I wonder what else they believe in so much but can't prove.
I'm a theistic evolutionist.
Posts
Total:
137
-->
@ethang5
I'm pretty sure You'll die in a grease fire.
Oh
Did i just say that out loud?
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Maybe there is a grease fire singing group? But how does one choose which grease fire singing group to join?
Lol. Ah, the internet. Where you can talk in real time to completely insane people in complete safety
I wonder if there is a singing group for insane people?
-->
@ethang5
I haven't group sung for almost a year now.
If i knew, if i was told 20years ago that not believing in god ment no more group sing song.
I may have tried a little harder to believe.
But yeah, You sure know where to hit me Epongs...
It's almost like you think being or becoming a atheists comes at no cost.
We had to make sacrifices to.
I lay / lye in bed some Sunday mornings just knowing you guys would currently be in full voice as i lay.
And yeah , i get a little jealous.
But don't you ever think i want to be a part atheist for some kind of fun or something.
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
I haven't group sung for almost a year now.
Wow. You must be even more confused than usual.
If i knew, if i was told 20years ago that not believing in god ment no more group sing song. I may have tried a little harder to believe.
Don't worry about it. God will survive your disbelief.
But yeah, You sure know where to hit me Epongs...
Hit you? I like you deb.
It's almost like you think being or becoming a atheists comes at no cost.We had to make sacrifices to.
You poor dear.
I lay / lye in bed some Sunday mornings just knowing you guys would currently be in full voice as i lay. And yeah , i get a little jealous.
Well, I can't relate, because I hardly ever think of you guys. Why are you so consumed with us? Is it the great singing groups?
But don't you ever think i want to be a part atheist for some kind of fun or something.
I won't. I just wish you weren't so unhappy.
-->
@ludofl3x
<br>So there are things that seem to exist without any process, you're saying?
What is it about eternity that suggests to you there is no process in it? According to OED: "Process: A continuous and regular action or succession of actions occurring or performed in a definite manner, and having a particular result or outcome; a sustained operation or series of operations." That can occur on a finite, or infinite basis; the definition does not distinguish. You cannot just assert that it does. It says there is a definite manner to the process, not that it's finite in duration. Such a claim must be another word. Your assertion; you find it and tell us.
-->
@ludofl3x
So there are things that seem to exist without any process, you're saying?
Newton's first law of motion is a perfect example of process. His first law of motion is often stated as:
An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.
The fly in Newton's soup is the phrase, "...with the same speed..." because we have observed by more accurate measurement than Newton had available in his day that objects in motion, such as the moon, do not sustain the same speed, even if no other unbalanced force is causing the variation. or perhaps it is the forces at work upon the moon on a constant, but variable basis: the earth, the sun, other planets and moons, the occasional fly-by asteroid, etc. The point, is, the moon, and any such body in motion, does stay in motion, even at variable speed, unless and until acted upon by "an unbalanced force" that would be greater than the forces already at play.
I call that a process. An eternal process.
Someone earlier in this string commented something to the effect that there was either an intelligent creation, or there was evolution, never the twain to meet, worlds without end, amen.
Darwin was an intelligent man. He theorized in his volume, On the Origin of Species, in the last paragraph, in editions 2 through 6, that "There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved." [Bolded italics are in editions 2 - 6, but missing only from edition 1]
Darwin is describing theistic evolution. That is, creation, which is not formation of matter/energy out of nothing, but organization of existing raw materials in chaos [the "without form and void" of Genesis]. Subsequent to creation is the process of evolution engaged, effectively, allowing the creation free agency to do as it will with little interference in allowing the process to proceed. What's so hard about that, or have all you Darwinists defrocked St. Darwin?
The uninformed, who are also teachers, are going to teach... what? Their uninformisms to their students? But, they're Teachers! Yeah, admittedly, but that is not automatic license to only tell you truth. There are agendas, here, children. "Question everything with boldness." - Thomas Jefferson.
-->
@fauxlaw
Okay, if you want to call it a process, but it's not eternal. The moon wasn't always there, and it won't always be there. If you're talking about the immutability of the Newtonian principal, that's a different story, but that's not a process (process = step 1, step 2, step 3). It's an observation (phenomenon X behaves in Y way).I call that a process. An eternal process.
You cannot just assert that it does.
I didn't assert anything. I'm asking someone who said "nothing exists without a process" to explain how those two things exist, according to him, without a process. The natural follow on question is "how can we know."
-->
@ludofl3x
So if evolution doesn't deal with origins then any claim that we were originally apelike creatures is invalid, as would be any claim about where we originated from.
-->
@ludofl3x
The natural follow on question is "how can we know."
<br>
"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. Bit let him ask in faith, never wavering, for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea driven with the wind and tossed." - James I: 5, 6.
That's how. Sure, you're going to tell me that prayer doesn't work. No, it doesn't if you don't follow the process. Damn, there's that word again. Everything. EVERYTHING is a process, my friend. parse it as you will, everything from being born to going to the grave, and beyond, is process. Step 1, step 2, step 3. If you don't following the process exactly as defined, how do you ever expect to achieve what was planned?
-->
@ronjs
So if evolution doesn't deal with origins then any claim that we were originally apelike creatures is invalid, as would be any claim about where we originated from.
It doesn't deal with the ORIGIN OF LIFE. It deals with why life is so diverse, how and why it diversifies and why development continues. But yeah, sure, you're right, okay, got it, evolution is a total sham and it's all magic words and whatever.
-->
@fauxlaw
That's how. Sure, you're going to tell me that prayer doesn't work. No, it doesn't if you don't follow the process. Damn, there's that word again. Everything. EVERYTHING is a process, my friend. parse it as you will, everything from being born to going to the grave, and beyond, is process. Step 1, step 2, step 3. If you don't following the process exactly as defined, how do you ever expect to achieve what was planned?
Efficacy of prayer is a different question, but if you have a process you follow and it's always effective, I'd love to hear it. Newtonian laws aren't processes.
I don't understand your last question.
-->
@ludofl3x
if you want to call it a process, but it's not eternal. The moon wasn't always there,
It's an eternal process because, although our moon was not always there [and neither was the earth, nor the sun, etc.], there have always been, and always will be moons, and suns, and earths, and stars in the whole bloody universe, and they will all follow processes... until they don't, but new ones will. You cannot think of the universe as a singular creation at one point in time, and then God rested forever. He woke up, and is still creating elsewhere, planting a garden here, and there, and way over there... an eternal process of creation, and resting, and...
-->
@fauxlaw
there have always been, and always will be moons, and suns, and earths, and stars in the whole bloody universe, and they will all follow processes...
You and I are having a different argument than EtrnlView and I are. The above is an assertion that implies you do not think Big Bang Cosmology is correct, and asserts something you have no way of knowing, "always."
You cannot think of the universe as a singular creation at one point in time, and then God rested forever. He woke up, and is still creating elsewhere, planting a garden here, and there, and way over there... an eternal process of creation, and resting, and...
I don't see any god doing any of that, it just looks like people doing it. As ever, I remain interested in evidence to the contrary, but evidence, not assertion. I wish you'd taken part in an older thread, one dealing with how you decided to go from "Creator god" to "God that I specifically believe in." I'm sure it would have been a lively back and forth.
-->
@ludofl3x
Example of a process: prayer
1. Study a concept about anything: read, ponder. formulate questions, if any, think about questions and potential answers.
2. If a question remains unanswered, and further study and pondering does not reveal an answer, determine to pray about it.
3. prayer preparation: a] be sincere and humble. b] be faithful. that is, know in your heart that an answer will be given, and know that the answer should be accepted and followed c] prepare your question. how will it be asked?
4. Do not doubt yourself, nor that God will hear you.
5. Address God as "God," "Father," etc.
6. Be thankful, and tell Him you are grateful for your life, your gifts, the bounty you have, the food you eat, etc. God is willing to give more to the one who expresses gratitude for what he has.
6. Ask your question, just as if you were addressing anyone facing you. Just ask. Don't need to make it fancy. "I have a problem with..... I've tried to figure it out, but the answer isn't there. Please help me to find the answer and to know it s true.
7. You are part of the solution, don't expect to just hand over the burden to God without a commitment to continue the pursuit of your question; commit to being proactive, and patient.
8. Close your prayer in renewed expression of faith to receive an answer. If you believe in Jesus Christ, close in his name. If you don't, well, he is the Christ whether that's believed, or not. Expressing faith in him is necessary because he is the Savior and Redeemer of all the world, and is our intermediary with the Father. If that is your question - is Jesus the Christ, the Son of God - then ask if he is.
You get the picture. Cannot employ steps out of sequence, or skip steps and expect a desired result. If we do not engage all steps, in a proper order, we cannot expect a desired result, like an answer.
