AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Evolution

779 182540
stormwolf722
offline
stormwolf722
227 posts
Nomad

Well a lot of people have been telling me evolution is real. They give me the most craziest surreal 'facts'. Has anyone discovered any fish with legs? Any humans with gills or fins? If you put all the pieces of a watch into you're pocket and shake it around for trillions of years, will it ever become a watch? Is there but one possibility? Or if you completely dismantle a chicken and a fish, and put it into a box, shaking it around for trillions of years. Will it ever become a fish with wings? or a chicken with fins? :l

  • 779 Replies
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Yeah i know the questions were rhetorical. I just don't understand why people(*religious weirdos) are so up in arms over something(everything). If you believe in god(s) then your faith shouldn't be threatened by anything (everything).


It's the specific claim that God created everything as is (or at least close to it) that have them up in arms.

Anyway let's see where the Bible and evolution contradict. I will use the King James version.

Genesis 1:12
And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:15
And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.


With evolution planets would evolve to utilize photosynthesis. This would require the sun to exist as an environmental factor in order to drive them to develop this trait. So plants existing before the sun would be against evolution.
The second problem here is it states types of plants such as fruit baring plants and trees. according to evolution these plants didn't arise all at once. Fruit came about as a symbiotic relationship with animals. Trees didn't evolve until the Devonian period some 417 million years ago, along with the first seed producing plants.

Genesis 1:20-21
And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Genesis 1:24-25
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creeps on the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.


(Okay just a side note I checked the Hebrew and it doesn't make specific mention of whales. It would be more accurately translated as great sea creatures. Though it does specify cattle)

The problem here is birds evolved from dinosaurs which comes WWAAAYYY after the evolution of sea life. In the Bible we have birds first then land animals. This would again go against what evolution states. As we see in the fossil record with one animal transitioning into another we get,
fish -> amphibians -> reptiles -> dinosaurs/mammals -> birds

If we were to follow what the Bible says here we would have to have
fish/birds -> reptiles/dinosaurs/mammals and I'm not even sure where amphibians would fit in.

Another thing that get's harped on is the whole "everything after it's kind" statement in the Bible which implies no transitioning from one species to the next. This is likely one of the biggest arguments between scripture and evolutionary theory.
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

I still think evolution is false and creationism is correct.


Thank you for your oh-so wonderfully expressed opinion. But, as you have demonstrated that you have no idea what evolution actually is, how it works, and what it claims, you have no ground to stand on whether it is correct or not. Once you learn this, then you won't even need to argue it as you'll see it makes sense, has mountains of evidence backing it, and has been proven.
Dewi1066
offline
Dewi1066
539 posts
Nomad

I still think evolution is false and creationism is correct.


Without giving a single argument to why you think it? That is the equivalent of stopping someone in the street just to tell them they can carry on walking!
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Thank you for your oh-so wonderfully expressed opinion. But, as you have demonstrated that you have no idea what evolution actually is, how it works, and what it claims, you have no ground to stand on whether it is correct or not. Once you learn this, then you won't even need to argue it as you'll see it makes sense, has mountains of evidence backing it, and has been proven.


Not to mention he has blatantly ignored any counterargument put forth to him. It's quite possible he knows this and is just trolling.

Anyway anyone else want to take a stab at the creationist article?
Kasic
offline
Kasic
5,552 posts
Jester

I've got another question for all creationists/people who think evolution is wrong.

Why are you so against it? As macfan so called it, "evilution" that seems to be a pretty common view of the theory. Creationists/others seem to think it's a personal attack against their beliefs and thus go against it solely on that basis.

News flash: Evolution -is- proven, and it -doesn't- disprove creation. At most it disproves the literal interpretation of creation stories of everything being created "as is." Evolution in no way says that there can be no god or supernatural being which created life. If you want to attack that, learn what you're talking about and chase after abiogensis at the very least, that goes against the need for a supernatural being to have created life.

ChillzMaster
offline
ChillzMaster
1,434 posts
Nomad

I'm a man of the Inverted Star, a true theistic Satanist who believes that God made it all, but I'm also a huge proponent of evolution. I'm not a huge Bible guy, but the way Your Friendly Neighborhood Satanist sees it, couldn't some Divine just have put everything here, and kinda waited to see what happened? The Cogs and gears were placed and set upon a neverending hill, and all they had to do was roll?

-Chillz still isn't a fan of The Creator... regardless of that Creating business...

cablecar1
offline
cablecar1
158 posts
Nomad

couldn't some Divine just have put everything here, and kinda waited to see what happened?

