Posted by Mr_Fiend And you fellas get on my case for saying things like "just read the bible to find out". Ha, none the less, I wont mind cracking open a book supporting evolution to see what all the fuss is about, wouldnt be the first time.

Why not open it up. Start with some valid criticisms of the major points in any of those books. I've got lots for the bible. Wanna hear some?

Bible = bad evidence. Dawkins, Dennet = good evidence and logically valid arguments.

Posted by Mr_Fiend But lets not open up that can of worms, I've debated the creationism vs evolution WAY too many times....

Of course you have, since evolution is a valid scientific theory supported by all available evidence (like fossils, carbin dating, astronomy, and least of all biology) while on the other hand creationism is a joke and is always reduced to faith, which is of course evidence of nothing but wishful thinking and intellectual laziness.

Posted by Mr_Fiend And you fellas get on my case for saying things like "just read the bible to find out". Ha, none the less, I wont mind cracking open a book supporting evolution to see what all the fuss is about, wouldnt be the first time. But lets not open up that can of worms, I've debated the creationism vs evolution WAY too many times....

Hey, like I said, I've read the Bible plenty of times. These are a different sort of book, though. They don't try to convince you to believe in an unexplainable thing. They just do a really, really good job of explaining how it works. Evolution can be a really difficult concept to wrap your head around, but just like any slightly complex process, once you figure it out, it's like a light bulb going off in your head, and suddenly you can see how it applies to all sorts of things.

And really, you needn't abandon your Christian faith to understand evolution. There are lots of Christians, even evangelical ones, who realize that the stories in the old testament are metaphorical, and that God may have created the world using natural processes, like evolution, that we can understand.

I mean, what is more impressive, a magician God that shouts, "Abracadabra!" and rips away the sheet to reveal a fully formed universe, or a God so wise that he simply writes a few equations and gives them a nudge- and watches as our infinitely complex universe grows and unfolds, all on its own, exactly as he planned it.

Posted by Avius I mean, what is more impressive, a magician God that shouts, "Abracadabra!" and rips away the sheet to reveal a fully formed universe, or a God so wise that he simply writes a few equations and gives them a nudge- and watches as our infinitely complex universe grows and unfolds, all on its own, exactly as he planned it.

A universe that arrived at its present state through natural processes that are still occurring. Where does God enter in? I have no need of that hypothesis.

Oh, neither do I. I was trying to find some middle ground, is all.

Posted by Avius And really, you needn't abandon your Christian faith to understand evolution. There are lots of Christians, even evangelical ones, who realize that the stories in the old testament are metaphorical, and that God may have created the world using natural processes, like evolution, that we can understand. I mean, what is more impressive, a magician God that shouts, "Abracadabra!" and rips away the sheet to reveal a fully formed universe, or a God so wise that he simply writes a few equations and gives them a nudge- and watches as our infinitely complex universe grows and unfolds, all on its own, exactly as he planned it.

Finally something we can agree on. Yes, I would also agree that the old testament is full of metaphors, of which could have completely different meaning from they actually say. One thing that I have always thought is that it says in Genesis that God created everything in 6 days (rested on the 7th). But elsewhere in the bible it says that a day in heaven is like a thousand years on earth. So that means that it took 6 thousand years just to form the earth and life? Could "evolution" have played a role in that? I dont know. When it says God "spoke" things into existence, who is to say what that exactly means? I still have a ton of unanswered questions.

Having said that, believing we evolved from soulless apes is just plain stupid to me for numerous reasons. Just because we are genetically similar and physically similar to something, doesnt mean we had to evolve from it. Hell, we have more genetic compatibilities with pigs than apes. There are of course obvious forms of evolution all the time, domesticated dogs and cats are excellent examples. But they have not, nor will they ever gain a soul and a conscience (which no animal has, only humans) with right and wrong morals. So that would mean that somehow we gained a soul and humanity if we evolved from wild animals. Thats even more outrageous.

Posted by Mr_Fiend I still have a ton of unanswered questions.

You and me both, brother.

So interestingly, the Hebrew word "yowm" that is translated as "day" in genesis can also be translated as "period of time" without any connotation of length. So really, each "day" could be a thousand years, or a billion, or the periods of creation could be of totally different lengths.

Having said that, believing we evolved from soulless apes is just plain stupid to me for numerous reasons. Just because we are genetically similar and physically similar to something, doesnt mean we had to evolve from it. Hell, we have more genetic compatibilities with pigs than apes. There are of course obvious forms of evolution all the time, domesticated dogs and cats are excellent examples. But they have not, nor will they ever gain a soul and a conscience (which no animal has, only humans) with right and wrong morals. So that would mean that somehow we gained a soul and humanity if we evolved from wild animals. Thats even more outrageous.

Come now, don't just go making stuff up. Pigs have WAAY LESS in common with us than monkeys.

Next, I think you are underestimating apes and animals in general. The Bible does not say that animals do not have souls. In fact, in Genesis 1:30, they are referred to as "nephesh chayah," or "living soul," the same term that is applied to Adam in Genesis 2:7.

Many animals, and the great apes in particular, have been shown to have incredibly complex cultures and moral systems. A study was done where two monkeys were put in cages next to each other. One monkey was given a lever that when pulled, would deliver some food to him, and a painful electric shock to the monkey next door, which he could see and hear. After a few pulls, he learned that this action was causing pain to his neighbor, and stopped pulling the lever. He refused to pull the lever, and I believed they stopped the study when the monkey was in danger of dying from starvation.

These animals' ability to communicate is somewhat less than ours, but you wouldn't argue that a human born with a genetic defect that disrupts speech is soulless. You might just grant that person some leeway as far as moral matters are concerned if they are unable to understand what is expected of them.

Finally, even if you stick to the interpretation that animals do not have souls, or have some sort of inferior soul, are you saying that it would be beyond God's power to upgrade to a new model if or when he saw fit?

Posted by Avius Next, I think you are underestimating apes and animals in general. The Bible does not say that animals do not have souls. In fact, in Genesis 1:30, they are referred to as "nephesh chayah," or "living soul," the same term that is applied to Adam in Genesis 2:7.

Yes, you're right, it doesnt say "they do not have souls", but it is a very strong implication that they dont. The biggest being we are not suppose to save animals like we are instructed to do with man. Yes, animals suffer as result from sin just like us, but they have no soul of which satan wants. The bible also referrs to them as beasts and that we are to have dominion over them. And the bible said that man was created in His image (his image being a spirit or soul), creatures were not created in His image.

Posted by Avius Many animals, and the great apes in particular, have been shown to have incredibly complex cultures and moral systems. A study was done where two monkeys were put in cages next to each other. One monkey was given a lever that when pulled, would deliver some food to him, and a painful electric shock to the monkey next door, which he could see and hear. After a few pulls, he learned that this action was causing pain to his neighbor, and stopped pulling the lever. He refused to pull the lever, and I believed they stopped the study when the monkey was in danger of dying from starvation.

If I'm not mistaken, that would be an example of "survival of the fitess", animals with higher brain functions realizing the need to protect their own kind. I view that as a survival response and not evidence of a soul.

Posted by Avius are you saying that it would be beyond God's power to upgrade to a new model if or when he saw fit?

Actually, no. I DO believe that it was possible that there was a primative human/ape like race (Pre-Adamite)that did in fact exist (obvious from fosels we have found). And I believe that race or races existed thousands or millions of years before Adam was even created. But these were soulless creatures, human like bodies with no spirit, unable to "fellowship" with God. So then God created man (Adam) in His image with a soul.

Gen 1:2 "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." That to me implies that the earth was already there, and void, almost as if it was a clean slate wiped clean from a previous life. Then, God started his 6 days (or 6 thousand years) of creation in the next verses.

Its just a theory of course, like evolution. But it would certainly fill some gaps, but raise many questions at the same time. But the big question this theory raises, could this be the source of all the "evolution" evidence collected?

Posted by Mr_Fiend Having said that, believing we evolved from soulless apes is just plain stupid to me for numerous reasons. Just because we are genetically similar and physically similar to something, doesnt mean we had to evolve from it.

Actually, we didn't evolve from apes, we and apes evolved from a common ancestor. It is an important distinction.

Its just a theory of course, like evolution. But it would certainly fill some gaps, but raise many questions at the same time. But the big question this theory raises, could this be the source of all the "evolution" evidence collected?

You seem to have theory and hypothesis confused.

Posted by Mr_Fiend Yes, you're right, it doesnt say "they do not have souls", but it is a very strong implication that they dont. ....... (his image being a spirit or soul), creatures were not created in His image.

Ok, well I tried. I'm not going to argue over Bible interpretation because that is pretty much "whatever floats yer boat" territory, as literally thousands of disagreeing Christian sects can attest to.

If I'm not mistaken, that would be an example of "survival of the fittest", animals with higher brain functions realizing the need to protect their own kind. I view that as a survival response and not evidence of a soul.

Hey, awesome! So we can agree that intelligence and altruistic behavior are beneficial, fitness-enhancing traits, and they are not indicative of a soul. How about language? There are some absolutely AMAZING recent studies on primate language I could dig up.

