Re: Evolution
 

Isn't that partially the "divine spark" theory?

Re: Evolution
 

Yes, but let's keep a discussion on that in a different thread.

Re: Evolution
 

The entirety of the Bible cannot be taken word-for-word. There are plenty of believers who take parts as allegory and other parts as truth.

The belief that the Earth is flat -- for instance -- stemmed from the Biblical text about Satan taking Jesus to the highest mountain on earth so that he could look out and see all the kingdoms of the world at once. There could be no mountain high enough for this purpose, even back then.

Re: Evolution
 

Interesting article here guys.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7539

Did humans evolve in fits and starts?

• 17:30 17 June 2005
• NewScientist.com news service
• Gaia Vince

Humans may have evolved during a few rapid bursts of genetic change, according to a new study of the human genome, which challenges the popular theory that evolution is a gradual process.

Researchers studying human chromosome 2 have discovered that the bulk of its DNA changes occurred in a relatively short period of time and, since then, only minor alterations have occurred......

Re: Evolution
 

The bible needs to be taken literally. God wrote it and God is perfect. You cannot just ignore something from the bible you disagree with. You must accept all of it or not at all.

Re: Evolution
 

This statement was ignorant.

God did not write the bible. Men wrote the bible. A lot of men, over a period of about 3000 years or so.

If you take everything written in the bible literally, then it has already been proven that God does not exist. So don't make the mistake in believing two year old philosophy. The earth is not flat. The earth was built over a period of billions of years, and life evolved on earth over a period of billions of years. You can either accept this or you can't. Your cjoice. Even the previous Pope has said not everything should be taken literally in the bible.

Re: Evolution
 

1) No, the Bible was written by people, who were at best inspired by God. A group of people decided which books to include and exclude from the Bible. Men -- imperfect men put the Bible together.

2) What is it with some Christians and extremes? So because I don't think everything in the bible is literal, I should just ignore all the stuff that makes sense even to good people who aren't Christians? Hogwash! It's misguided folks like you who drive people from the church. As you get older I hope you learn to see that this is a world full of greys -- there are very few absolutes.

Re: Evolution
 

I can't believe he thinks that "god wrote the bible". The bible has been interpreted and re-interpreted by men over the course of history.

Re: Evolution
 

I dont believe in "God" so I do not believe he wrote the bible. I was just saying it's dumb to just forget about some parts of the bible because they don't make sense. If God existed why would he let a book written about him have false imformation.

Re: Evolution
 

Wow, that's even worse coming from a non-believer.

Let me put your question another way. "Why does God allow anything bad to happen?"

One answer is that he made man with a will of his own, so that we wouldn't be puppets that say "I love you God" every time he pulls our strings. This way, people's love for him actually means something, because it is of our own free will. That same free will allows people to write whatever they want about God.

Make sense?

Of course the OT God used to wipe civilizations off the face of the earth if they made him too angry, but Jesus took care of that in the New Testament -- which brings up an interesting contradiction between the OT and the NT: If God is perfect (and the Bible is as well) then why did he change the rules in the middle of the game? The OT God is a legal and vengeful God. The NT God is all love and mercy, and there are far fewer grand miracles going on -- hmm.

Anyhow, I'm way off topic. My point is, although I reject certain parts of the bible, there are other parts that just make sense. I'm not talking about the miracles. I'm talking about things like "Let he who has no sin cast the first stone", "Love does not envy, it does not boast...". There is plenty of good wisdom in the bible. I don't even have to believe in God to recognize that.

Re: Evolution
 

Do you have any idea how ignorant that statement makes you look?

Re: Evolution
 

No, I don't.

Re: Evolution
 

guys if you want to discuss about relegion please do so but in the relegious discussion thread

Re: Evolution
 

Yes, lets keep this on the topic of Evolution! So stop talking about the Bible, the Torah, the Koran, and all other books focused on religion oot o' dis. Alright, so has anyone found ANY nonregiligous/spiritual/"faith-based" reason to disprove Darwin's Theory?

Re: Evolution
 

I don't really have an opinion on this, but I suppose it's a good thing!

Re: Evolution
 

Good thing you don't have an opinion? Nice sig.

