Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[evolution]

But, obviously if you do not yet know what God is, in the context to me, then my answer would make ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE AT ALL, TO YOU.

That's fine. Give the answer that would make "absolutely no sense to me."

I have zero interest in you explaining why you're not answering. Just give the answer already. If it doesn't make any sense to me that's fine.

Because a sock is a thing. And, if God is said to have created every thing, then obviously a sock is evidence of God and Its ability to create.

[evolution]

All "darwin" ever really did was just help in verifying just what is written in the bible, that is: Everything is created, which is evolving, which just means through evolution every thing is created. This is what is clearly written, and stated in the bible, as can be clearly SEEN and evidenced.

This is probably the dumbest most funny and stupid thing I have read all week!!
This is thigh slapping risible..

I love the way Darwin says that it was all created in 7 days! Amazing!!
And the bit about the flood - priceless!

And when Moses looks up to heaven and having thanked god for the 10 commandments, says "Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed 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."
Yes, replies God, "A grain in the balance will determine which individual shall live and which shall die - which variety or species shall increase in number, and which shall decrease, or finally become extinct. But remember Moses you are but a Man. Man, however well-behaved,
At best is but a monkey shaved!"

But none of that, to me, says anything about how every thing is created through evolution. So, I find you bringing obviously completely

[evolution]

ridiculous and absurd, nothing to do with what I said, notions to try to counter what I actually said and meant also very funny.

[evolution]

LOL

evolution, your manner of discussion is interesting! I love your care to the words, but I think you try to ignore their meanings and philosophies

Are you aware that different people see and have different meanings, for the same word?

If you assume there is one meaning for each and every word, which everyone agrees with, then you will find that you are sadly mistaken.

If you think that I am ignoring 'the'meanings to words shows that you appear to not be aware that words mean different things to different people.

I think those who with agnostic tendency try to make a divine discussion mixed up and complex to confuse he who brings some simple proofs about existence of God! I think in addition to other factors, one of the key reasons of disbelief in God is just this manner of thinking which they leave the vivid and simple proofs and go to the complex words, phrase and philosophies that take them away from the subject more and more, because a group of them think this manner of philosophy is more develop than theistic belief and is closer to nowadays science and technology, while today a trivial microbiological beings with a particular genetic array has made man, science and technology unable!

Are you even aware that I am trying to show, with evidence and proof, how God exists, and who and what God is as well?

Are you also aware that this can be done very simply and very easily? That is; when you people who believe, and those who disbelieve, STOP believing and disbelieving.

Well, my purpose is not that to humiliate the sciences and technology, because I myself am a talented researcher (or maybe scientist) in these fields, but I want to say what human knows is very less than what he doesn't know!

Who is a "he"?

The material sciences is just a page of creation book and there are so many knowledge and mysteries upon these issues that man doesn't know! How can we travel to the Mars with an airplane?! And how we can travel to the farthest galaxies with a spacecraft with hydrogen and oxygen (or even atomic) fuel?! I think if it is possible, it will take long about thousand trillion years!!

(despite I love astronomy sciences and NASA researches very much, I had to bring this example)

I have no idea what this example is for exactly.

I was going to answer some of your questions but my English is slow and writing long comments makes me tired. I will reply to the questions later. But let me I answer one.

Yes, the computer mouse is my own design. It is not among those mouses that are taught in the internet or instruction articles

Okay, if you say so. But did you mean 'the' computer mouse is your own design, or, 'that' computer mouse is your own design?

[Sculptor1]

This is probably the dumbest most funny and stupid thing I have read all week!!
This is thigh slapping risible..

I love the way Darwin says that it was all created in 7 days! Amazing!!
And the bit about the flood - priceless!

And when Moses looks up to heaven and having thanked god for the 10 commandments, says "Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed 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."
Yes, replies God, "A grain in the balance will determine which individual shall live and which shall die - which variety or species shall increase in number, and which shall decrease, or finally become extinct. But remember Moses you are but a Man. Man, however well-behaved,
At best is but a monkey shaved!"