Actually, no. I DO believe that it was possible that there was a primitive human/ape like race (Pre-Adamite)that did in fact exist (obvious from fossils we have found). And I believe that race or races existed thousands or millions of years before Adam was even created. But these were soulless creatures, human like bodies with no spirit, unable to "fellowship" with God. So then God created man (Adam) in His image with a soul.

Ok, so then in this view evolution is still on the table as an option? For the sake of argument we can assume that God would insert a proper soul once his pre-arranged conditions were met.

Gen 1:2 "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters." That to me implies that the earth was already there, and void, almost as if it was a clean slate wiped clean from a previous life. Then, God started his 6 days (or 6 thousand years) of creation in the next verses.

Or maybe the first "day" was 10 billion years long, the second 1.5 billion, the third 500 million, and so forth, until the sixth was a mere five or six million years? Consider it. All physical evidence shows that this is the sort of timescale we're dealing with.

Its just a theory of course, like evolution. But it would certainly fill some gaps, but raise many questions at the same time. But the big question this theory raises, could this be the source of all the evolution evidence collected?

Splumer makes a point. Evolution IS a theory. Like gravity. A very well supported theory, which is the very best you can do in science. Some scientists still debate exactly HOW it works, but the fact that it DOES work is observable and testable (and really, the argument over how it works is pretty weak). Bible stories, since they are by their nature un-testable, are hypotheses. These two words are interchangeable in vernacular English, but in science, "theory" is reserved for explanations that can be tested by experiment and observation.

And yes, I do believe that evolution is, in fact, the source of all the evolution evidence we've collected. Does it raise questions? Hell yes! I, for one, am excited to learn the answers (which will hopefully bring along some bouncing baby questions of their own!).

Posted by Avius There are some absolutely AMAZING recent studies on primate language I could dig up.

Spare me, please. Communication, even advanced communitcation, is not evidence of a soul.

Posted by Avius Ok, so then in this view evolution is still on the table as an option? For the sake of argument we can assume that God would insert a proper soul once his pre-arranged conditions were met.

I dont know everything that happened when man was created, no one knows everything, so it leaves certain areas open for a "hypothesis" (as you fellas emphasized). Do I believe we evolved from an "ape like" creature, lmao no! Do I believe creatures can evolve, yes, but to only a certain extent. I prefer to call it "adapting" rather than "evolving".

Posted by Avius Bible stories, since they are by their nature un-testable, are hypotheses.

For one, all the places in which these "stories" were set, are or were actual places. And there has be a ton of evidence uncovered in the past decades to support the basis of many bible "stories". Including the one (hopefully soon to be documented) about Noah's ark. Its still sitting in ice in Turkey on top of Mt Ararat. Google "Ararat anomaly", awesome stuff. Then of course there is the great mystery of who has the ark of the covenant, lots of evidence to prove that exists too. Thats just to name a few.

Posted by Mr_Fiend I dont know everything that happened when man was created, no one knows everything, so it leaves certain areas open for a "hypothesis" (as you fellas emphasized). Do I believe we evolved from an "ape like" creature, lmao no! Do I believe creatures can evolve, yes, but to only a certain extent. I prefer to call it "adapting" rather than "evolving".

Whether you believe it or not has no bearing on its truth. Our great-grandparents were trilobites.

Then of course there is the great mystery of who has the ark of the covenant, lots of evidence to prove that exists too. Thats just to name a few.

Just saw something on discovery last week about this. Apparently it's kept in a chapel in Ethiopia, guarded by one monk who won't let anyone see it, despite the fact that letting people see it would prove its existence and remove a lot of controversy and give ammunition to theists.

Posted by Mr_Fiend Spare me, please. Communication, even advanced communitcation, is not evidence of a soul.

I shall spare you. We can agree on this as well, since it turns out that there is no evidence of a soul whatsoever.

I dont know everything that happened when man was created, no one knows everything, so it leaves certain areas open for a "hypothesis" (as you fellas emphasized). Do I believe we evolved from an "ape like" creature, lmao no! Do I believe creatures can evolve, yes, but to only a certain extent. I prefer to call it "adapting" rather than "evolving". For one, all the places in which these "stories" were set, are or were actual places. And there has be a ton of evidence uncovered in the past decades to support the basis of many bible "stories". Including the one (hopefully soon to be documented) about Noah's ark. Its still sitting in ice in Turkey on top of Mt Ararat. Google "Ararat anomaly", awesome stuff. Then of course there is the great mystery of who has the ark of the covenant, lots of evidence to prove that exists too. Thats just to name a few.

So let me get this straight. There are thousands of published papers, millions of pieces of physical evidence, and an entire, ongoing field of study that support evolution, and your response is "lmao that's stupid."

