Evolution

[keithprosser3]

Given the nature of reproduction and of natural selection isn't evolution inescapable?
How can evolution not happen?

[Star]

Good grief. At a certain point you have to edit out at the nested quotes, otherwise they take up most the page.

[arian]

[Replying to post 198 by arian]

What is your definition of faith, in your own words?

Faith is (as I have explained before) knowing without a doubt, and using rationale that I must turn my stearing-wheel to the right when I come to a curve in the road that turns right. I don't doubt, because I have evidence: 1. The road is turning right in front of me. 2. I know that when I turn my steering wheel to the right, I will follow the road. If I had NO EVIDENCE in my faith, I would not drive.

Faith is a holding cognitive content as true knowing there is no evidence for it (the truth claim).

How is that rational?

No evidence for faith would NOT be 'acting on faith', but religious indoctrination. This is why faith in religion fails, while faith in the One True Creator God NEVER fails. It is the most rational decision anyone could make because it is built on evidence.

The faith you're talking about is like a kid learning to drive, .. and he would have one Instructor tell him that if he never turns the steering-wheel, he will always remain on that straight and narrow road no matter what leis before him. And another would tell him that when he turns the steering-wheel to the left, the car will turn right, .. and then another yet another individual personal doctrine slightly different from the others.

Rationality is based on reason or evidence. Faith is belief in inspiration, revelation, or authority. The word faith generally refers to a belief that is held with lack of, in spite of or against reason or evidence.

.. say WHAT? .. if that was the definition of faith, I would NEVER leave the house.

So what you are saying is that whatever your Evolutionary science Teacher, or your religious Pastor tells you, you believe without reason or evidence, right? That would be 'indoctrinated faith followed religiously', not real faith, .. or not the faith described in the Bible.

Now you can understand why billions of people 'believe' in Evolution, the Big Bang theory, why we have tens of thousands of different religions and their gods, and why so many believe in this Agenda 21 as the solution to all their problems, .. because these are (as you explained) "belief that is held with lack of, in spite of or against reason or evidence" This is NOT how we Believers 'believe' in God I Am Who I Am, our Creator.

Thanks.

[arian]

So you are in fact not capable of recognising design? Because according to you everything is designed and you know this by comparing everything designed with all that is designed.

I don't understand your question; 'not capable to recognize design'?

Here again, .. first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,"

Then I use science; ".. then everything that we didn't design and create, .."

And finally I come up with a rational conclusion: "Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!"

Then I search for further evidence of this Creator and found the Bible. In there it reveals more logical conclusions like; "We were created in God the Creators image!" Well now that explains a lot, .. wouldn't you agree?

[JohnA]

So you are in fact not capable of recognising design? Because according to you everything is designed and you know this by comparing everything designed with all that is designed.

I don't understand your question; 'not capable to recognize design'?

Here again, .. first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,"

Then I use science; ".. then everything that we didn't design and create, .."

And finally I come up with a rational conclusion: "Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!"

Then I search for further evidence of this Creator and found the Bible. In there it reveals more logical conclusions like; "We were created in God the Creators image!" Well now that explains a lot, .. wouldn't you agree?

What is your definition of faith, a faith based belief?
If you have evidence, then why have faith?
Are you trying to say your faith based belief is an error because you have evidence that can replace your faith?

[Clownboat]

Here again, .. first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,"

First?!? This was your first step? I have a hard time believing you. Plus, I see no logic in this statement. To be logical, it should infer something. It just states something that every human on earth already knows (that we design and create).

Then I use science; ".. then everything that we didn't design and create, .."

This really was step two? Again, I find this hard to believe. It also infers nothing.

"...then if everything that we didn't design and create..." Yes? Yes? I'm all ears, don't leave me hanging.

And finally I come up with a rational conclusion: "Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!"

Finally?!? As in, this was your last step?

My guess is that first you had a belief (step 3), from there stemmed steps one and two.

Either way, neither of your first two premises infer an intelligent creator.

Then I search for further evidence of this Creator and found the Bible. In there it reveals more logical conclusions like; "We were created in God the Creators image!" Well now that explains a lot, .. wouldn't you agree?

I agree that you found the Bible. The process that you claim for doing so is in question, not to mention your claimed premises don't lead to the conclusion that you found.

For this reason, it appears that you have specific beliefs first and foremost. From there you infer design and a creator. There is just too much bad design in nature to be lead to an intelligent creator behind it all (as in directly behind it).

[JohnA]

[Replying to post 198 by arian]

What is your definition of faith, in your own words?

Faith is (as I have explained before) knowing without a doubt, and using rationale that I must turn my stearing-wheel to the right when I come to a curve in the road that turns right. I don't doubt, because I have evidence: 1. The road is turning right in front of me. 2. I know that when I turn my steering wheel to the right, I will follow the road. If I had NO EVIDENCE in my faith, I would not drive.

Faith is a holding cognitive content as true knowing there is no evidence for it (the truth claim).

How is that rational?

No evidence for faith would NOT be 'acting on faith', but religious indoctrination. This is why faith in religion fails, while faith in the One True Creator God NEVER fails. It is the most rational decision anyone could make because it is built on evidence.

The faith you're talking about is like a kid learning to drive, .. and he would have one Instructor tell him that if he never turns the steering-wheel, he will always remain on that straight and narrow road no matter what leis before him. And another would tell him that when he turns the steering-wheel to the left, the car will turn right, .. and then another yet another individual personal doctrine slightly different from the others.

Rationality is based on reason or evidence. Faith is belief in inspiration, revelation, or authority. The word faith generally refers to a belief that is held with lack of, in spite of or against reason or evidence.

.. say WHAT? .. if that was the definition of faith, I would NEVER leave the house.

So what you are saying is that whatever your Evolutionary science Teacher, or your religious Pastor tells you, you believe without reason or evidence, right? That would be 'indoctrinated faith followed religiously', not real faith, .. or not the faith described in the Bible.

Now you can understand why billions of people 'believe' in Evolution, the Big Bang theory, why we have tens of thousands of different religions and their gods, and why so many believe in this Agenda 21 as the solution to all their problems, .. because these are (as you explained) "belief that is held with lack of, in spite of or against reason or evidence" This is NOT how we Believers 'believe' in God I Am Who I Am, our Creator.

Thanks.

Faith is (as I have explained before) knowing without a doubt, and using rationale that I must turn my stearing-wheel to the right when I come to a curve in the road that turns right. I don't doubt, because I have evidence: 1. The road is turning right in front of me. 2. I know that when I turn my steering wheel to the right, I will follow the road. If I had NO EVIDENCE in my faith, I would not drive.

You are projecting.
Faith is a holding cognitive content as true knowing there is no evidence for it (the truth claim).
You can have evidence that you have faith, by asserting and admitting you have faith. But that does not imply you have evidence for the cognitive content that you are holding as true.

You turn your steering wheel because:
1) you have previous historical evidence that turning you wheel will turn the car.
That is not faith at all.

You are making an epistemological error to state you have faith that you your car will turn when you turn your wheel.

No evidence for faith would NOT be 'acting on faith', but religious indoctrination.

I am NOT asking you if you have evidence for your faith based belief.
I am asking what is the definition of faith.

If you believe in a god then you are religious. Whether you practice it or not is irrelevant, but you are religious because you have some dogma (from religion or made up yourself) about your god, about his attributes, his wants/needs, his features, his existence and the impact on humanity.
You are now merely demonstrating that you do not even understand what is meant by religion, the definition of religion.

This is why faith in religion fails, while faith in the One True Creator God NEVER fails. This is why faith in religion fails, while faith in the One True Creator God NEVER fails. It is the most rational decision anyone could make because it is built on evidence.

Are you trying to argue now that Religious FAITH is different to your FAITH?
One is based on evidence and the other is not?
You are religious if you hold a belief in a god, period. FAITH is FAITH, stop truing to contradict your faith. Jesus orders you to be perfect, so you have no excuse for this false dogma that you are pontificating.

The faith you're talking about is like a kid learning to drive, .. and he would have one Instructor tell him that if he never turns the steering-wheel, he will always remain on that straight and narrow road no matter what leis before him. And another would tell him that when he turns the steering-wheel to the left, the car will turn right, .. and then another yet another individual personal doctrine slightly different from the others.

There is only one definition of faith. You are merely confusing faith, belief and knowledge. Suggest you read up on epistemology and your own religious dogma called faith and your bible.

if that was the definition of faith, I would NEVER leave the house

That is indeed the definition of faith.
And you are now confusing belief with faith.
Faith is a type of belief, a belief that is grounded in accepting there is no evidence for it's truth claims.
Belief is merely holding cognitive content as true, in spite of know if there is evidence or not.
If there is no evidence, then it is a faith based belief.
If there is evidence then you need to justify the belief and then it becomes knowledge (a justified non false belief).
This is epistemology 101. Suggest you read up on it.

So what you are saying is that whatever your Evolutionary science Teacher, or your religious Pastor tells you, you believe without reason or evidence, right? That would be 'indoctrinated faith followed religiously', not real faith, .. or not the faith described in the Bible.

Evolution is a scientific fact (accepted knowledge), no faith needed since it is based and backed by evidence.
You merely adopted some else's faith, some authority's faith, to accept your faith based belief in your magical mystical deity that has no evidence for it's existence according to your Bible (Heb 11:1). And guess what, Science agrees, you have no evidence for your god, and many religious people agree as well.

Now you can understand why billions of people 'believe' in Evolution, the Big Bang theory, why we have tens of thousands of different religions and their gods, and why so many believe in this Agenda 21 as the solution to all their problems, .. because these are (as you explained) "belief that is held with lack of, in spite of or against reason or evidence" This is NOT how we Believers 'believe' in God I Am Who I Am, our Creator.

You are still making a serious epistemological error.
You can not believe in knowledge when there is evidence. You can only accept or reject knowlege.
You clearly reject Evolution and the Big Bang Theory and try and rationalize it using and epistemological error to say it is a belief (there may be evidence or not) or even worse sating it is faith (there is no evidence).
You hold faith (cognitive content as true knowing there is no evidence for it) in your god. That means you already accepted that there is no evidence and there can not be evidence for your god. If you present evidence than you are merely trying to reject your own faith dogma. That would upset your Jesus as you are clearly going against your scripture.

If you have evidence, then you can not have faith because they are mutually exclusive.
You are merely trying to argue that your faith based belief is an error because you have evidence that can replace your faith. You are going against the Bible and your cosmic tyrant.

I find it quite strange that you do not even understand the central tenant of your dogma: faith. That is quite a surprise and indeed explains your obvious rejection of accepted literature (your scripture and espistomology). You should be concerned, because you are upsetting your Jesus by misrepresenting science and your own faith based belief. Be careful because this error may cost you that eternal after-life that your cosmic sorcerer has on offer.

[arian]

What is your definition of faith, a faith based belief?
If you have evidence, then why have faith?
Are you trying to say your faith based belief is an error because you have evidence that can replace your faith?

You ask again? Look at post 220.

Evidence to REPLACE faith? Okey-dokey

Again, .. Faith without evidence is not faith, it is religion.
Following religious indoctrination is not faith either, it is called walking in darkness, .. it is blindness which causes fear.

[arian]

Here again, .. first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,"

First?!? This was your first step? I have a hard time believing you.

Hi Clownboat!

Well yes, first as I said: first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,", .. that's a logical first step reasoning don't you think? How else would I come to the logical conclusion that; ".. then whatever we didn't create, a Creator God must have done it!"

Plus, I see no logic in this statement. To be logical, it should infer something. It just states something that every human on earth already knows (that we design and create).

Again, .. The evidence is as you said; "what every human on earth already knows (that we design and create)"

Come on now, .. so what's the next logical question? "If we create, then who created the far more complex things we didn't create?" .. right?

Then I use science; ".. then everything that we didn't design and create, .."