Re: Evolution
 

What do you mean that species dont evolve in to other species? The common chicken evolved from dinosaurs you trying to tell me they are the same?? :lol:

Re: Evolution
 

An amazing and decisive point that will definitely change a lot of people's minds and bring tons of people away from the "lie" that is religion.

Prove it.

Re: Evolution
 

Yes, enough with Bible debates. And that's a damned good question--is there a scientific argument against evolutionary theory?

Awaiting the Intelligent Design stuff...:rolleyes:

How about a better theory--based in scientific method?

Many people think we must "believe in evolution," but this is silly...I don't need faith in the roundness of the Earth or the fact that when I drop something, it will fall to the ground. I simply agree with the evidence, since it is logically supported--my "belief" is not required. Therefore, if another person puts forth a better theory, other than Darwin's, I'll gladly take it into consideration.

Re: Evolution
 

When discussing evolution many people seem to get caught up in the mistake of thinking that animals evolve one trait at the time. This leaves room for the creationists, allowing them to vent arguments like "how can a flightless dinosaur benefit from a halfway evolved wing with all other traits being similar to other flightless dinosaurs?" Fossils suggest that all other traits are changing as well. it is not like a humanmade plane where you alter one feature at the time to get it to lift of the ground.

Re: Evolution
 

No, I haven't read the whol thread but this has to be brought up, and dear god it may have been already brought up.

This is the basic battle of Physicists vs. Metaphysicists. One being totally concrete thinkers, the other of surreal thought. There is no way the two will ever agree on any form of this subject matter simply because of a few reasons:

1. Physical thinkers beleive that everything has to be proven. What can be done, must be seen, heard, and felt. Metaphysical thinkers believe that we, as humans, are unable to comprehend the possibilities of a fourth (proven now, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesseract) or fifth or sixth dimensions. We can't feel, see, prove, hear, or use any sense we don't know of to beleive in something that might be true.

2. Most aethiests are Physical thinkers. Most religious are Metphysical thinkers. Aethiests and Religious don't agree, why would Physical v. Metphysical thinkers?

3. Physicists take a complete history driven agenda as to proof. Metaphysists take the more psychological approach to things.

4. So physiscists think that meta's are ridiculous because they have no proof for what they want to show, while metaphysicist feels thast that the physicist is weakminded for being unable to comprehend the fact that there might be something out there that the human mind is unable to comprehend.

I see most all physicist people here, and being very one minded. You need to think like a Metaphysicist in order to understand both sides of the argument. Have you ever seen, felt, or heard an albino albana? Doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Re: Evolution
 

:confused: Scientists have been using fourth, fifth, n-dimensions for some time now, so how can they not 'comprehend the possibilities of"?

Re: Evolution
 

In truth, in metaphysics the physical world/experience is generally treated as a corrupted or partial manifestation of the ideal or total metaphysical world, or as our collective perception of the metaphysical world.

More important than that "debate" is many people are unable to differentiate between facts and truth. Truth is independent and generaly transcendent of fact. Fact is held by the chains of proof. You can prove a fact. You cannot prove a truth.

Re: Evolution
 

Yeah, but its sure fun as hell to run in the nude, and even better if you find lake and skinny dip in-30 degrees wheater! You lose an entire inch off your gentitals! Ahhhhh.....life is good..... :moon: http://www.gamingforums.com/images/smilies/pwned.gif

Re: Evolution
 

Personly I belive in Darwin's Theory of evolution. Even ifyou don't believe in Darwin's theory, Scientists have found proof that humans have evolved over the eons. THey foundskelton's much like our own , bet yet different in many way's. THey have found sevral species, of humans Proto-Human, and Homo-Erectus. If this doesn't convince you, then Some of our reatives being alive today , might. Say for exaple Chimpanzee's , our closet realtive. Cimpazee's have intelict matcing , estamted , atcient human's, their hobbies and emotions are extremly simalr to ours( There have been some chimps seen to pay, most likely using food of some sort , to see a female chimps butt). Let alone thier bone structure is almost exactly like ours. Who can't say Darwin's right?

Chimps Rule!