Well, that would be a different god than my God. A god who creates a hostile, molten universe and lets generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations, and generations of things die cannot truly be the God I worship and have faith in. I believe that God created a world that was without sin and it was the decision of man to bring sin into the world. God said, "Please, put your trust in me. Do not eat from the fruit or you shall surely die,"
With this alternate idea, that God simply set up a universe and waited to see what would happen, there has to already be sin, which would mean that God was the creator of sin. If something dies it has sin in it, and to think that God created the universe just to have things die of sin and become a little bit smarter over millions of years or whatever... it's just a filthy abomination that completely defies the character of God.
Deth666
offline
Deth666
653 posts
Nomad

With this alternate idea, that God simply set up a universe and waited to see what would happen, there has to already be sin, which would mean that God was the creator of sin. If something dies it has sin in it, and to think that God created the universe just to have things die of sin and become a little bit smarter over millions of years or whatever... it's just a filthy abomination that completely defies the character of God.


If god set up a universe and waited to see what would happen, doesn't that mean the universe was created without sin. I mean it would be a "virgin" universe. Unless God intentionally set up the universe with sin. Maybe I misunderstood what you said?
Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,824 posts
Peasant

More likely: The world was set up by an alien form, playing God in multitude, as if God wanted perfection, I would live forever, or perhaps, no one would exist because who's more imperfect than us? If I could obtain perfection, I would, but seeing as how the possibly existent God wanted to do it but didn't, I have many a speculation

cablecar1
offline
cablecar1
158 posts
Nomad

In a perfect universe nothing dies (at least that's what I believe). How can there be evolution if nothing dies? As can be seen, in the past, things have died. A lot. If God set up in the universe and wanted it to change with great versatility you can't have a bunch of molten rocks and hope they become alive. There has to be lots of this dying for these tiny single-celled creatures to become sentient men, so I just don't see how God would want the universe to form that way. It doesn't make sense. Random chance doesn't work for a completely perfect and sinless God.

Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,824 posts
Peasant

I'm not sure who you're fighting for, or what your point is. Are you saying that a God, who remains unconfirmed in existence (UIE), set up the world/s for evolution, but was mum on perfection?

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

and generations of things die cannot truly be the God I worship and have faith in.


We only need to look at human history (even if you believe in a young Earth) to see numerous generations die off.

God said, "Please, put your trust in me. Do not eat from the fruit or you shall surely die,"


Actually it specifically states he would die that day and according to the story he lived for hundreds of years after the event.

With this alternate idea, that God simply set up a universe and waited to see what would happen, there has to already be sin, which would mean that God was the creator of sin.


Sin is nothing more than an offense against a religious or moral law. So if God is the law giver than sin is only sin because God said it was. This would mean he is in respect the creator of sin in about the same way a government makes things illegal.

If something dies it has sin in it, and to think that God created the universe just to have things die of sin and become a little bit smarter over millions of years or whatever...


Things die because the biological functions that sustain the organism eventually fail. Committing a an immoral action isn't going to fundamentally alter human biology to such a degree. Even if you want to argue that the fruit once ingested could alter humans in this way it still would not have applied to the rest of the universe.
Masterforger
offline
Masterforger
1,824 posts
Peasant

Wow. At least we know where MageGrayWolf's allegiance lies.
As for sin, Mage's right. It's merely an action that breaks the religious law of an order. Thus, it would be like breaking the law, with less punishment. It wouldn't affect death that much

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

In a perfect universe nothing dies (at least that's what I believe).


Such a universe wouldn't be capable of life in the first place. Now clearly in the Genesis story Adam and Eve could and did eat, not just that one fruit but other stuff as well. Think of what happens in the act of eating. This very act deprives another living organism of life, if even in part. So if Adam and Eve lived in a perfect world they wouldn't eat anything making the creation of a digestive track, teeth and mouth making it capable of consuming food entirely pointless.
cablecar1
offline
cablecar1
158 posts
Nomad

Actually it specifically states he would die that day

No...
We only need to look at human history (even if you believe in a young Earth) to see numerous generations die off.

Exactly. Because things that are not perfect (things contaminated with sin) die. I don't think you saw my point at all.
Sin is nothing more than an offense against a religious or moral law

Sin is what makes something imperfect. Perfection and imperfection can not be together in a person or thing. The thing either is or isn't perfect.
Things die because the biological functions that sustain the organism eventually fail

Would that happen to a completely perfect, flawless organism that was not built to die? No, it would not. Does this happen to imperfect, flawed organisms? Yes, it does.
This very act deprives another living organism of life

Fruit = Stored sugar? Right? I don't see your point. It's not a sin to eat fruit...
To solve a little bit of confusion, I do not believe that the universe is billions of years old, I believe in young-earth creation. I'm not suggesting that God made a sinful universe. I was trying to explain why that was unreasonable and the Macro-evolution-everything-came-from-an-amoeba-theory does not and can not align with my faith.
Showing 286-300 of 779