There is one old book of fairytales, a smudge on a mountainside (I saw a documentary on this, btw, and it's bunk) ,and some ancient cities actually exist (that's like saying King Kong is real because it took place in New York, an actual city), and you solemnly claim that this is proof of your point of view.

Basically, you are saying that my gigantic mountain of evidence is completely useless, and in the same breath, you seriously expect me to accept the little, inconsistent pile that you claim as evidence.

You need to do some studying about the nature of evidence, logic, and a little thing called confirmation bias. Because I'm trying real hard to listen to what you're saying and respond to it, and it's obvious that you are not returning the favor.

Here is your homework. If you can respond intelligently to these basic concepts, then this conversation can continue. Otherwise, I'm out.

http://www.uer.ca/...d=1&threadid=79911

http://en.wikipedi.../Confirmation_bias

Posted by Mr_Fiend Its just a theory of course, like evolution. But it would certainly fill some gaps, but raise many questions at the same time. But the big question this theory raises, could this be the source of all the "evolution" evidence collected?

I think you are all using "theory" differently. This may elucidate you.

180202.jpg (40 kb, 800x600)

Posted by Avius I shall spare you. We can agree on this as well, since it turns out that there is no evidence of a soul whatsoever.

There is no evidence disproving a soul either, or disproving God as well.

Posted by Avius So let me get this straight. There are thousands of published papers, millions of pieces of physical evidence, and an entire, ongoing field of study that support evolution, and your response is "lmao that's stupid."

The SAME thing applies to creationism, but the secular world and liberal media doesnt want to expound on the fact that there is a lot of research into creationism and tons of evidence disproving evolution. So far all they have found are bones and fossils, then put "theories" to work and came to a conclusion. Its still a "theory".

People say beleiving in something they cant prove is stupid (believing in God), well I say believing I came from some sort of primative ape (of which has not been proven) is stupid. So yes, thats my response.

Posted by Avius There is one old book of fairytales, a smudge on a mountainside (I saw a documentary on this, btw, and it's bunk) ,and some ancient cities actually exist (that's like saying King Kong is real because it took place in New York, an actual city), and you solemnly claim that this is proof of your point of view.

Hahaha, no, that would simple minded of me. I was pointing out those facts just to help give more credability to the bible.

Posted by Avius Basically, you are saying that my gigantic mountain of evidence is completely useless, and in the same breath, you seriously expect me to accept the little, inconsistent pile that you claim as evidence.

I dont expect you do anything. Just stating my case. You'll get your evidence when you have faith. If keep trying to rationalize something spiritual with a physical mind, you will give in to doubt which is the opposite of faith, and of which supplies you with the "evidence" you're looking for. Acquiring physical evidence of something non physical, is well, impossiple.

Posted by Avius You need to do some studying about the nature of evidence, logic, and a little thing called confirmation bias. Because I'm trying real hard to listen to what you're saying and respond to it, and it's obvious that you are not returning the favor.

I came to what I believe on my own for reasons earlier stated, not biased on what other people think or believe. I never had any preconceptions. My logical mind kicked in when I experienced what God had to offer me, and especially when I realized what the alternative was.

Beyond this point, nothing I say or present will change either of our beliefs, I think we both know its pointless because we both know who is gonna ask what and who is gonna reply with what answer.

I can only rationalize faith physically in so many ways, you have to experience its results first hand to understand. And to have faith in God, you must have zero doubt. The world can analyze faith forever, but they will never get the answer they are looking for.

Posted by Mr_Fiend I came to what I believe on my own for reasons earlier stated, not biased on what other people think or believe. I never had any preconceptions. My logical mind kicked in when I experienced what God had to offer me, and especially when I realized what the alternative was. Beyond this point, nothing I say or present will change either of our beliefs, I think we both know its pointless because we both know who is gonna ask what and who is gonna reply with what answer. I can only rationalize faith physically in so many ways, you have to experience its results first hand to understand. And to have faith in God, you must have zero doubt. The world can analyze faith forever, but they will never get the answer they are looking for.

Cool. Well, It's been fun, then. But it looks like we'll just agree to disagree on this one.

Happy exploring, and God bless!

Posted by Avius Cool. Well, It's been fun, then. But it looks like we'll just agree to disagree on this one. Happy exploring, and God bless!

Ha, love the inside joke there. Same to you dude, we all learned something.

And here is another one, for the love of God can a mod please lock the this thread?!?!

Posted by Mr_Fiend for the love of God can a mod please lock the this thread?!?!

Seconded.

Seems the great discussion has fizzled.



As requested.