This really was step two? Again, I find this hard to believe. It also infers nothing.

Logic, the systematic use of symbolic and mathematical techniques to determine the forms of valid deductive argument.
the quality of being justifiable by reason : there's no logic in telling her not to hit people when that's what you're doing.

.. like a piece of rope nailed to a piece of board called the "Weather Rope" which tells the weather. You leave it outdoors, and if the rope moves back and forth, it is windy. If it's wet, it is raining. If it's ripped off the nail, RUN, .. it's a tornado, .. or, the kids took it. There is faulty logic also, never the less it's logic.

"...then if everything that we didn't design and create..." Yes? Yes? I'm all ears, don't leave me hanging.

Come on, you can do it, ... I know you can Clownboat, "...then if everything that we didn't design and create..." .. then what? It Appeared out of nothing?
See what I mean, .. you have to use logic, "Then a Creator God did it!" It's really not that hard.

And finally I come up with a rational conclusion: "Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!"

Finally?!? As in, this was your last step?

My guess is that first you had a belief (step 3), from there stemmed steps one and two.

Either way, neither of your first two premises infer an intelligent creator.

Well, for us Believers who are not burdened down with religious indoctrinations, it's really easy because our faith is not built on fairytales, .. but evidence.

Then I search for further evidence of this Creator and found the Bible. In there it reveals more logical conclusions like; "We were created in God the Creators image!" Well now that explains a lot, .. wouldn't you agree?

I agree that you found the Bible. The process that you claim for doing so is in question, not to mention your claimed premises don't lead to the conclusion that you found.

The Bible was always there, I even read it but it did not make much sense to me, until my continuos search for truth, God opened the Bible for me. It was like a light that went on, and all of a sudden it was filling in the gaps that science left open. It was like that Johnny Cash song: "I see the light, .. I see the light, .. no more darkness, .. no more night, .. Praise the LORD, .. I see the light!"

For this reason, it appears that you have specific beliefs first and foremost. From there you infer design and a creator.

Are you kidding me, .. who doesn't have specific beliefs first and foremost? Only some people just keep jumping around from one religion to the next. From Former Christian, to Atheist, to Evolutionist, to New Ager and so on.

There is just too much bad design in nature to be lead to an intelligent creator behind it all (as in directly behind it).

Aaahh.. yess. And this is where you much better designers come in, right? With your Genetically Modified animal/humans with a face like a pig, a body of a rat, hooves like a horse, which die soon after birth screeching like a pig, turning and twisting in unimaginable agony as he/it slowly dies to the horror of everyone. You may call this a better design, and even a victory if he/it lives for a few days, but we Believers don't. And neither does your Creator my friend Clownboat! God will not tolerate this level of wickedness for too much longer, .. The Day of Reconing is at hand.

[JohnA]

What is your definition of faith, a faith based belief?
If you have evidence, then why have faith?
Are you trying to say your faith based belief is an error because you have evidence that can replace your faith?

You ask again? Look at post 220.

Evidence to REPLACE faith? Okey-dokey

Again, .. Faith without evidence is not faith, it is religion.
Following religious indoctrination is not faith either, it is called walking in darkness, .. it is blindness which causes fear.

I answered you post and showed your errors.

Yet you are religious and therefore has faith.
Faith is faith, religious or not.
Stop rejecting literature. This has nothing to do with fake gods.

[Clownboat]

Here again, .. first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,"

First?!? This was your first step? I have a hard time believing you.

Hi Clownboat!

Well yes, first as I said: first I use logic; "if we humans design and create,", .. that's a logical first step reasoning don't you think? How else would I come to the logical conclusion that; ".. then whatever we didn't create, a Creator God must have done it!"

Plus, I see no logic in this statement. To be logical, it should infer something. It just states something that every human on earth already knows (that we design and create).

Again, .. The evidence is as you said; "what every human on earth already knows (that we design and create)"

Come on now, .. so what's the next logical question? "If we create, then who created the far more complex things we didn't create?" .. right?

Then I use science; ".. then everything that we didn't design and create, .."

