). But these are not the same as day to day uses.
In general, this topic is always side tracked by demands for "proof" and such which mostly just causes me to do this -->
Please just take a bit of time to do some additional research before demanding proof...it is just not how science really works.
As discussed 10 pages ago, proof is relative. If you believe that fossils on top of a mountain were proof of the flood, and i believe they are proof of geological forces and history, where oceans used to cover what is now mountaintop...what exactly can we do to change that?
If you believe the Bible is literal and that is proof, then there is no point in any other explanation. And apparently if we don't believe that we are inferior and make people ashamed to be human

I will point out also that evolution does not have a "purpose" and is not directional, that is to say that things are not assumed to get more complex or "better" over time. There is no "evolutionary" ladder as far as most scientists are concerned.
If you are walking around the street, you sometimes find a bit of sidewalk that has a footprint, or leaf print from when it was wet. This is a good analogy of the fossil record. Look at that bit of pavement and figure if you can determine the world around you from it? That is how incomplete the fossil record is. Please don't use "absence" in the fossil record as "proof" of anything.
I will also point out that we have NO set agreement on "what a species is." But if a species A consists of a gene pool, and that gene pool is split off (by whatever...), does species A still exist? Or do you have species B and C? These are debates in evolutionary theory and it is important to understand some of that.
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Evidence of the crossing of the Red Sea
Pharaoh's Drowned Army
Confirmation of the actual Exodus route has come from divers finding coral-encrusted bones and chariot remains in the Gulf of Aqaba
ONE of the most dramatic records of Divine intervention in history is the account of the Hebrews' exodus from Egypt.
The subsequent drowning of the entire Egyptian army in the Red Sea was not an insignificant event, and confirmation of this event is compelling evidence that the Biblical narrative is truly authentic. Over the years, many divers have searched the Gulf of Suez in vain for artifacts to verify the Biblical account. But carefully following the Biblical and historical records of the Exodus brings you to Nuweiba, a large beach in the Gulf of Aqaba, as Ron Wyatt discovered in 1978.
Repeated dives in depths ranging from 60 to 200 feet deep (18m to 60m), over a stretch of almost 2.5 km, has shown that the chariot parts are scattered across the sea bed. Artifacts found include wheels, chariot bodies as well as human and horse bones. Divers have located wreckage on the Saudi coastline opposite Nuweiba as well.
Since 1987, Ron Wyatt found three 4-spoke gilded chariot wheels. Coral does not grow on gold, hence the shape has remained very distinct, although the wood inside the gold veneer has disintegrated making them too fragile to move.
The hope for future expeditions is to explore the deeper waters with remote cameras or mini-subs. (ABOVE GILDED CHARIOT WHEEL - Mute witness to the miracle of the crossing of the Red Sea by the Hebrews 3,500 years ago. Found with metal detector.
Coral-encrusted chariot wheel, filmed off the Saudi coastline, matches chariot wheels found in Tutankhamen's tomb
Mineralized Bone - One of many found at the crossing site (above center). This one Tested by the Dept. of Osteology at Stockholm University, was found to be a human femur, from the right leg of a 165-170cm tall man. It is essentially 'fossilized' i.e. replaced by minerals and coral, hence cannot be dated by radiocarbon methods, although this specimen was obviously from antiquity.
Chariot wheel and axle covered with coral and up-ended. Exodus 14:25 "And took off their chariot wheels, that they drave them heavily:....."
Solomon's memorial pillars
WHEN Ron Wyatt first visited Nuweiba in 1978, he found a Phoenician style column lying in the water. Unfortunately the inscriptions had been eroded away, hence the column's importance was not understood until 1984, when a second granite column was found on the Saudi coastline opposite -- identical to the first, except on this one the inscription was still intact.
In Phoenician letters (Archaic Hebrew), it contained the words: Mizraim (Egypt); Solomon; Edom; death; Pharaoh; Moses; and Yahweh, indicating that King Solomon had set up these columns as a memorial to the miracle of the crossing of the sea. Saudi Arabia does not admit tourists, and perhaps fearing unauthorized visitors, the Saudi Authorities have since removed this column, and replaced it with a flag marker where it once stood.
How deep is the water?
THE Gulf of Aqaba is very deep, in places over a mile (1,600m) deep. Even with the sea dried up, walking across would be difficult due to the steep grade down the sides. But there is one spot where if the water were removed, it would be an easy descent for people and animals. This is the line between Nuweiba and the opposite shore in Saudi Arabia.
Depth-sounding expeditions have revealed a smooth, gentle slope descending from Nuweiba out into the Gulf. This shows up almost like a pathway on depth-recording equipment, confirming it's Biblical description "...a way in the sea, and a path in the mighty waters." (Isaiah 43:16).
The Bible writers frequently refer to the miracle of the Red Sea crossing, for it was an event which finds no equal in history. The Hebrew prophets describe the sea at the crossing site as "...the waters of the great deep ...the depths of the sea..." (Isaiah 51:10). Knowing the exact spot to which the Bible writers were referring, what is the depth there? The distance between Nuweiba and where artifacts have been found on Saudi coast is about 18km (11 miles).
Along this line the deepest point is about 800m (2,600 feet). No wonder that Inspired writers of the Bible described it as the mighty waters. And no wonder that not a single Egyptian survived when the water collapsed in upon them. (above right NUWEIBA BEACH - The spot where the crossing began. )
( right Model of depths at crossing site.)
( left The Saudi side also has a beach area
of a similar size see approximate path.)
( below right THE EXODUS ROUTE - With the correct crossing site in the Gulf of Aqaba)
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Originally Posted by Jerthunter
Unfortunately many people in this thread insist that the bible's words must be taken literally. I am attempting to see how they decide what must be literal and what is symbolism.
revelations was written in apocaliptic form - a type of jewish literature that uses symbolic imagery to communicate hope in the ultimate triumph of God to those in the midst of persocution. the events are ordered according to literary, rather then strictly cronological patterns.
 

