Eevee
usually right
And the Big Bang may have taken place in its own reality that we are unaware of. Special pleading.God created reality as humans know it. God may well be bound by his own reality that we are unaware of.
So in lieu of combining pieces of established knowledge, you are inventing a being which ignores everything we know and then admitting that nobody knows how it works. This is absurd.God is omnipotent, but he acts through his 'holy spirit'. Humanity clearly doesn't know how this works, but it isn't too far to say the 'holy spirit' would be a toolkit or machinery (or whatever the equivalent in 'Godworld' is.)
Appeal to consequences. The possible fallout of acceptance of evolution has zero bearing on whether or not it is true.Treating both creation and evolution as fictional (to put them both on a level playing field) I see why evolution seems more logical - it was designed that way. Creation is about what we don't know, and a) it can seem fanciful and b) it can be scary. Evolution can only result in depression
I must also note that the most popular religions paint people as mere pawns created for the entertainment of some deity and describe life as a short and fairly pointless waiting room before we get to the good stuff. Evolution is only depressing if you cannot figure out what to do with your life without someone telling you, which is kinda pathetic.
Irrelevant. Everything in the world relies on chance. Particles move about at random, yet reactions always work out the same way and water still evaporates at room temperature.1) Evolution relies on chance. It relies on the chance mutation being benificial for the organim in an environment. The organism may not evolve randomly but what it evolves into has a random element to it.
This argument is akin to saying that you will never get a 6 if you keep rolling a die because it relies on random chance.
Convenient! My work is done for me.2) I can demonstrate that this intelligence might exist, but you will just say 'that was evolution'
I am not convinced you understand how science works. Evolution makes predictions, and we have found evidence that confirms these predictions. The same applies to every new proposal and every existing theory.Again, I call the parts where a lot of the evidence seems to rely on extrapolating what is shown at another level speculation, not evolution as a whole.
Creationism, on the other hand, predicts and implies nothing. It cannot be tested at all.
Why are you demanding absolute proof if, by your own admission, it is impossible to find?I like the word 'more.' It seems to fit. There's still no absolute proof, however much evidence you have. If you want absolute proof, get a a time machine.
We cannot even absolutely prove that gravity works how we think it does. All we can do is notice that it usually works a certain way, make predictions ("if I let go of this ball, it will fall to the ground"), and test them. Gravity has never predicted anything that has proven false, so we accept it. If we ever found an exception, we would have to rethink our understanding of gravity.
No, but it certainly makes it likely, and useful for understanding the world if nothing else.Even a large amount of evidence doesn't make something correct, however.
I see no reason to think anything is beyond human understanding. This is a cop-out and more special pleading.I think it comes down to how evolution is within human understanding but God is beyond it
What makes you think I believe "this" is all that exists? I don't discredit the possibility of other universes or orthogonal dimensions; it would be rather arrogant of me to assume that our universe is unique.the concept of this not being everything seems 'wrong' to some people, wheras others feel there must be something else. Is it irrational to think this isn't everything there is?
Where is the design? There are plenty of odd bits and pieces left in all sorts of creatures that either serve little purpose or could have been designed far better -- and yet they weren't, even by a being supposedly far smarter than us.There appears to be design in living things. Is it so impossible that there might be a designer.
We see a lot of organisms that seem to fit their environments because organisms that don't fit well DIE.
Except that a creator brings far more questions into this than it answers.You will notice that I talked about the possibility of a creator. This is key. It's important to consider this because not all creators are the same, as they have a number of differences.
For one, would a creator not appear designed? If it is capable of designing everything on its own, clearly it is more complex and powerful than everything; why is it exempt from needing its own creator? This is more special pleading.
There are people who believe this, but it still raises the same questions about God. In fact, it turns him into the god of the gaps.Of course evolution and creation may not be incompatable at all. If God created the first cell, which isn't (acording to evolutionists) part of evolution, and then 'steered' the evolution of life (remember this is the guy who invented the physical universe), there is no conflict with science and the bible.
All I do is consider what I think and why.I'll leave anyway. All I did was provide some answers (bas as they may have been) to some questions, but clearly I am incapable of being such a skilled debator as youself.
Emphasis mine.You don't know me. You don't know what I'm like. You don't know what I mean. I spent half the homosexuality thread staring at inncorrect assumptions about me.
Perhaps you should learn to better express yourself, rather than complaining that we don't understand you.
So what would you say if governments allowed slavery? Would that be okay, because they're not condoning it?Anyway: Permit =/= condone. I have legal permission to drink as much alcohol as I want. This does not mean the government of my country condones binge drinking.
Funny. You just said it's Adam's and Eve's faults. What sort of benevolent creator punishes 10+ billion people for the actions of two?God created humans perfect for their purpose: Intelligent, free willed creature who served god willingly. Thing have gone wrong since then but if Adam and Eve hadn't gone down the path of rebellion humanity wouldn't have become imperfect. The problems are a result of Adam and Eve rejecting God. So, in short: It's our fault.
Where did the other reality come from?See all this makes sense, and doesn't contradict evolution at all. I actually think something similar to this, only in my version God exist in a different reality and invented this one.
Organisms do not evolve. Populations evolve.If the organism stays the same, then it isn't evolving.
No, it's not. Detrimental mutations generally kill the organism; beneficial ones naturally spread. It doesn't matter if there are a hundred million bad mutations and just one good one; the good one is still far better at replicating than all the bad ones combined. This is the very basis upon which evolution works.Also how does something which is almost universally harmful provide the basis of how life evolved? I don't care how many mutations occured; saying that enough beneficial ones happened for evolution is a cop-out.
Last edited: