The Evil Genius Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Zero Cool One of the unanswered questions that I see with Evolutionism (or apes evolving into humans) is that it was a one time thing. We don't see any cavemen nowadays. A long time ago, a group of apes evolved into cavemen, which evolved into humans. Since then apes have ceased to evolve into cavemen. None of the cavemen or apes in that group were significantly slower in evolving. Either that or the humans killed all the cavemen. Wouldn't you think that somewhere, sometime we could observe a creature in the evolutionary chain between humans and apes? I think you are ignoring the idea that what spurred the leap from ape to caveman might have been an environmental condition not present nowadays (or any other time in the past few ten thousand years or so). Thats why we don't see the leap today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pez Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 The Bible was written at FACE VALUE. There is no reason to think that God meant it otherwise. Someone mentioned the Hebrew word for "day." Well, they should well know that it can mean a 24 hour period. Someone said it could mean thousands of years. There is no reason to believe that God meant anything else in the early chapters of Genesis other than 24 hour days. (That is trying to fit the "facts" [supposed] into the theory, but it doesn't work.) It says, "The EVENING and the MORNING were the first day, "etc., etc. Even today we know that "evening and morning" constitute a full, 24 hour day. For further study on this 24 day issue, click here: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-184.htm And what about the points on earth.. (such as parts of alaska on north) where a morning or a night can last weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNut73 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Zero Cool Well, from reading this thread, I have failed to see conclusive scientific proof of either Evolutionism or Creationsim. As Om said, natural selection is different than Evolutionism. We can observe natural selection, but I don't believe we have observed apes evolving. Does anybody have any proof of an ape evolving into even just a higher form of ape, let alone a human? Have you ever seen Shannon Sharpe? :jk: :noflame: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by The Evil Genius I think you are ignoring the idea that what spurred the leap from ape to caveman might have been an environmental condition not present nowadays (or any other time in the past few ten thousand years or so). Thats why we don't see the leap today. This is precisely what I was trying to say. Those are the questions that are unanswered. What was the environmental condition that existed then, and not now, to cause the leap or to prevent the leap from happening again? Also, what caused the cavemen to become extinct? or did they just all evolve into humans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pez Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Well I pose a question for creationists... Did god create all the animals, plants, man, etc all at once? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by SkinsNut73 Does anybody have any proof of an ape evolving into even just a higher form of ape, let alone a human? Have you ever seen Shannon Sharpe? :jk: :noflame: According to this, the earliest man looked like Samuel Jackson. http://www.bet.com/articles/1,,c1gb6569-7360,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by SkinsFan2456 Thank you......so, very simply, it COULD be true that both concepts come into play at the same time. I don't think that is the arguement from my perspective. I am just disputing that people lived for 1000 years at a clip not too long ago.......and that Adam and Eve were the first two humans.....and that there was a giant named Goliath that was beaten down by little David......and that Moses parted the Red Sea......etc.......etc. I have no issue with saying that God IS mother nature....causing the adaptive changes that we are observing. Clearly, though, there is someone here who WON'T see it that way. Some fanatics want to discount the theory of evolution entirely. It IS just a theory....but, it is worth investigating.....which is more than I can say for the biblical version. 2456, Coach Gibbs does not believe in the theory of evolution. He's a creationist. He also attributes ALL his successes to the "fairy tales" you claim are in the Bible. So answer a question for us: Is Joe Gibbs a foolish and deluded man who holds to totally "fanatical" beliefs that are not even worth investigating? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pez Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by skinsfan51 2456, Coach Gibbs does not believe in the theory of evolution. He's a creationist. He also attributes ALL his successes to the "fairy tales" you claim are in the Bible. So answer a question for us: Is Joe Gibbs a foolish and deluded man who holds to totally "fanatical" beliefs that are not even worth investigating? skinsfan51, Please quote the source to where Gibbs has stated he does not believe in evolution.... I am a church going christian, and I believe in evolution! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 I believe that the answer could be a combination of both. Where does the Bible say what Adam and Eve looked like? It doesn't. Therefore, Adam and Eve "could" have been hairy, hunched over beasts....kind of like apes. All we know of Adam and Eve is what children's illustrated books show us. Hardly conclusive, since they are usually caucasians which I find HIGHLY unlikely. This is the same with Jesus Christ. The bible says something like Jesus was "olive skinned, with hair like wool." Well that hardly sounds like the common paintings and portraits of Jesus that show him to be blonde-haired, and blue-eyed. On the other hand non-believers also like to point to Dinosaurs not being in the Bible as proof that the Bible is b.s. Oh really, well Science has "prooved" that Dinosaurs predated man by thousands of years, so that is hardly conclusive as well. My point is, is that nobody really knows what the heck happened. Science likes to think that it has somehow disproved religion, when in fact, it has only added more question marks. I also believe that the Bible, specifically the old testament was meant to be taken metophorically, so the very concept of "creationism" to me is suspect. For instance, in the old testament of the Bible, man's vanity in building the Tower of Babel is how we came to speak so many different languages. God became angry that man could be so vain as to attempt to build a Tower to Heaven, so he made it impossible for man to complete the task, by making it impossible for man to communicate, and coordinate with one another. Therefore, according to this story, the reason why the Chinese speak Chinese, the English speak English, and the Germans speak German is because of man's vanity by daring to be as grand as God. I believe this story, as most others in the old testament is a metophor used to explain why men speak different languages. Many Christians believe this is LITERALLY what happened. At the end of the day, I don't think that anybody Scientists, Christians, Muslims, Atheists, etc. really have any idea what happened. I truly believe that it is impossible to know for sure what happened thousands of years ago. I believe there is a higher entity, being, what have you of some sort, and I don't think, contrary to what some believe that science has dis-proved anything. We Earthlings can't even get past our own moon yet, and we are going to try to say for sure what runs the universe? I don't think so. We have a long, long...long way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 One more thing about "creationism" I know that some people are going to say that talk about the whole 7 day thing. I also believe this is meant to be taken metophorically. "God created the Earth and the Stars" .....on the 6th day he created Man, on the 7th day he rested. Where are Dinosaurs right? Like I said, Metophors man, Metophors.... Maybe God created The Earth, and then created the Dinosaurs. Maybe he didn't like how the Dinosaurs turned out, so he eliminated them with a large rock from the sky. A few thousand years later, when he got around to it, he created Man. Really, who knows. Like I said before, nobody does. We can play the other hand, and the spin game all day long, but at the end of the day nobody really has a clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Science likes to think that it has somehow disproved religion ... Due respect and all, G, but where the heck did THAT come from? That's an eyebrow-raising statement on enough so many levels I'm not sure WHAT to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by pez skinsfan51, Please quote the source to where Gibbs has stated he does not believe in evolution.... I am a church going christian, and I believe in evolution! It's in the beginning chapter of "Racing to Win" by Gibbs. I'm reading it now. It's an outstanding book. He talks about how he always believed that God created the heaven and earth and not evolution. I'm not quoting him directly. But it's in there. I'm not lying. (I just don't have time to look it up now. If you have to have the exact words, I'll get them for you later. Sorry.) It puzzles me that anyone who would call themselves a Christian would believe in evolution. No offense, but it's a stain on the church. The Bible's account of how we all came to be is in stark contrast with evolution. They cannot be married. Otherwise, major doctrines of the Bible are compromised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pez Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 I know I will get heckled on both sides now, but I believe in both science and religion in harmony. I believe god created the universe (using the big bang) I believe god created man (using evolution) I believe god uses the tools of both evolution and natural selection to advance some of his creations while getting rid of some of his less desirable work. I constantly have these discussions with my pastor (drive him a little nuts sometimes), but he says that believing in science as well does not make me any less of a christian, and does not impede my faith. I choose both!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Commander PK Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Om Due respect and all, G, but where the heck did THAT come from? That's an eyebrow-raising statement on enough so many levels I'm not sure WHAT to do with it. Well, let me re-phrase. Scien TISTS (I know, broad term here) like to think that through their "discoveries" they have somehow disproved religous teachings. Atleast, the two usually don't go hand in hand. How many Scientists do you know who are devout religous people? What I mean, is people who believe in the Theory of Evolution, for example, usually like to present in arguments this "theory" as proof that history according to the Bible can't be correct. Therefore God can't exist, if the Bible isn't correct. Well, it seemed like all my college professors were like this anyhow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pez Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by G-Train Well, let me re-phrase. Scien TISTS (I know, broad term here) like to think that through their "discoveries" they have somehow disproved religous teachings. Atleast, the two usually don't go hand in hand. How many Scientists do you know who are devout religous people? What I mean is that, people who believe in the Theory of Evolution for example, usually like to present in arguments this "theory" as proof that history according to the Bible can't be correct. Therefore God can't exist, if the Bible isn't correct. Well, it seemed like all my college professors were like this anyhow. I believe in both.