geridoc

Well-Known Member
Evidence of the crossing of the Red Sea...
Two responses to this:
First - the talk-origins group has discussed Wyatt at length, generally negatively. I haven't studied the issue, so can't comment otherwise.
Second - So what? Does this bear on evolution, or on the possibility that some portion of your Bible may be literally true? I would think the latter.
I just found a site (here ) that appears to be a creationist site and, nevertheless concludes that Ron Wyatt's stuff is fabrication. You have to be careful about what you read on the web, but there it is for evaluation.
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Originally Posted by GeriDoc
Two responses to this:
First - the talk-origins group has discussed Wyatt at length, generally negatively. I haven't studied the issue, so can't comment otherwise.
Second - So what? Does this bear on evolution, or on the possibility that some portion of your Bible may be literally true? I would think the latter.
I just found a site (here ) that appears to be a creationist site and, nevertheless concludes that Ron Wyatt's stuff is fabrication. You have to be careful about what you read on the web, but there it is for evaluation.
yawn i dont think you would believe in creation if God came down from heaven and thumped yoiu on the head .
im done with this thread God bless, btw none of the pictures would down load but it doesnt really matter
 

ophiura

Active Member
I would find it interesting if their truly are bones (and it is certainly debated), as exposed bones are not common at wreck sites, even far more recent (eg titanic). Even whale bones are gone within 50 years.
 

ophiura

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefreak29
yawn i dont think you would believe in creation if God came down from heaven and thumped yoiu on the head .
im done with this thread God bless

This is a two way street as well, which is why the discussion typically doesn't get far.
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
This is a two way street as well, which is why the discussion typically doesn't get far.
it never will
 

darknes

Active Member
Personally, I think it would be more awe-inspiring to believe that it took billions of years for us to finally reach our current state of existence, showing the miraculous planning by God than it is to believe that he created it all in 6 days.
Reefreak, why did it take God 6 days to create everything? Surely he could have done it all in one day, or even one hour?
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darknes
Personally, I think it would be more awe-inspiring to believe that it took billions of years for us to finally reach our current state of existence, showing the miraculous planning by God than it is to believe that he created it all in 6 days.
Reefreak, why did it take God 6 days to create everything? Surely he could have done it all in one day, or even one hour?
the real question isnt how long he took , but how he did it. God created the earth in an orderly fashon(he did not make plants before light)and he created men and women as unique beings capable of communication with him. no other part of creation can claim that remarkable priviledge. its not important how long it took God to create the world, whether a few days or billions of years, but that he created it just the way he wanted to.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darknes
Personally, I think it would be more awe-inspiring to believe that it took billions of years for us to finally reach our current state of existence, showing the miraculous planning by God than it is to believe that he created it all in 6 days.
Reefreak, why did it take God 6 days to create everything? Surely he could have done it all in one day, or even one hour?
If you do believe in God, who are you to question Him? Why didn't he just make us to follow Him and not have the decision? That'd be a lot easier than sending down His son to die for us.
 

ophiura

Active Member
Why create 3500 species of mosquitoes? Why not one that can inhabit all environments?
Why create 90 + species of deep sea brittlestars in one genus, where the differences are just basically in a few arms spines? Its like He had a quota...and as I also work with a quota, I know the lack of, shall we say "quality" that often comes with that. That is not meant to be a slight, by the way, but it does make me lean toward the evolutionary (theistic) side. With all the potential to just come up with completely wacky stuff that even our tiny human minds can imagine in literature and art? Truly, species level taxonomy brings these sorts of things to light. Even though I thanked God every time I saw some new thing...even studying evolution, yes thank you...it still was a bit of a question.
Why can the mind of someone like Darwin, or frankly...me...not be a gift from God in its own right? Why is it not possible that God is perfectly OK with the expansion of the mind, observing, asking and proposing solutions? Why is that damnable? It seems it is, clearly, at least from certain corners. Could that not be the expansion of the human mind and spirit to its fullest potential?
But it makes no difference in the end. Many of us are so opposed in principle that we never get far in the discussion. :(
 

ophiura

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
If you do believe in God, who are you to question Him? Why didn't he just make us to follow Him and not have the decision? That'd be a lot easier than sending down His son to die for us.

