Was Darwin Wrong?

[ItalianScallion]

Problem is, that every Christain believes the same thing, and they all follow the Bible as the word of God. They are at least as assured as you are, that they are right.
EVERYONE says "It's not what I say, it's want God says."
Who is right and who is wrong?
Wait, let me guess, you are right, and they are wrong.
I wonder how I knew that.

So why do so many people doubt it? Darwin did and look at the mess he got into.
There's enough proof of the Divine authorship of the Bible if people would read it and learn how to understand it. Without it, as the absoulte truth, anybody can be right and no one can say they're wrong...(which is why there are so many wrong teachings out there today).

While I have my beliefs, I'm always willing to believe someone else probably has it more accurate than me. I mean, who knows? But when someone tells me I'm definitely wrong, when there is absolutely NOTHING more than a book that makes this claim? I say BS.

"You're definitely wrong".......

"whoa whoa whoa, you can't use their book, you gotta use mine, theirs is all lies written by men, ours was written by men inspired by god"

OMG! You finally got it!!

 

[thatguy]

So why do so many people doubt it? Darwin did and look at the mess he got into.
There's enough proof of the Divine authorship of the Bible if people would read it and learn how to understand it. Without it, as the absoulte truth, anybody can be right and no one can say they're wrong...(which is why there are so many wrong teachings out there today).

"You're definitely wrong".......

OMG! You finally got it!!

what you dont get is, that is what everyone says about their book, that it is the real one, while denying the divinity of the other books. the truth is that they are all fiction===> they are all lies. none of them were written by god therefore they are all equally invalid

 

[ItalianScallion]

Once more, you and I agree, except that you seem to believe your view is the only Christian view, and I know better.

Can you 'splain dis to me?

 

[Beta84]

I did read Caps post, and that's not what was said at all.

What was said was a question as to whether or not a religious person would agree the possibility they were wrong. There wasn't even an inkling of a non-religious person accepting they may be wrong.

The question actually lends credence to the theory that evolution is like a religion - they believe without any real proof, testability, or good reason other than faith that their thought process is right.

he made a point to comment on a non-religious person being willing to accept that there is the possibility of a supreme being. :shrug:

Evolution may have some holes, as much science does, but there is also quite a bit of research that's been done and evidence that's been found. But who knows how everything actually got to the way it was. Religion is one explanation, science is another, or there could always be a joint theory where religious explanations can go hand in hand with the scientific evidence. But for everyone who says "the religious explanation has no holes" BS, that's because religious answers are always a cop-out since there is an answer written in a book somewhere and some of you guys think that instantly means it's the end-all-be-all answer.

 

[Beta84]

You're definitely wrong. I am 100% sure of this and I have books as evidence.

 

[ItalianScallion]

what you dont get is, that is what everyone says about their book, that it is the real one, while denying the divinity of the other books. the truth is that they are all fiction===> they are all lies. none of them were written by god therefore they are all equally invalid

But since you don't believe in any book of absolute truth, then you cannot make that statement and be right...no one can in that case.
This is what caused Darwins troubles. He read the Bible's account of creation and doubted some of it and added to it.
Sure, everyone believes their "book" is the truth but only one has stood the test and been proven as the absolute truth...

 

[This_person]

he made a point to comment on a non-religious person being willing to accept that there is the possibility of a supreme being. :shrug:

Evolution may have some holes, as much science does, but there is also quite a bit of research that's been done and evidence that's been found. But who knows how everything actually got to the way it was. Religion is one explanation, science is another, or there could always be a joint theory where religious explanations can go hand in hand with the scientific evidence. But for everyone who says "the religious explanation has no holes" BS, that's because religious answers are always a cop-out since there is an answer written in a book somewhere and some of you guys think that instantly means it's the end-all-be-all answer.

The Bible (or any other religious book) generally does not equate itself to all possible knowledge of all things.

IMO, the Bible tells you all you NEED to know about God. Maybe not all you want to know, but all you NEED to know. That does not mean in any way that the Bible is the complete book of all knowledge of everything. It's not, and I dare say no reasonable Christian would ever suggest it is. That's a gross mischaracterization of the faith.

However, in terms of what this thread turned into, I would suggest that ID (not Biblical Genesis, but ID) is what you describe as a great possibility. If there is a designer who designed things to work the way they do, and designed a bit of evolution into how things run, that's ID. If there is no possibility of that whatsoever, that's "close-minded".

 

[ItalianScallion]

Evolution may have some holes, as much science does, but there is also quite a bit of research that's been done and evidence that's been found. But who knows how everything actually got to the way it was. Religion is one explanation, science is another, or there could always be a joint theory where religious explanations can go hand in hand with the scientific evidence. But for everyone who says "the religious explanation has no holes" BS, that's because religious answers are always a cop-out since there is an answer written in a book somewhere and some of you guys think that instantly means it's the end-all-be-all answer.

Why work so hard when someone else has done all the foot work for us?

You're definitely wrong. I am 100% sure of this and I have books as evidence.

Dianetics???

 

[thatguy]

But since you don't believe in any book of absolute truth, then you cannot make that statement and be right...no one can in that case.
This is what caused Darwins troubles. He read the Bible's account of creation and doubted some of it and added to it.
Sure, everyone believes their "book" is the truth but only one has stood the test and been proven as the absolute truth...

you are right, the koran has definately stood the test of time and has been proven the absolute truth

so i beleive in one less book than you do, and somehow that makes me unable to determine if any are false? that is retarded. If anything i would say that it makes me MORE able to determine if the books are false because i dont have a vested interest in any.

 

[Beta84]

But since you don't believe in any book of absolute truth, then you cannot make that statement and be right...no one can in that case.
This is what caused Darwins troubles. He read the Bible's account of creation and doubted some of it and added to it.
Sure, everyone believes their "book" is the truth but only one has stood the test and been proven as the absolute truth...

Really? Only one? Then how come everyone in the world isn't of the same faith if there's only 1 true book? Oh I know...because that was a completely false statement.

The Bible (or any other religious book) generally does not equate itself to all possible knowledge of all things.

IMO, the Bible tells you all you NEED to know about God. Maybe not all you want to know, but all you NEED to know. That does not mean in any way that the Bible is the complete book of all knowledge of everything. It's not, and I dare say no reasonable Christian would ever suggest it is. That's a gross mischaracterization of the faith.

However, in terms of what this thread turned into, I would suggest that ID (not Biblical Genesis, but ID) is what you describe as a great possibility. If there is a designer who designed things to work the way they do, and designed a bit of evolution into how things run, that's ID. If there is no possibility of that whatsoever, that's "close-minded".

I'm aware. I don't even know if it's a NEED to know, I think it's more of a "this is what I felt like providing you with, so deal with it" type of scenario. But a bunch of it was written by people who merely observed events, so I think it's a little bit of this, a little bit of that.

Speaking of "close-minded", check out this other guy I'm having a "discussion" with.

Why work so hard when someone else has done all the foot work for us?

Dianetics???

All the foot work? Hardly. Please refer to This_Person, he seems to be pretty rational in comparison to you.

If you mock Dianetics, the evil aliens in your stomach are going to explode out of you and eat your brains!!! If not, then maybe Allah will strike you down. If not, maybe Buddha will sit on you and make you respawn as a piece of poop. Or that Hindu dude with his 500 hands will strangle you. I don't know, there are plenty of possibilities.

 

[ItalianScallion]

you are right, the koran has definately stood the test of time and has been proven the absolute truth
so i beleive in one less book than you do, and somehow that makes me unable to determine if any are false? that is retarded. If anything i would say that it makes me MORE able to determine if the books are false because i dont have a vested interest in any.

Nor do you have the Holy Spirit enlightening you...

Really? Only one? Then how come everyone in the world isn't of the same faith if there's only 1 true book? Oh I know...because that was a completely false statement.

Funny guy...
People make bad choices or haven't done the necessary research on the Bible. You like books? Read "The case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. He was an avowed atheist trying to disprove Christ and he ended up becoming a Christian because he couldn't. He details his research in it.

All the foot work? Hardly. Please refer to This_Person, he seems to be pretty rational in comparison to you.

He made a very true statement. The Bible doesn't tell us everything about God or life but it does tell us most of what we need to know.

If you mock Dianetics, the evil aliens in your stomach are going to explode out of you and eat your brains!!! If not, then maybe Allah will strike you down. If not, maybe Buddha will sit on you and make you respawn as a piece of poop. Or that Hindu dude with his 500 hands will strangle you. I don't know, there are plenty of possibilities.

WOW! And I thought it was my cooking that caused those stomach pains...

So your switching to Judaism?

Soitainly not! That would be like going back to 8 track tapes...

 

[foodcritic]

Really? Only one? Then how come everyone in the world isn't of the same faith if there's only 1 true book? Oh I know...because that was a completely false statement.

.

Your argument that the Bible is false BECAUSE not everyone follows it does not prove your argument. It is a good point but that is about it.

If you can't prove one to be "true" does that by default mean that none can be true? This does not seem logical to me. Does it to you?

Truth does exist, if it didn't we would live in chaos, if at all.

If I say that the earth is round and you say it's flat, we both can't be right. One of has is "closer" to the truth. Now if I say its round we may actually realize that in fact it's not perfectly round but round to us all the same.

Why should religion be any different?

 

[capsfan78]

Are you willing to accept it's a possibility that there IS?

I'm very open to the idea that I'm totally wrong, and there is some sort of supreme being(s).

 

[thatguy]

Nor do you have the Holy Spirit enlightening you...

but the jews certainly do, and their book has stood a much longer and more grueling test of time.....

 

[capsfan78]

So why do so many people doubt it? Darwin did and look at the mess he got into.
There's enough proof of the Divine authorship of the Bible if people would read it and learn how to understand it. Without it, as the absoulte truth, anybody can be right and no one can say they're wrong...(which is why there are so many wrong teachings out there today).

Your going to say that the Bible is absolute, 100% true to the word?

So, at in the book of Genesis, people were living to be a few hundred years old.

When Noah built his Ark, he had one pair of every species of animal on it. Lets assume here, that the Ark was built in the area of modern day Jerusalem. How does a Tasmanian Devil, which lives specifically on one island adjacent to Australia, make the journey to Jerusalem?

How can you take the Bible to be Absolute, when the Preachers, Priests, and all other church people who are suppose to be the experts, and teach us, don't agree on the "Interpretation" of the Bible? How also can you take it to be absolute, when there were books lefts out of the Bible by the church?

 

[lewis7lewis]

You gotta be kidding right?

obviously evolution didn't happen. Those walking monkeys that we've found artifacts of are just extinct now. they didn't evolve into humans. humans were always here.

although that would probably just give darwin an argument with natural selection, even if it disproved his evolution stuff. geez this guy was good

Look If that's what you believe then so be it but your Wrong!
It's a..... Fact that Plants have evolved!....that Animals have evolved..
and...the Earth has evolved and so have Humans!And let's get this
straight the Bible is a book about how to get to Heaven not a book
of the Heavens!See this is where reglion is messed up your mind.

 

[lewis7lewis]

Your going to say that the Bible is absolute, 100% true to the word?

So, at in the book of Genesis, people were living to be a few hundred years old.

When Noah built his Ark, he had one pair of every species of animal on it. Lets assume here, that the Ark was built in the area of modern day Jerusalem. How does a Tasmanian Devil, which lives specifically on one island adjacent to Australia, make the journey to Jerusalem?

How can you take the Bible to be Absolute, when the Preachers, Priests, and all other church people who are suppose to be the experts, and teach us, don't agree on the "Interpretation" of the Bible? How also can you take it to be absolute, when there were books lefts out of the Bible by the church?

Hey don't even try it's a waste of time talking with these people they have
tunnel vision and their set at Full Speed Ahead!Their is not even a chance that the cold hard facts will change the way they think they have been
brainwashed by Reglion that the possibility of anything else is out of bounds.

 

[foodcritic]

Your going to say that the Bible is absolute, 100% true to the word?
So, at in the book of Genesis, people were living to be a few hundred years old.

Yes. The oldest was Methuslah at 969. The best answer(s) to this are
1) God simply allowed for this for the purposes of re-population.
2) The human body was less corrupt from the results of Adam's sin and we are naturally regressing from perfection. With out medical advancment how old would we live to be....I suspect
In Gen 6 set's man's age at 120yrs and in Psalms

In Psalm 90 we read
10 The length of our days is seventy years—
or eighty, if we have the strength;
yet their span [a] is but trouble and sorrow,
for they quickly pass, and we fly away.


I find this passage amazing. It was written at least 1500 years ago by King David. How much incite did it take for him to see that man kind's life span would be between 70-80 yrs????. Exactly what it is today.

When Noah built his Ark, he had one pair of every species of animal on it. Lets assume here, that the Ark was built in the area of modern day Jerusalem. How does a Tasmanian Devil, which lives specifically on one island adjacent to Australia, make the journey to Jerusalem?

This is a fair question. Without looking at any creation talking points I would speculate that it would be hard to determine the landscape of the earth pre-flood. The flood forever changed the landscape of earth. No one doubts a world wide flood BTW.

How can you take the Bible to be Absolute, when the Preachers, Priests, and all other church people who are suppose to be the experts, and teach us, don't agree on the "Interpretation" of the Bible? How also can you take it to be absolute, when there were books lefts out of the Bible by the church?

Usually the bible is very clear. There are some areas of disagreement. However Christians should not divide on issues that are not essential. I personally think that creation is an essential point that is reiterated through out the OT and NT.

 

[This_person]

I'm very open to the idea that I'm totally wrong, and there is some sort of supreme being(s).

So, you and Beta are both open to the possibility that ID is correct.

Maybe you didn't realize you were, and believe something else is MORE likely, but you've now both admitted that you believe that ID is a viable option to consider.

Thank you.

 

[Beta84]

Your argument that the Bible is false BECAUSE not everyone follows it does not prove your argument. It is a good point but that is about it.

If you can't prove one to be "true" does that by default mean that none can be true? This does not seem logical to me. Does it to you?

Truth does exist, if it didn't we would live in chaos, if at all.

If I say that the earth is round and you say it's flat, we both can't be right. One of has is "closer" to the truth. Now if I say its round we may actually realize that in fact it's not perfectly round but round to us all the same.

Why should religion be any different?

I was only trying to make a point -- I wasn't saying the Bible is definitely false. I'm saying that it's very difficult to determine what's true, what's not, and basically everything else in between. Can we say, for certain, that certain events took place? Even if every little piece of history was accurate within the bible, does that mean the actual supernatural events took place? No. Same with any other book written for the purposes of religion. I am not saying any book is wrong, I'm just saying there's no way to prove definitively that any of them are right.

Speaking of the earth being round, didn't the Vatican strongly disagree that the earth was round for centuries? Didn't they disagree that the earth rotated around the sun for centuries? It's archaic. They tell you what they want to believe based on the Bible. They ignore science. Religion is good for some stuff, but to listen to religion when there is science saying otherwise is just silly.

but the jews certainly do, and their book has stood a much longer and more grueling test of time.....

It has. Heck, Christianity believes in that book too...it's called the Old Testament. It's just that the New Testament changed a ton because they didn't really like the first cut

Look If that's what you believe then so be it but your Wrong!
It's a..... Fact that Plants have evolved!....that Animals have evolved..
and...the Earth has evolved and so have Humans!And let's get this
straight the Bible is a book about how to get to Heaven not a book
of the Heavens!See this is where reglion is messed up your mind.

You've already proved that you're pretty effing stupid, but to quote ME of all people when I was being completely sarcastic and mocking some people with that statement is just retarded. Go away and let the big boys discuss.