Evolution

[Churchwork]

Evolution is not wrong, it just lacks in its ability to explain what happened before the amoeba. It only deals with the physical and does not touch on morality of the soulical and the spiritual.

Evolution itself is not capable of explaining how God allows the gravity to escape (scientists agree there seems to be some loss of gravity out of the known universe) to produce rapture; or in quantum physics (http://biblocality.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2424&postcount=1), despite the low probability of a particular outcome, it would be that outcome that allows for resurrection. Quantum physicists say if you push on a wall long enough, nearing eternity, eventually you will be able to pass through it.

Evolution can't explain how the dark energy is stronger than the dark matter and matter combined. There will always be something God keeps for Himself. Perhaps in some cases we are not designed to even be able to understand all things. Naturally, the created can't understand all things of the uncreated creator, nor His way of doing things.

[darkreign]

Evolution has NOTHING do with how the "amoeba got here", interesting that you say amoeba, but anyway, you are right, it has nothing do with what you call a spirit or a soul.

Evolution does not deal with ridiculous claims like gravity leaking being caused by God, what the duce? It would be the outcome that allows for the russerection? What in the world are you talking about, who taught you this stuff, pseudo science university?

Evolution has nothing to do with quantum mechanics, the rapture, dark matter, or gravity leaking outside the universe, this is a strawman!

That would be like me saying "The bible is not wrong, it just cant explain how car engines work, or how the internet operates, or how heat leaks out of an oven into fairy land to go play in the land of ressurecting super pink unicorns."

See how nonsensical this is? Please, issue some form of retraction, because you are just pressing nonsense.

[Churchwork]

darkreign,

That's right. Evolution says nothing about how the amoeba got here. That's why I said, "it just lacks in its ability to explain what happened before the amoeba."

The greatest scientists in the world today are seeking to find this leaking God particle. It may be ridiculous to you because you are so narrow minded, but they may be onto something in building the largest particle collider in the world which I think is over 27 miles long.

I agree, evolution is also so simplistic an idea that it would not even cover the work being done searching for sparticles.

You sound like you are really behind the times.

Since I already said, "Evolution can't explain..." these things, why then belligerently respond by saying, "Evolution has nothing to do with..." these things. You are not so good in communication skills are you?

Let me give you an analogy how horrible your approach is. If someone says "Sally went out to play with the dog," and you respond with, "No! Sally went out to play with the dog," you can see how mindless that is when you do that. This is a strawman arguing not to mention utterly belligerent. You're gone.


That would be like me saying "The bible is not wrong, it just cant explain how car engines work, or how the internet operates, or how heat leaks out of an oven into fairy land to go play in the land of ressurecting super pink unicorns."
Since evolution (the "dust" Gen. 2.7) is not designed to explain some things, so the Bible, which is a book of spirit, is not designed to explain mechanical engineering. There is nothing wrong with laws of one thing being inadequate to explain something else. How silly that the laws of addition and multiplication, for example, are suppose to explain quantum physics or the psychology of the orangutan.

The difference, is that the smartest minds in the world today are pursuing this God particle or Graviton that is suppose to escape when these particles and sparticles collide, giving grounds for resurrection. I don't think these scientists are searching for a super pink unicorn.

:hilarious

While there is basis for scientists to searching for sparticles scientifically speaking, there is no reason to search for your unicorns.

I think you should issue a retraction, because it is pressing nonsense, don't you think? Why believe in puff the magic dragon of things happening all by themselves? Science disagrees with you.

[Cyndi]

Evolution is not wrong, it just lacks in its ability to explain what happened before the amoeba. It only deals with the physical and does not touch on morality of the soulical and the spiritual.

Evolution itself is not capable of explaining how God allows the gravity to escape (scientists agree there seems to be some loss of gravity out of the known universe) to produce rapture; or in quantum physics (http://biblocality.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2424&postcount=1), despite the low probability of a particular outcome, it would be that outcome that allows for resurrection. Quantum physicists say if you push on a wall long enough, nearing eternity, eventually you will be able to pass through it.

Evolution can't explain how the dark energy is stronger than the dark matter and matter combined. There will always be something God keeps for Himself. Perhaps in some cases we are not designed to even be able to understand all things. Naturally, the created can't understand all things of the uncreated creator, nor His way of doing things.

The statement pertaining to quantum physics is not accurate in terms of the resurrection. Quantum physics does not say if you push on a wall long enough nearing eternity, eventually you will be able to pass through it. I believe there may be some misconception as to what quantum mechanics is and how it functions pertaining to that statement.

Evolution explaining dark matter, or gravity is irrevelent. They are both processes scientists are still studying. I believe there are things God keeps to himself. Science is not one of them. He placed us here on Earth with a brain which he intended for us to use.

Evolution is a part of God's creation. The idea of evolution is not intended to touch on spiritual or the soul. It is a definition of the mechanism that explains how life changes and adapts on Earth.

[Churchwork]

Quantum physics does say if you push on a wall long enough you will be able to pass through it. I didn't make this up, but I got it off a program on tv where this is what Quantum Physicists said to describe the nature of this phenomenon. So this statement remains true. By the way, these were the most highly regarded scientists on the planet today.

Evolution is the study of biology since the Amoeba. It does not address cosmology and gravity and dark matter, so you are right, evolution is irrelevant in explaining these things.

The things God keeps to himself would include those things that science will be limited in explaining. God has no problem with science. His issue is with fuzzy science.

Evolution is the "dust" (Gen. 2.7) from which the body was created. Then about 6000 years ago God breathed the breath of life into the body from dust to create the soul life. God waited at least 13.7 billion years to create the body from dust. What patience!

Evolution, since it is so limited, should not be used as some reason to reject God. That is the point! It would be like trying to use addition to disprove calculus. Evolution is also limited in understanding adapting and life changes in terms of the effects of sin and salvation.

Like I said, evolution is limited.

[Auriliux]

I didn't make this up, but I got it off a program on tv
Do you believe everything you hear on TV?


By the way, these were the most highly regarded scientists on the planet today.
What were their names? Were they even physicists?


Evolution is the study of biology since the Amoeba.
Evolution isn't a study of something, Evolution is the theory of inheritence. Genetisism <sp> is the study of genetics which is what you could apply to anything that had a cellular structure (Which obviously isn't the first form of life)


Evolution is the "dust" (Gen. 2.7) from which the body was created.
The dust is a theory?


Evolution, since it is so limited
Limited in what way?


It would be like trying to use addition to disprove calculus.
Is it just me, or does that analogy not actually make sense


Evolution is also limited in understanding adapting and life changes in terms of the effects of sin and salvation.
Evolution isn't just limited, it doesn't actually have anything to do with a term that's unmeasurable. What does genetics have to do with sin or salvation?


Like I said, evolution is limited.
Again, how so?

[Churchwork]

Since nothing in nature can happen all by itself, know there must be the uncaused creator.

[DD_8630]

Since nothing in nature can happen all by itself, know there must be the uncaused creator.
Since they can, know that there mightn't be.

[Auriliux]

Churchwork, why is it when you fail to be able to refute our points, you resort to simply saying things like "Well, it can't happen. The Lord does it"...

We have used facts, and not ambiguous statements. Could you try and do the same? And if you can't think of any remarks to refute our statements, just don't say anything?

[Churchwork]

Your point is refuted because there are trillions of things in nature that have a cause and you can't prove one thing without a cause. The Lord does all things too. In fact, His blood and body on a molecular level have touched all things.

Always remember, since nothing in nature happens all by itself, nature can happen all by itself, but requires a cause that is uncaused, because there cannot be an eternity of the past of cause and effects due to the exponential progression of conscience.

[DD_8630]

Your point is refuted because there are trillions of things in nature that have a cause and you can't prove one thing without a cause.
Radioactive decay, the photoelectric effect, quantum tunneling, etc. You have thus far given no explanation for these phenomena.


The Lord does all things too. In fact, His blood and body on a molecular level have touched all things.
Got any evidence for this? Thought not.

[Auriliux]

His blood and body on a molecular level have touched all things.

Impossible. Matter cannot travel faster than the speed of light, therefore how could his atoms touched all atoms in the universe in the space of 2000 years?


but requires a cause that is uncaused

Why?


because there cannot be an eternity of the past of cause and effects due to the exponential progression of conscience.

What, exactly, does consciousness have to do with a concept of eternity?

[Churchwork]

None of these processes prove unequivocally something happens all by itself, therefore the burden of the proof remains on you. You get an infraction for Board Etiquette #6 for repeating yourself without anything to support your idea. Just because mankind, including myself don't know the cause to somethings is no reason to assume they don't have a cause in the backdrop of trillions of things that do have causes. That's illogical.

Yes, recently someone sent me the evidence.

[Churchwork]

Auriliux,

The math calculation I saw was all things on earth, not all things in the universe. Our experience is this earth, nor far away distant planets.

Don't ask the question why the cause must be uncaused after the answer was already given. Don't ask why the exponential progression of conscience in the 4 Step Proof for God (http://biblocality.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4195&postcount=1) disallows an eternity of the past of cause and effects, when it was already given.

[Auriliux]

None of these processes prove unequivocally something happens all by itself, therefore the burden of the proof remains on you. You get an infraction for Board Etiquette #6 for repeating yourself without anything to support your idea. Just because mankind, including myself don't know the cause to somethings is no reason to assume they don't have a cause in the backdrop of trillions of things that do have causes. That's illogical.

Yes, recently someone sent me the evidence.


But the point is we do have evidence... You don't... And no, a book written by mere morals doesn't really count, they could have simply been con men who wished for people to listen to them and respect them by saying that they were prophets or instruments of a creator. If, for instance, it was written directly by a shining being who held uptmost power, and was recorded doing so by eye witnesses, video recorders, photos, and other analysis to show something special stood there and wrote I could admit that it was the word of god.

[Churchwork]

You can say you have evidence, but you aren't able to show it.

A prophet is one who has revelation from God. It is testable and proven. For example Daniel's prophecy came to pass about the coming Messiah.

It is unrealistic to place demands on history with technology that did not exist then.

What you are going through is this: it doesn't matter if Jesus stood right before you this very moment and performed scores of miracles, you would still not accept Him.

That is why Hell was created, because some simply don't want to be forgiven for their sins. They love their sins too much to let them go. In layman's terms: you're a bad person.

[Auriliux]

What you are going through is this: it doesn't matter if Jesus stood right before you this very moment and performed scores of miracles, you would still not accept Him.

No, because if there was adequate proof, I would believe in God. I would admit that I was wrong. Unfortunately it's you who have this problem, there's all the scientific proof around you, but religious people refuse to accept that

[Churchwork]

There is adequate proof, but you still reject Jesus, showing your hostility to your Creator, which is why you are going to hell. It's a matter of your heart.

I highly recommend you watch the documentary, The Lazarus Phenomenon. Abraham clearly said to the Rich Man what good would it be for you to experience the resurrection of Jesus yourself, because you would not believe Him even then, since you don't even accept what the prophets say already. In other words, you have already made up your mind, shut your mind down to the evidence and don't care anyway. How sad for you that this is the way you want to live your life. Whereas those that are saved are conscientious in examining the data to discern correctly.

The scientific proof is all around you, but religious people like you prefer to remain antichrist. Like God said, all you need do is look at the mountains and the stars to know that you did not do it, they did not happen all by themselves, but were caused by the uncaused, Himself.

Logic, though, can't convince an unsaved person because, logic is not what is holding you back from accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior. You have a spirit of God-consciousness, so you already know, but you don't want to give it up because you prefer to remain in your sin nature. That's what bad people do, they rationalize their sins and themselves apart from God. The reasons you come up with are absolutely illogical, so when logic is given to you, shutting your mind down, repeating yourself to drown out the truth and getting lost in the world is your only recourse instead of facing reality. Nothing is new under the sun. The same lame behavior patterns today are the same responses of people who refused to be saved millennia ago.