Again, please be open to the idea that not everyone is a Christian, and that is fine. Even for those who are, their interpretation, in accordance with their faith even, would still differ with yours. I would prefer this not be part of the discussion.
 

darknes

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
If you do believe in God, who are you to question Him? Why didn't he just make us to follow Him and not have the decision? That'd be a lot easier than sending down His son to die for us.
If God didn't want us to ask questions, he wouldn't have given us free will. He made us in His image, to grow in understanding which will further strengthen our faith.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darknes
If God didn't want us to ask questions, he wouldn't have given us free will. He made us in His image, to grow in understanding which will further strengthen our faith.
I believe in God, but I also believe science helps to strengthen my faith.
I agree. But my for me personaly, God has a plan for everything, we may not know it here on earth, but that's what is going to make Heaven great. WE get to ask God all those questions that have been bugging us for so long.
 

darknes

Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
Why create 3500 species of mosquitoes? Why not one that can inhabit all environments?
Why create 90 + species of deep sea brittlestars in one genus, where the differences are just basically in a few arms spines? Its like He had a quota...and as I also work with a quota, I know the lack of, shall we say "quality" that often comes with that. That is not meant to be a slight, by the way, but it does make me lean toward the evolutionary (theistic) side. With all the potential to just come up with completely wacky stuff that even our tiny human minds can imagine in literature and art? Truly, species level taxonomy brings these sorts of things to light. Even though I thanked God every time I saw some new thing...even studying evolution, yes thank you...it still was a bit of a question.
Why can the mind of someone like Darwin, or frankly...me...not be a gift from God in its own right? Why is it not possible that God is perfectly OK with the expansion of the mind, observing, asking and proposing solutions? Why is that damnable? It seems it is, clearly, at least from certain corners. Could that not be the expansion of the human mind and spirit to its fullest potential?
But it makes no difference in the end. Many of us are so opposed in principle that we never get far in the discussion. :(
Very nicely stated.
I am just in awe at some of the things that we are now learning through science. Not only applying to biology, but all aspects. Some of the things we are learning through Quantum Physics is astounding as well.
 

reefreak29

Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
Why create 3500 species of mosquitoes? Why not one that can inhabit all environments?
Why create 90 + species of deep sea brittlestars in one genus, where the differences are just basically in a few arms spines? Its like He had a quota...and as I also work with a quota, I know the lack of, shall we say "quality" that often comes with that. That is not meant to be a slight, by the way, but it does make me lean toward the evolutionary (theistic) side. With all the potential to just come up with completely wacky stuff that even our tiny human minds can imagine in literature and art? Truly, species level taxonomy brings these sorts of things to light. Even though I thanked God every time I saw some new thing...even studying evolution, yes thank you...it still was a bit of a question.
Why can the mind of someone like Darwin, or frankly...me...not be a gift from God in its own right? Why is it not possible that God is perfectly OK with the expansion of the mind, observing, asking and proposing solutions? Why is that damnable? It seems it is, clearly, at least from certain corners. Could that not be the expansion of the human mind and spirit to its fullest potential?
But it makes no difference in the end. Many of us are so opposed in principle that we never get far in the discussion. :(
to have spiritual pride is a terrible sin , im not holyer then thou because of what i believe, God created us to be thinkers and to have free will theres nothing wrong with what you believe as long as you have a relationship with God in your own way, to damn someone because of there beliefs is wrong and intollerable its not up to us to judge other people but it goes the same way for us i cant tell you how many times ive been called an idiot or uneducated because i believe in God
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by ophiura
I think everyone would benefit from a review the scientific definitions of theory, law, truth and proof. And maybe the "scientific method" as well. Heck, even a wikipedia definition will do (in fact they are quite good). But these are not the same as day to day uses. ...
Hehe, I take it I mispoke in some regard?
 

darknes

Active Member
I was watching part of a show on Discovery last night that really bothered me. It was called "Before the Dinosaurs".
The show was basically going through the day of certain extinct species. What bothered me was the assumptions they were making, and stated them to be factual.
For instance, they said "Lions are known to eat about 70% of a carcass, but the Dimetredon consumes nearly 90%". "The Dimetredon eats the intestines by shaking out the "poo" and consuming the lining". (of course the exact words were a little different).
It went on and on with facts like this. Do they really know all these behaviors with such detail based on some bones from millions of years ago?
 
Top