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Genesis 1:6And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: There are a couple of interesting questions raised by this verse as it stands in english. Who is God talking to? Who is "us", "our"? If man is made in God's image and likeness, does that mean that God looks like man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWill Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by skinsfan51 2456, Coach Gibbs does not believe in the theory of evolution. He's a creationist. He also attributes ALL his successes to the "fairy tales" you claim are in the Bible. So answer a question for us: Is Joe Gibbs a foolish and deluded man who holds to totally "fanatical" beliefs that are not even worth investigating? Have you sat down and discussed with him whether he takes the bibles words literally or figuratively? Or whether or not he believes everything he reads? Joe Gibbs is an EXTREMELY intelligent man.....and I am absolutely certain you would be surprised by those answers. You do not know JG, so don't talk like you do, just because he attributes a lot of what he has to his faith. Fanatical is buying into that book word for word, and not accepting what we humans have been learning in the years SINCE the bible was written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWill Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Om Due respect and all, G, but where the heck did THAT come from? That's an eyebrow-raising statement on enough so many levels I'm not sure WHAT to do with it. Religion likes to think science does not exist. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushman Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Zero Cool There are a couple of interesting questions raised by this verse as it stands in english. Who is God talking to? Who is "us", "our"? If man is made in God's image and likeness, does that mean that God looks like man? It means God looks like an Arab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Happy Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 From all that I have seen, Evolutionism is not wholly supported by factual evidence either. If that is true, Evolutionism is just another form of religion like Creationism. They both require some amount of faith. Some Evolutionists are just as dismissive of Creationism as any Creationist is of Evolutionism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Evolution......watch Penn and Teller Bullsh*t good show on the subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bushman Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by SkinsFan2456 Religion likes to think science does not exist. :laugh: Science has crushed religion repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan51 Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Bushman Science has crushed religion repeatedly. Ok, Bushman, I have to respond to this because it's a comment based upon total ignorance. You can't just make statements like that and not expect to be challenged. Do you know that in the 1970s this issue of creation and evolution started heating up? Those on both sides were having debates with each other on university campuses all over the country. After a very short time it was quite evident that the evolutionists weren't faring too well against these Christian scientists who presented the clear facts about their religion (the evolutionist's religion, that is). So what were they to do? They were getting whipped in front of hundreds and sometimes thousands of people in every debate (they NEVER win debates on this subject--NEVER). The answer: stop debating. That's right. Creation-hater, Eugene Scott, stepped in and said to all the evolutionists: "Stop debating. It looks bad for us." Call your local university today and ask the Ph D in charge of the biology department if he or she is willing to debate a Ph D creationist. See what tell you. Most of them will tell you, "No, I'm not interested." Then they try to chalk it up to a "meaningless debate about something that is already settled." HA!! NICE TRY. Translated that means: "I know I'll get my butt kicked, so I'll refrain for now. Where's my microscope?" Science has NOT crushed religion over and over. That is just plain incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWill Posted August 24, 2004 Share Posted August 24, 2004 Originally posted by Bushman Science has crushed religion repeatedly. I do believe in miracles though. I think it is most definitely a miracle that so many people still buy that $hit.....word for word no less. It is an indication to me that our education system is shot to hell......or that many people are so stubbornly ignorant, they refuse to open their eyes. Do you really think God would create a world where people form armies behind their spiritual beliefs, and sacrifice their own lives to quell the messages of other faiths? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.