Re: Evidence for theistic evolution
Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2015 11:58 am
In the sense of one who believes there is no such thing as a miracle or that there is anything spiritual in existence.Audie wrote: ( oh and come now, "naturalist"? )
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." (Psalm 19:1)
https://discussions.godandscience.org/
In the sense of one who believes there is no such thing as a miracle or that there is anything spiritual in existence.Audie wrote: ( oh and come now, "naturalist"? )
jpbg33 wrote:The bible has never been proven wrong so stop replacing it with something that has been proven wrong mean times. if you wont to replace it you must prove it wrong first.
To me it conjures images of a 19th century British gentleman of leisure who putters about his country estate taking note ofRob wrote:In the sense of one who believes there is no such thing as a miracle or that there is anything spiritual in existence.Audie wrote: ( oh and come now, "naturalist"? )
Why in the world would you have a problem with that? Because that's pretty awesome, IMO!Audie wrote: To me it conjures images of a 19th century British gentleman of leisure who putters about his country estate taking note of
the whereabouts of Ms hedgehog, and when the daffodils bloomed.
Just out of curiosity, why do you say that? We know he associated with the other Apostles and even called Peter out on something in Antioch. And he even went to his death under Nero as far as I can tell... I mean, of course he wasn't perfect, but I don't see any reason we shouldn't believe him.Audie wrote: Dont wish me that, though, I dont believe Saul for a minute. He was to Jesus as Brigham Young to J Smith, a cynical
exploiter and self seeker.
Having the capacity to admit being wrong does wonders too. Thomas Edison was famous for saying things likeStoryteller wrote:Being clever doesn't necessarily make you smart either. Being open to new ideas makes you smart.
jpbg,jpbg33 wrote:being open to new good ideas not any ideas that comes along. If evolution could hold up and not be proven wrong and could discredit what is being believed. Then yes we would have to consider it but to just come up with something with out making sure it holds up just because you don't agree with the one that dose hold up doesn't make sense. Why do we have to teach evolution when there is a more solid account of how thing began. Just a few problems I have with evolution "what cased the big bang" "why did thing stop evolving" " what started life". There are more but that is a few of them.
Good that you recognize your lack of language skills.jpbg33 wrote:Actually I'm according to science smarter then most people so I'm pretty sure I know what I read. I do not read a lot so consequently my spelling and grammar are not that grate but my logic is superior to most. People a lot of the time assume how logical someone is by there spelling and grammar But in reality spelling and grammar has nothing to do with logic.
Nothing to do with evolution.jpbg33 wrote:"what cased the big bang"
The current view is that things didn't and (I believe) that things never will.jpbg33 wrote:"why did thing stop evolving"
Nothing to do with evolution.jpbg33 wrote:" what started life"
I just would not look the part, even in tweeds.Rob wrote:Why in the world would you have a problem with that? Because that's pretty awesome, IMO!Audie wrote: To me it conjures images of a 19th century British gentleman of leisure who putters about his country estate taking note of
the whereabouts of Ms hedgehog, and when the daffodils bloomed.
"Come along, cedric! We'll be late for tea! Pip pip!"
I don't know that was trying to be, but I like it.
Just out of curiosity, why do you say that? We know he associated with the other Apostles and even called Peter out on something in Antioch. And he even went to his death under Nero as far as I can tell... I mean, of course he wasn't perfect, but I don't see any reason we shouldn't believe him.Audie wrote: Dont wish me that, though, I dont believe Saul for a minute. He was to Jesus as Brigham Young to J Smith, a cynical
exploiter and self seeker.
If you were a self-seeking person seeking riches why in the world would you choose heavily persecuted Christianity to exploit during that time? It just doesn't make sense to me.
Maybe God started it?jpbg33 wrote:First of all for any kind of evolution to be true there has to be a reason why it started. or we would have all kinds of universe all over the place in different stages of life second everything seems to be going on the same way for thousands of years now. Seems to me we would have seen some of this changing happening some where especially with all the different things there are and in thousands of years nothing has changed.