This really was step two? Again, I find this hard to believe. It also infers nothing.

Logic, the systematic use of symbolic and mathematical techniques to determine the forms of valid deductive argument.
the quality of being justifiable by reason : there's no logic in telling her not to hit people when that's what you're doing.

.. like a piece of rope nailed to a piece of board called the "Weather Rope" which tells the weather. You leave it outdoors, and if the rope moves back and forth, it is windy. If it's wet, it is raining. If it's ripped off the nail, RUN, .. it's a tornado, .. or, the kids took it. There is faulty logic also, never the less it's logic.

"...then if everything that we didn't design and create..." Yes? Yes? I'm all ears, don't leave me hanging.

Come on, you can do it, ... I know you can Clownboat, "...then if everything that we didn't design and create..." .. then what? It Appeared out of nothing?
See what I mean, .. you have to use logic, "Then a Creator God did it!" It's really not that hard.

And finally I come up with a rational conclusion: "Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!"

Finally?!? As in, this was your last step?

My guess is that first you had a belief (step 3), from there stemmed steps one and two.

Either way, neither of your first two premises infer an intelligent creator.

Well, for us Believers who are not burdened down with religious indoctrinations, it's really easy because our faith is not built on fairytales, .. but evidence.

Then I search for further evidence of this Creator and found the Bible. In there it reveals more logical conclusions like; "We were created in God the Creators image!" Well now that explains a lot, .. wouldn't you agree?

I agree that you found the Bible. The process that you claim for doing so is in question, not to mention your claimed premises don't lead to the conclusion that you found.

The Bible was always there, I even read it but it did not make much sense to me, until my continuos search for truth, God opened the Bible for me. It was like a light that went on, and all of a sudden it was filling in the gaps that science left open. It was like that Johnny Cash song: "I see the light, .. I see the light, .. no more darkness, .. no more night, .. Praise the LORD, .. I see the light!"

For this reason, it appears that you have specific beliefs first and foremost. From there you infer design and a creator.

Are you kidding me, .. who doesn't have specific beliefs first and foremost? Only some people just keep jumping around from one religion to the next. From Former Christian, to Atheist, to Evolutionist, to New Ager and so on.

There is just too much bad design in nature to be lead to an intelligent creator behind it all (as in directly behind it).

Aaahh.. yess. And this is where you much better designers come in, right? With your Genetically Modified animal/humans with a face like a pig, a body of a rat, hooves like a horse, which die soon after birth screeching like a pig, turning and twisting in unimaginable agony as he/it slowly dies to the horror of everyone. You may call this a better design, and even a victory if he/it lives for a few days, but we Believers don't. And neither does your Creator my friend Clownboat! God will not tolerate this level of wickedness for too much longer, .. The Day of Reconing is at hand.

Let's break it down shall we?

Arian:
A) if we humans design and create
B) then everything that we didn't design and create
Therefore: Must have come by a Creator with very high intelligence who designed all this!
(This really is more of a sentence broken up by A, B and therefore, rather than two premises pointing to a conclusion)

A) Yes, humans can design and create. So what? Some things humans designed and created, and other things happen naturally, like snowflakes and weather systems. Your, "if humans design and create" is therefore a meaningless premise.

B) "then everything that we didn't design and create".... This is also a meaningless premise. It's almost like you are trying to suggest that things humans didn't design, like snowflakes, the weather, sand dunes etc.... must have come from something that you have yet to link to this premise.

But wait! Where are you going with all of this? That's right, all along you have been asserting your conclusion into your premises (even though they are faulty).

C) Your therefore fails. Your faulty premises don't point to an intelligent creator. We understand how snowflakes form. They are not designed, nor created. Thus, even though your premises are faulty, your conclusion can be shown to be in error.

This does not mean there is not a god of some sort out there. This only shows that your current argument is not logical and should be discarded due to that fact.
Perhaps try:
Premise A
Premise B
Therefore...

Like:
A) Humans are complex
B) Evolution explains how humans became complex.
Therefore, evolution is a good reason for accepting why we exist.