Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Finding common ground between God and evolution ("Theory is greater than facts)
Seattle Times ^ | Jan 25, 2005 | Froma Harrop

Posted on 01/25/2005 6:15:41 PM PST by gobucks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 581-596 next last
To: WildTurkey
I have yet to propose a figurative interpretation of any of the passages discussed in Genesis. They have all been literal.

However, there are passages in the Bible that are figurative. The insistence to read the Bible as all one way has severe logical problems.

JM
161 posted on 01/26/2005 7:48:57 AM PST by JohnnyM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
I have yet to propose a figurative interpretation of any of the passages discussed in Genesis. They have all been literal.

However, there are passages in the Bible that are figurative. The insistence to read the Bible as all one way has severe logical problems.

JM
162 posted on 01/26/2005 7:49:25 AM PST by JohnnyM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: bigLusr

Well... proselytizing is legal, it's Constitutionally protected

Is it? We have the freedom of speech and the freedom of worship. So stating your religious beliefs is certainly protected and worshiping as you wish as long as you do not infringe on others rights is legal. But is getting in someone's face and badgering them with your religious beliefs and trying to force them to be taught in public schools legal?

if done by responsible people, ultimately benefits society.

Freedom of speech benefits society. Only the proselytizers believe that proselytizing their belief benefits society. Others do not.

Just like gun ownership, right?

Gun ownership is a right. Trying to convince people they should own a gun if they don't is okay provided they have asked you to convince them or they can 'turn you off', like a TV commercial, if they don't want to hear it.

163 posted on 01/26/2005 7:49:48 AM PST by ml1954
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey

I *am* a Christian. I am *still* in need of a Savior, Someone to save me from my many sins, including the sin of bearing false witness. If I've truly sinned against you in that way, let me know and I'll apologize.


164 posted on 01/26/2005 7:52:05 AM PST by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: phoenix0468
facts were the result of tested theories

No. "Facts" are the information we draw from observation and the results of experiments. They are very simple things, like "we added 10g of HCl into a solution of 5g NaOH & 95g H20, and 7.4 seconds later we observed bubbles in the solution" or something like that.

Facts are extremely small pieces of information, like a dot on a page. It's only when you have lots of facts, and can see a pattern between them, that you can start to guess at what the theory is. The theory is the picture that you think would involve most of those dots. Knowing a bunch of facts is good, but understanding a theory that fits the facts is even better.

165 posted on 01/26/2005 7:52:39 AM PST by xm177e2 (Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Hajman
If your hypothesis that "as the organisms reach some critical evolution event, they might hit a chaotic boundry and get shot off in another direction very quickly, making the evolution non-linear" then there would, when taking the limit to infinity, be an equal number of regressions, as well as progressions.
166 posted on 01/26/2005 7:53:14 AM PST by TaxRelief (Support the Troops Rally, Fayetteville, NC -- March 19, 2005)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
If one believes that man evolved, and was not created, one does not believe in Scripture, period.

Flase dichotomy. A person can believe that man was created by God using evolution as His method.

You cannot twist the Bible into man's evolution from animal without denying it's validity in every other area.

Why not? If God created man through the process of evolution, how does that invalidate the rest of the Bible?

167 posted on 01/26/2005 7:53:48 AM PST by Modernman (What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyM
I have yet to propose a figurative interpretation of any of the passages discussed in Genesis. They have all been literal.

Come on. You said that the passages in Gensesis 2 where animals were created AFTER Adam were figurative and that the animals were actually created BEFORE Adam.

168 posted on 01/26/2005 7:55:00 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Theo

My friend, it's clear you hate God.

You have no idea what I believe nor what my emotional relationship is to God, a supreme being, the prime mover, the universe, etc. You have no idea whether I am Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim, Christian, Jewish, a Deist, etc. Your statement says more about you than me.

169 posted on 01/26/2005 7:55:59 AM PST by ml1954
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: ml1954
So stating your religious beliefs is certainly protected and worshiping as you wish as long as you do not infringe on others rights is legal. But is getting in someone's face and badgering them with your religious beliefs and trying to force them to be taught in public schools legal?

Hmm. Your definition of proselytizing isn't the same as mine. In my mind we're talking about the freedom to share the bible with someone and to pray with him/her if s/he accepts the gospel. Apparently in your mind it's a rather violent, forceful process.

