How important is the question of God to you.

Discussion in 'The Sanctuary' started by TheBigPayback, Dec 15, 2012.

?

how important to you is it?

  1. Very Important/ of Utmost importace

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. Important

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Important but Not Essential

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. completely Unimportant/ Not very important

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Well, I disagree. At the least here the theory is just biased on assumptions from good observations (where possible).

    For example, you cannot observe Macro evolution. It is not demonstrable or testable. It is an assumption of what happened passed off as fact.

    Evolution has nothing to do with us sending information across the internet. Evolution theory is not a part science.

    Name one advancement in the name of the Evolution Theory.


    //

    I'm not used to anything man but speaking out...I understand we all will disagree. However, there is only one truth.
    test
  2. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    i notice i didn't answer your first question. but if you really want an answer to "what is evolution," i'm afraid i'm going to have to invoke the textbook definition.
    test
  3. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    LOL that's okay man. I'm sure you would say "gene frequency change in a population over time" and skipping the other necessary steps for life to have come alive, find food and learn how to mate/reproduce.

    ;p
    test
  4. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    i started typing out a response about evidence for evolution but then i remembered where this argument started. this assertion that you can't observe evolution is irrelevant to the idea that every thing preceding the origins of life is an inseparable part of the theory of how life evolved.
    test
  5. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    In the case of so called Macro evolution study I agree with ya. I get you on this. But know this, it is not an assertion to say Marco evolution is not observable. It is plain fact that it is not observable, demonstrable or testable. Real science seeks to do these things, of which we benefit greatly in society.
    test
  6. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    so wait... does this mean you are admitting that the 6 steps of evolution is a bogus model? cause that would be agreeing with me.
    test
  7. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    I understand that "scientists" understand that chemicals, planets, elements, the cosmos all had their own evolution and this surely happened first before the phenomena of life coming from non life and evolving from lesser forms to higher forms.

    Star evolution has a very "legitimate" model in the "scientific" community. So does all the other steps, having theories and giving serious study...all with assumed non bogus but correct models.

    Do I agree with what these men think ? No. But I am able to see it in their shoes, as you and all of us are if we are to be honest and seek it out unbiasedly.

    The state protected scientific community however has to "tow the party lines" and cannot question it's own theories. That would be academic suicide.

    Teach capitalism in Soviet Russia 30 years ago...you would be exiled to Siberia forever.
    test
  8. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,468
    1. I'm not preparing myself in this life for the next one whether it's there or not.

    2. I think yes, although I know there are caveats to this line of thinking. If you're not a good person or you've been pushed too far and it takes the afterlife to stop you from committing heinous acts then focus on that.
    test
  9. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    you're still ignoring my central point, so i'm done.
    test
  10. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    What is your central point

    And if you are done, it was cool to discuss things with you.
    test
  11. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    central point

    .....
    test
  12. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Ok, let me know if I got it. I admit I am having trouble understanding what you said, but I did try to address it the best I could.


    Yeah, you do not have to have working 'expertise' in star evolution to know and study Marco evolution for example...yeah I agree. You can study one without the other in theory.

    Did I get it ?
    test
  13. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    yes, you're agreeing with what i'm saying, but you aren't applying the implications to your 6 step model.
    test
  14. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Well in truth I am not so much as agreeing with you rather than understanding you. Big difference.
    test
  15. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    I mean i understand what you are saying.
    test
  16. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    well if you don't agree you could always raise an objection to one of my points. if there's a flaw in my reasoning then i don't see it, at which point you should call my attention to it. otherwise we're just repeating our positions to each other.
    test
  17. M-theory

    M-theory Saint Esprit

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2001
    Messages:
    38,468
    test
  18. Coup d'état

    Coup d'état Don't believe the hype

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2009
    Messages:
    4,096
    Fair.

    I understand your point, that you can study one "step" of the theory independent of others. That is fine in theory. In practice however, what is really available for us to study and whether that what we are observing really indicates in the positive the sequence, the totality of the entire theory is another story. All official dogma must be air tight...which it is far from.

    You know my position, do you understand it ?

    In reality, these models (the 4 steps) must all be air tight and be built upon with evidence...of which there is none. Cosmic, Chemical, Planetary and stellar evolution are insurmountable obstacles that organic evolution needed to have gotten past first...I say this to put the theory in historical perspective.

    //

    I guess that is where this discussion is going anyway...to the "facts". I think we've been there before but I wouldn't mind hashing a out a few lines of reasoning if you were to present the common conventions of this encompassing evolution theory. One topic at a time, point by point, precept upon precept.

    It is hard to argue against a negative. I am convinced this theory falls flat on its face under close examination.

    You may say I am not a 'scientist' so how can I be credible and be taken seriously ?

    Well, the only good grades Charley Darwin received was in bible college...and I'm sure you consider him a great scientist ;)
    test
  19. Geedorah

    Geedorah King

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2011
    Messages:
    11,872
    Isnt Big Bang and God theory the same then?
    You are saying God was always there,Big Bang also just happened.
    Im not a she.
    test
  20. reggie jax

    reggie jax Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2006
    Messages:
    1,351
    @ coup d'état

    you're still saying you acknowledge my point and then going on to ignore it in making your own arguments. either you don't understand my point or you're dodging it.

    i'm not just saying that theoretically the different theories can be studied on their own. i'm saying they have to be, there's no other way to study them. i'm also saying that the same "obstacles" that you say stand in the way before evolution could take place, also stand in the way before anything that science studies can take place. what you're arguing against isn't evolution but scientific naturalism.

    if you want you can make a thread about it. i'll respond if you drop the 6 stage model and keep it short, concise and original. no quote mining or jumping from topic to topic before a point has been settled, use your own words and respond to my points directly, and i'll do the same. i don't want another 'debate', though. the prospect of 'winning' ruins any potential for a productive conversation.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)