That answer is not likely to be a personal visit. What will occur may be something you've never felt before: a warming or burning sensation in your heart. It begins to swell, as if enlightening until it expands throughout your entire body. It is felt, not merely imagined. It is palpable. It is a feeling of such peace, you might begin tears. It is the most glorious feeling I have ever felt, and it is felt very often as I hone the skill of prayer.
Why do you think Newtonian laws are not processes? How do you define "process?"
<br>Why do you think Newtonian laws are not processes? How do you define "process?"
Newtonian laws are observations. There is not a step 1 in "Objects in motion tend to stay in motion, objects at rest tend to stay at rest." It's just observed. A process would be like "An object of incredible mass once struck the earth and sheared off a gigantic hunk of rock, turning it into pebbles and dust (step 1) that settled into an accretion disk around the remainder of the planet (step 2) and following the laws of physics and gravity eventually coalesced (step 3) into a relatively constant orbit." That's a process.
If you can wade through the various personal jibes and attacks and time wasters, you should check out the "Does Prayer Work" thread.
-->
@ludofl3x
Ah, right, special pleading, got it. Nothing exists without a process, except this thing, which exists without a process.
Ah that's right, making up fallacies again to avoid facts.
So it is "thingS," which is strange since you started your post by saying:
So you don't comprehend what co-exists means? it means they exist as a single unit, one can't exist without the other....let me know when you catch up.
-->
@ronjs
That's quite interesting since what is relevant is that we are here and evolution doesn't prove why we are here.So if evolution doesn't deal with origins then any claim that we were originally apelike creatures is invalid, as would be any claim about where we originated from.
-->
@ludofl3x
So, if that is true then why do evolutionists try to keep looking further and further back in time, if not looking for origins. Evolutionists have also proposed things like the "big bang" as the origin of the universe.
Evolutionary biologists look further and further back in time at life ad its development. Evolution and big bang cosmology may make the religious uncomfortable by varying degrees, but they are in no way related
-->
@ludofl3x
Actually nothing the evolutionists do or say makes me uncomfortable in the slightest.
I highly doubt this whole universe thing existed before i did.
-->
@ronjs
Shhh! Don't tell atheists that.Actually nothing the evolutionists do or say makes me uncomfortable in the slightest.
Pretending that science makes theists "uncomfortable" is one of the few things that make them happy. And its such a small price to pay.
Hey i too find it easier Picturing God making a hooved-hyena-whale for the ducks we have today then trying to grasp the Toe.
I feel the toe is incorrect.
Crap i said that out loud hey?
hang on a sec . I have to run a quick google
°•°•°•°• GOOGLE SEARCH °•°•°•°•° 《 Are atheists allowed to not believe in the TOE ' 》
....enter...
Arrrrr , see this right here is the beauty of being a atheist.
Guys. ?
Hey guys?
It says right here. ( Atheists are allowed to ' NOT ' believe in the theory of evo )
Nice hey?
And get this.
Apparently me not believing in the TOE. ( WILL NOT. ) in any way shape or form effect my afterlife accommodation.
Good game.
Good game.
-->
@Deb-8-a-bull
Good game.Good game.
Try to stay on topic. The OP said, "I'm a theistic evolutionist" not, "I'm a basketball player." Try to keep up.
The plain reading of Genesis does not support the "Gap Theory" or "Progressive creationism" and reads as nothing other than real history and it takes grammatical acrobatics to make it say otherwise. Jesus also only treated it as real historical events.And since creation and the flood are mentioned or alluded to in every book of the Bible, this can give a better understanding of the rest of scripture.
-->
@ronjs
The plain reading of Genesis does not support the "Gap Theory" or "Progressive creationism" and reads as nothing other than real history and it takes grammatical acrobatics to make it say otherwise.
The "gap theory" really stems from looking for answers about the chronological discrepancies in the Bible. The writers of Genesis did, in fact, take a sort of "gap year" between studies before resuming their work and translators only later realized that there was a period of time largely unaccounted for. So I think that some creationists are making an earnest attempt to fill that gap with as much time as possible in order to account for the chronological discrepancies.
Genesis 1:27 clearly states that God made man in his own image and it is quite obvious that he had the human characteristic of "developing" his plan and 4.5 billion years was not really such a great deal of time to him (given he has been around for eternity) pottering around in his workshop in order to get things just right.