That's unfortunate. :-/

170 posted on 01/26/2005 7:56:30 AM PST by bigLusr (Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Theo

I have no antagonism toward the creator. However, I do thank you for your thoughts on evolution.


171 posted on 01/26/2005 7:57:23 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
Everyone, in your view, who believes that God created the heavens and the earth, is a "religious fantatic" and on the same level as a mad man who murders thousands?

Not per se. However, everyone who rejects evidence that exists right before their eyes and instead relies on an allegorical, centuries-old text as their basis for an understanding of science is a philosophical cousin with men like Bin Laden.

172 posted on 01/26/2005 7:57:27 AM PST by Modernman (What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Theo
The Bible says, for example, that death followed sin -- that death did not take place before Adam sinned. But evolution says that death preceeded sin, and that it was a necessary element of evolution.

Romans 5 is clearly talking about human death. Evolution does not rule out the possibility that there was no human death before the fall. On the other hand, nothing in the Bible rules out animal death before the fall. It explicitly mentions plant death.

Besides, you've got to reject more science than just evolution if you want to believe there was no animal death before human sin.

173 posted on 01/26/2005 7:58:59 AM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
Why not? If God created man through the process of evolution, how does that invalidate the rest of the Bible?

It requires one to think, instead of just repeating that which man has taught him to believe.

174 posted on 01/26/2005 7:59:20 AM PST by WildTurkey (When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
You mean no animals or plants died before Adam sinned?

Right

Based on what?

175 posted on 01/26/2005 8:00:19 AM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: bigLusr

In my mind we're talking about the freedom to share the bible with someone and to pray with him/her if s/he accepts the gospel.

What you describing here is freedom of worship, not proselytizing. So no argument there.

It becomes proselytizing when the 'sharing' is forced on someone who is not interested.

176 posted on 01/26/2005 8:01:45 AM PST by ml1954
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: Theo
Evolution is not merely "change," but "improvement"

Evolution has nothing to do with improvement. You're thinking of Social Darwinism and Eugenics.

specifically the *increase* of meaningful genetic information through generations.

Evolution can occur through a loss of genetic information, through an increase or through a simple alteration in currently existing material.

I disbelieve in both "micro" evolution and "macro" evolution, if evolution is defined as the meaningful "increase" of genetic information through generations....

Your statement is meaningless, as that is not the definition of evolution.

177 posted on 01/26/2005 8:04:54 AM PST by Modernman (What is moral is what you feel good after. - Ernest Hemingway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 157 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

Not per se. However, everyone who rejects evidence that exists right before their eyes and instead relies on an allegorical, centuries-old text as their basis for an understanding of science is a philosophical cousin with men like Bin Laden.

Well said.

178 posted on 01/26/2005 8:05:04 AM PST by ml1954
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: TaxRelief
then there would, when taking the limit to infinity, be an equal number of regressions, as well as progressions.

Sorry for jumping in...

Yes, you would predict that over time, an equal number of regressions and progressions would occur... but since certain regressions would lead to death, the surviving population over time would not remain stagnant, as (if I'm reading you correctly) you seem to suggest... but would progress.

179 posted on 01/26/2005 8:06:43 AM PST by bigLusr (Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: JohnnyM
Jesus had genitals, feet, eyes, ears, lungs, arms, a digestive system, and a circulatory system. And Jesus is most surely God.

If you are Christian, sure. But to Jews, whose story Genesis is, that is not the case, so the questions remain.

Further, given the fact Creation occurred prior to Mary's pregnancy and the development of Jesus's body, how could Adam have been made in Jesus's image if that image had yet to exist? (i.e., Adam wouldn't have been made in God's image, but on the image God would take if Adam and Eve decide to disobey God, causing the fall, and necessitating the incarnation of Jesus. Was man created in God's potential image???)

Finally, Jesus had all the attributes of man because, as the Nicene Creed says, God "became" or "was made" man. Thus, his physical form was necessitated by him becoming man, and not on his essence as God. Therefore, logically, his human form could not be the image upon which man's form was made because it was not a function of his Godhood, but his personhood.

180 posted on 01/26/2005 8:08:21 AM PST by WildHorseCrash
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 581-596 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson