User Tag List

Page 44 of 44 FirstFirst ... 3441424344
Results 646 to 648 of 648

Thread: I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution

  1. #646
    TOL Legend Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    9,961
    Thanks
    2,822
    Thanked 4,865 Times in 2,923 Posts

    Mentioned
    87 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147740
    Quote Originally Posted by Alate_One View Post
    Not speculation. If evolution is true, an entire organism evolves. Each entire organism must be functional so you don't have a generation with a heart and one without. You have simple hearts, then more complex hearts with small but functional steps in between.

    Worms for example, are said to have 10 hearts. Which might make you think they are ten complex four chambered structures like those found in humans, but no. They are ten pulsating blood vessels, each being the simplest form of a heart.

    This all isn't rocket science to figure out.
    It is harder than rocket science. Biology 'theorizes' how one system can/may/perhaps does 'morph' through no external force into another different thing. There is no ▲worm▲ with a complex heart. It has, by design, a series of vessels that allow it to live in a horizontal position in the earth. To think 'snakes' are related to worms in some evolutionary form (specifically) is far reaching.

    Let's visit something for a moment: The age of the earth is NOT scientifically verifiable (wait objection for a moment). Necessarily, for anyone to actually 'verify' the age of the earth, that one necessarily must have been able to observe it, not just count rings. Example: trees are generally aged by rings but not all trees can be aged the same way. When a tree is very old, they no longer produce rings and so getting an exact age is nearly if not impossible. The ONLY way to know how old that particular tree is, is if there were records of it planted and kept from family member to family member. IOW, the only way to absolutely know the age of a very old tree is personal observation and trust in family recording ability.

    Evolution: The ONLY way to verify a horse losing its digits and relying upon one, would be personal observation as well, including trust in someone keeping track before you got there.

    Importance? Only that MANY scientists, including many on TOL, get VERY bent out of shape when anybody (YEC or others) questions veracity. It 'becomes' hearsay and unscientific when you cannot show or prove. A ton of banter on TOL has only served to confirm that one group, scientists, believe in one thing specifically 'without ability to prove' while another group "creationists" believe another with only the Word of God to stand or fall upon. At that point, it is a question about higher authority because each must adhere to respective authority. I cannot possibly tell you, from firsthand experience, how old the earth is. How about you? What first-hand experience, all of your own observation, do you have for the age of the earth (firsthand, its important)?
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

  2. #647
    Over 2500 post club Alate_One's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,670
    Thanks
    151
    Thanked 346 Times in 261 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    103604
    Quote Originally Posted by Yorzhik View Post
    No. The point of my argument is to say that DNA isn't magic. We can emulate enough of it to show that random mutations plus natural selection will not result in common descent.
    If you emulate it properly (by modeling the chemical structure) you will show that it DOES in fact result in common descent.

    This is a weak argument on the YEC's part. Try to emulate something badly and then pretend that disproves the original thing. If you emulate it properly, it will show you that evolution does in fact work.

    So the question remains: Can you name a breakthrough that was made because they didn't view DNA as code?
    Uhh studying the function of body plan and HOX genes?
    “We do not believe in God because we need to explain this or that feature of the world. That is what science is for. We believe in God because we see something deeper in the world, something that transcends the scientific explanations.” - Karl Giberson Ph.D.

    Some of the Evidence for Climate Change

    The Biologos Foundation - The science and faith of theistic evolution explained.

    What Darwin Never Knew

  3. #648
    Toxic Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    19,487
    Thanks
    589
    Thanked 13,612 Times in 9,446 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147858
    Quote Originally Posted by Alate_One View Post
    If you emulate it properly (by modeling the chemical structure) you will show that it DOES in fact result in common descent.
    This is a wild claim.

    This is a weak argument on the YEC's part. Try to emulate something badly and then pretend that disproves the original thing.
    No, that would be a dishonest argument. As it stands, the challenge you face has been utterly ignored.

    The function of body plan and HOX genes.


    Only a Darwinist could use the words "function" and "plan" to deny the existence of intent.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  4. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (Today),Right Divider (Today),way 2 go (Today)

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us