Evolution vs Creation-Comparing each View

[Backglass]

As i said: creationism is, at its root, a belief that the bible is literally true.

I think the original intent of the thread was to shed presuppositions at the door and look at evidence:

i.e. I won't say the Bible is literally true if you don't say that it's patently false.

So, instead of everyone yelling "you're stupid and I know the truth" why don't we try saying "One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning / development of the planet / species is ____________"

Just a thought.

OK.

One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning of the planet is the fact that no diety has shown himself to mankind, ever. Since there is no reason for such a being to hide, one can only surmise that it does not exist and that the stories of it's existence were written out of fear/ignorance of the unknown.

[bryguy]

Put those infants in an isolated area for 100,000 years, never exposed to LANGUAGE and they will never speak with words. Speech is LEARNED. What does this have to do with evolution? If no one was here to TEACH the apes to speak...they would never be able to speak.

Are you mad? Do you think that we only know how to speak because we live with others who can speak? We would have the same ability to speak no matter how we were bought up, what your saying is complete crap.

Also, humans were never taught how to speak. Btw, according to you, who taught us how to speak in the beggining, the 100,000 odd years ago?

ty, i was just about to make that same point.

[bryguy]

oh and just to let u guys know, here is a definition of both.


Creationism: A belief that the bible is literally true.

Evolutionism: The belief that everything happened by chance


both of these are wrong, for creationist, they believe that there was a world wide flood, but there is not enough water anywhere on earth and there never has been enough water on earth for a great flood. And also, genesis was written by moses, and there is proof that for about the time that the "great flood" supposedly took place, there was a black sea flood. And the black sea flood had been very large, and at the time, people had been living around the black sea for a while, so there were lots of cities around it. Oh and at the time the black sea was called New Euxine Lake, and it was a freshwater lake at the time

[bryguy]

And for evolutionist, they believe the earth is old (which it most probably is) and that everything happened by chance, well i got some info for u guys


1. The big bang theory was made my a CHRISTIAN PRIEST of how he thought God had made the universe.

2. Charles Darwin, the man who came up with the idea of evolution, renounced it on his deathbed, because he did not want it to be taken as that there is no God, he just thought that was how God made it. (oh, and Darwin was also a Christian)

3. There were historians around Jesus' time, that did not believe in any God but the romans gods, and they even put that in Isreal there was a man named Jesus doing healing acts, and bringing people back to life from the dead.

4. Something had to have created the stuff that created the big bang (if there ever was one) so what created that stuff? and what created the stuff that created that stuff? this question can go on forever, until u have nothing. All in all, only God can create something from nothing.

[MR. Nate]

One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning of the planet is the fact that no diety has shown himself to mankind, ever. Since there is no reason for such a being to hide, one can only surmise that it does not exist and that the stories of it's existence were written out of fear/ignorance of the unknown.

And for evolutionist, they believe the earth is old (which it most probably is) and that everything happened by chance, well i got some info for u guys


1. The big bang theory was made my a CHRISTIAN PRIEST of how he thought God had made the universe.

2. Charles Darwin, the man who came up with the idea of evolution, renounced it on his deathbed, because he did not want it to be taken as that there is no God, he just thought that was how God made it. (oh, and Darwin was also a Christian)

3. There were historians around Jesus' time, that did not believe in any God but the romans gods, and they even put that in Isreal there was a man named Jesus doing healing acts, and bringing people back to life from the dead.

4. Something had to have created the stuff that created the big bang (if there ever was one) so what created that stuff? and what created the stuff that created that stuff? this question can go on forever, until u have nothing. All in all, only God can create something from nothing.

I bolded the irrelevant and italicized the presuppositions. I hope it is helpful.

[heavycola]

As i said: creationism is, at its root, a belief that the bible is literally true.

I think the original intent of the thread was to shed presuppositions at the door and look at evidence:

i.e. I won't say the Bible is literally true if you don't say that it's patently false.

So, instead of everyone yelling "you're stupid and I know the truth" why don't we try saying "One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning / development of the planet / species is ____________"

Just a thought.

Fine, but my later point was that you can't separate creationism and the bible. If we are to shed all presuppositions, then we have to examine the physical evidence for every creation story in every culture around the world, not just the hebrew version.
The basis of creationism is not 'there is a load of evidence to support this', it is 'the bible is the literal truth'.
Creationism and evolution are not comparable theories.

[Snorri1234]

(actually: if we can now see millions of light years in every direction around us, and we still haven't found heaven, then just how high was this tower of babel? Obviously it's not a symbolical account of why different people speak different languages - it's in the bible, after all - but if it was tall enough to annoy god, how high WAS it? That musta bin some building!)

Hehehehehehe.

Also, this thread is ridiculous.

[jay_a2j]

Speech was never first taught to humans.

HE SAID IT!!
We have different races because of melanin intake in different areas of the world. Black people have a lot of melanin and are darker than Asians for example.

Your little "Bible" can't explain who taught apes to talk huh?

Frustration sets in***


The Bible doesn't explain it because it NEVER happened! Man did NOT evolve from apes. God created man WITH the ability to SPEAK!


Tower of Babel:

Man spoke one language.
Man starts to build a tower that could reach high into the heavens (to reach God)
God dispersed man giving them different races and tongues which would explain why Asians originated from Asia, Black originated from Africa, Indians from North and South America, White from Europe and Olive from the middle east.


So where does evolution explain this? Were there different species of apes evolving into different races? Creationism is , in my view, just so much easier to believe.


but there is not enough water anywhere on earth and there never has been enough water on earth for a great flood


Why do you put God in a box?

[joecoolfrog]

As i said: creationism is, at its root, a belief that the bible is literally true.

I think the original intent of the thread was to shed presuppositions at the door and look at evidence:

i.e. I won't say the Bible is literally true if you don't say that it's patently false.

So, instead of everyone yelling "you're stupid and I know the truth" why don't we try saying "One of the evidences that I have found compelling for my belief structure on the beginning / development of the planet / species is ____________"

Just a thought.

Fine, but my later point was that you can't separate creationism and the bible. If we are to shed all presuppositions, then we have to examine the physical evidence for every creation story in every culture around the world, not just the hebrew version.
The basis of creationism is not 'there is a load of evidence to support this', it is 'the bible is the literal truth'.
Creationism and evolution are not comparable theories.

This was the point made by the USA Supreme Court when it rejected the concept of creationism as a Science. Science must by its very nature be based on natural law alone wheras creationism,and indeed religion,is based on belief in the supernatural. It was also opinioned that science must be flexible and open to revision and correction,creationism however is rigid , dogmatic and accepts no challenge to its position.
Evolution is a theory based on natural law and open to refinement, creationism offers nothing other than a defence of religion and has no scientific basis, it is not an alternative theory. In short if creationism is taught as being equaly valid to evolution then it is in violation of the first amendment of the constitution.

[Backglass]

Why do you put God in a box?

Why do you live your life for legend & folklore?

[Snorri1234]

Cephalopods can communicate by flashing signals. We didn't teach them that.

And its NOT SPEECH!!!!!!!!!

Okay, in spite of knowing you won't listen, I'll explain this clearly.

We have the ability to speak because our body is built in a certain way to allow it. Animals plain and simple don't have it. (Except for some parrots.) So it's only logical that animals don't talk.
This doesn't mean that animals don't communicate, because they certainly do. And language is a form of communication. We speak because we need to communicate and language is the fastest and best way to do that, because it allows for very complex communication.

Basically, language started with us needing to say "we go there, hunt." and evolved to the complex stuff it is today. And it will continue evolving even more.


(Also, I read a story about some mother who had locked her 3 children in a cellar for 12 years. The kids developed a language to communicate. It was very basic, but it was still speech.)

[jay_a2j]

(Also, I read a story about some mother who had locked her 3 children in a cellar for 12 years. The kids developed a language to communicate. It was very basic, but it was still speech.)

How old were they?

Had they been exposed to speech before the lock up?

Where is the documentation of this "story"?

[Backglass]

2. Charles Darwin, the man who came up with the idea of evolution, renounced it on his deathbed, because he did not want it to be taken as that there is no God, he just thought that was how God made it. (oh, and Darwin was also a Christian)

This Sunday School story is an unfounded urban legend. This following is from www.christiananswers.com no less!

"The main problem with all these stories is that they were all denied by members of Darwin's family. Francis Darwin wrote to Thomas Huxley on February 8, 1887, that a report that Charles had renounced evolution on his deathbed was "false and without any kind of foundation," and in 1917 Francis affirmed that he had "no reason whatever to believe that he [his father] ever altered his agnostic point of view." Charles's daughter (Henrietta Litchfield) wrote on page 12 of the London evangelical weekly, The Christian, dated February 23, 1922,

"I was present at his deathbed. Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier … The whole story has no foundation whatever." [The Darwin Legend]

It therefore appears that Darwin did not recant, and it is a pity that to this day the Lady Hope story occasionally appears in tracts published and given out by well-meaning people.

Something had to have created the stuff that created the big bang (if there ever was one) so what created that stuff? and what created the stuff that created that stuff? this question can go on forever, until u have nothing. All in all, only God can create something from nothing.

Why is it that infinity is perfectly OK when dealing with gods, but suddenly preposterous when gods are taken out of the equation? The universe is infinite and has always been here. No gods necessary.

[heavycola]

Where is the documentation of this "story"?

I think my ironymeter just exploded.

[vtmarik]

Why do you put God in a box?

Why do you live your life for legend & folklore?

Why do you eat your bread with the butter-side up?

Certainly the notion of eating toast butter-side-up couldn't have developed on its own given the observations of butter, toast, and gravity. God must've done it and indeed he did. After the Tower of Babel incident, he then instructed all of mankind to be unified in eating their toast with the butter-side up.

[Snorri1234]

(Also, I read a story about some mother who had locked her 3 children in a cellar for 12 years. The kids developed a language to communicate. It was very basic, but it was still speech.)

How old were they?

Had they been exposed to speech before the lock up?

Where is the documentation of this "story"?

I have no idea where to find it, was in the news some time ago. And they were probably exposed to a little language.

Also, kudos on ignoring everything else in my post, instead focusing on a small anecdote I just included for the hell of it. Great tactic.

[jay_a2j]

Okay, in spite of knowing you won't listen, I'll explain this clearly.

We have the ability to speak because our body is built in a certain way to allow it. Animals plain and simple don't have it. (Except for some parrots.) So it's only logical that animals don't talk.
This doesn't mean that animals don't communicate, because they certainly do. And language is a form of communication. We speak because we need to communicate and language is the fastest and best way to do that, because it allows for very complex communication.

Basically, language started with us needing to say "we go there, hunt." and evolved to the complex stuff it is today. And it will continue evolving even more.

Most of this has already been addressed. (flip back a few pages)

Language is a form of communication but Communication is not a form of language.


"we go hunt there"...yeah ok...and you criticize the creation of man from dust. I wonder just how improbable it is to go from a non-speaking individual to "we go there hunt" and the person you are talking to understands this. Much less how THAT person was taught what "we", "go", "hunt" and "there" meant. Taking evolution as the "gradual process" it is, when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it. The whole concept doesn't make sense.


Happy now?

[heavycola]

jay, reading your posts is like listening to nails on a blackboard sometimes. Do you wilfully misunderstand everything said to you or do you just ignore it?

[Backglass]

"we go hunt there"...yeah ok...and you critisize the creation of man from dust. I wonder just how improbable it is to go from a non-speaking individual to "we go there hunt" and the person you are talking to understands this. Much less how THAT person was taught what "we", "go", "hunt" and "there" meant. Taking evolution as the "gradual process" it is, when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it. The whole concept doesn't make sense.

And yet the concept that human beings were magically created from dust does?! Wow. You really will fall for anything wont you. I'll bet the carnies at the fair love to see you coming.

This is exactly how language evolved. First grunts, noises, and gradually words formed. Why are you so quick to say "when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it"? What makes you think this? Are you now an "early man memory expert" as well?

Let's see. It isn't possible for early humans to invent and teach each other language from memory, but it is perfectly plausible for a bible full of stories to be written down from memory with 100% accuracy.

Got it.

[bryguy]

Speech was never first taught to humans.

HE SAID IT!!
We have different races because of melanin intake in different areas of the world. Black people have a lot of melanin and are darker than Asians for example.

Your little "Bible" can't explain who taught apes to talk huh?

Frustration sets in***


The Bible doesn't explain it because it NEVER happened! Man did NOT evolve from apes. God created man WITH the ability to SPEAK!


Tower of Babel:

Man spoke one language.
Man starts to build a tower that could reach high into the heavens (to reach God)
God dispersed man giving them different races and tongues which would explain why Asians originated from Asia, Black originated from Africa, Indians from North and South America, White from Europe and Olive from the middle east.


So where does evolution explain this? Were there different species of apes evolving into different races? Creationism is , in my view, just so much easier to believe.


but there is not enough water anywhere on earth and there never has been enough water on earth for a great flood


Why do you put God in a box?

yes it is much easier to believe, and I am a christian, but the bible was not ment to be taken literally, it gives examples. And God could have had a great flood, but then we would still be flooded, and another thing, if the world was flooded, all plants (except those who live in the water) would be wiped out, so it is impossible for a dove to bring back a twig from a tree.

[bryguy]

"we go hunt there"...yeah ok...and you critisize the creation of man from dust. I wonder just how improbable it is to go from a non-speaking individual to "we go there hunt" and the person you are talking to understands this. Much less how THAT person was taught what "we", "go", "hunt" and "there" meant. Taking evolution as the "gradual process" it is, when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it. The whole concept doesn't make sense.

And yet the concept that human beings were magically created from dust does?! Wow. You really will fall for anything wont you. I'll bet the carnies at the fair love to see you coming.

This is exactly how language evolved. First grunts, noises, and gradually words formed. Why are you so quick to say "when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it"? What makes you think this? Are you now an "early man memory expert" as well?

Let's see. It isn't possible for early humans to invent and teach each other language from memory, but it is perfectly plausible for a bible full of stories to be written down from memory with 100% accuracy.

Got it.

ok just thought i would let u know, that is most likely how language evolved, and language can evolve, as is evident for over the last 300 years, if u speak English and went back 300 years to england, u would understand NOTHING that was being said. And the bible was not written until most of the stuff in it was ancient history

[vtmarik]

Again, Jay, let me repeat:

Language is not a function of biology, and is therefore not something you can use to disprove evolution.

The development of language from grunts and clicks to phonemes and morphemes involves different ideas and theories.

I posted the link two pages back, and I don't feel like reposting it. Search Wikipedia for "Origin of Language."

[Snorri1234]

Okay, in spite of knowing you won't listen, I'll explain this clearly.

We have the ability to speak because our body is built in a certain way to allow it. Animals plain and simple don't have it. (Except for some parrots.) So it's only logical that animals don't talk.
This doesn't mean that animals don't communicate, because they certainly do. And language is a form of communication. We speak because we need to communicate and language is the fastest and best way to do that, because it allows for very complex communication.

Basically, language started with us needing to say "we go there, hunt." and evolved to the complex stuff it is today. And it will continue evolving even more.

We go hunt there is merely something we would at least understand a bit
Most of this has already been addressed. (flip back a few pages)

Language is a form of communication but Communication is not a form of language.


"we go hunt there"...yeah ok...and you criticize the creation of man from dust. I wonder just how improbable it is to go from a non-speaking individual to "we go there hunt" and the person you are talking to understands this. Much less how THAT person was taught what "we", "go", "hunt" and "there" meant. Taking evolution as the "gradual process" it is, when a word would have been formed, it would soon die out and be forgotten before others could learn it. The whole concept doesn't make sense.


Happy now?

"We go there, hunt " is merely something we would at least understand a bit. It's not so hard to actually explain someone what "we" and "hunt" mean, because it's something you friggin put as a general rule. You don't go immediately from non-speaking to complex sentences. (Which this one already is.)

And why would a word die out before it can be learned?

[bryguy]

hmmm, strange how all the evolutionist here avoid the question i told them to ask themselves.

[vtmarik]

hmmm, strange how all the evolutionist here avoid the question i told them to ask themselves.

I'm sorry, I must've missed it.

What was the question again?