But none of that, to me, says anything about how every thing is created through evolution. So, I find you bringing obviously completely

"..So, I find you bringing obviously completely.."

Really?

[Faustus5]

There is absolutely nothing about natural selection mentioned or even hinted at in the Bible.

If this is what you believe is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that could show you otherwise.

The essential, core insight from Darwin was that biological complexity emerges from an utterly mindless, purposeless process. Again, completely alien to anything in scripture.

Again, if this is what you believe is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that you would be OPEN to listening to nor looking at.

All you'd need to do is quote scripture, any scripture, in which evolution by natural selection is mentioned or even hinted at. If you can't, that would suggest that you were either lying or don't actually know what you were talking about.

[Terrapin Station]

That's fine. Give the answer that would make "absolutely no sense to me."

I have zero interest in you explaining why you're not answering. Just give the answer already. If it doesn't make any sense to me that's fine.

Because a sock is a thing. And, if God is said to have created every thing, then obviously a sock is evidence of God and Its ability to create.

Thanks for answering.

The problem with that is that you're assuming prior to examining the sock that "God created everything." The sock itself isn't evidence of this.

I'm not assuming prior to examining the sock that "There are no gods." I'm looking at what the sock can provide evidence of. The sock can provide evidence of things like cotton, say, because it's made of cotton (if it is). Or it can provide evidence of polyester, or whatever it's made of. It can provide evidence of dyes, knitting techniques, etc. Because that's what's present in the sock--materials, ways the materials are put together or treated, etc. We can't assume before examining the sock that there are or aren't any gods, especially if we're concluding that the sock does or does not provide evidence of gods.

[Sculptor1]

That's fine. Give the answer that would make "absolutely no sense to me."

I have zero interest in you explaining why you're not answering. Just give the answer already. If it doesn't make any sense to me that's fine.

Because a sock is a thing. And, if God is said to have created every thing, then obviously a sock is evidence of God and Its ability to create.

Sorry to inform you but my socks were created by Marks & Spencer.

[Sculptor1]

PS
https://www.marksandspencer.com/5-pack- ... color=NAVY

[evolution]

But none of that, to me, says anything about how every thing is created through evolution. So, I find you bringing obviously completely

"..So, I find you bringing obviously completely.."

Really?

I did finish that sentence in my next post. I accidentally hit the submit button early.

[evolution]

If this is what you believe is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that could show you otherwise.



Again, if this is what you believe is true, then there is absolutely NOTHING that you would be OPEN to listening to nor looking at.

All you'd need to do is quote scripture, any scripture, in which evolution by natural selection is mentioned or even hinted at. If you can't, that would suggest that you were either lying or don't actually know what you were talking about.

Yes I CAN quote the parts of scripture in the Bible that explains evolution, naturally, by natural selection, to me, which, by the way explains it in the most simplest and easiest way. But what is the use? If people already hold the belief that there is none there, then could it be possible for them to see and understand things how I do?

Also, people have been taught to believe either evolution OR creation. They have not yet been brought up, and thus prepared, to learn and understand that BOTH creation AND evolution play equal parts in 'God's natural selection'.

So, if I quote scripture, then most people will only remain looking at that quote from the perspective as they see it and have now. Until someone shows me that they are truly interested in other's different or opposing views, then there is no use revealing my view. After all I am not here to show, reveal, nor prove anything to those who are not yet ready and interested to learn more and/or anew. I have, also, already explained the sign of when a person is Truly ready and wanting to learn and understand more, from my perspective. When I see that sign, then I will do what I choose to do. If that is to quote scripture and show how, to me, it explains evolution, then it will be available for you to see it.

[evolution]

Because a sock is a thing. And, if God is said to have created every thing, then obviously a sock is evidence of God and Its ability to create.

Thanks for answering.

The problem with that is that you're assuming prior to examining the sock that "God created everything." The sock itself isn't evidence of this.

But I NEVER assumed any such thing. I even used the 'if' word, as evidenced by my written words. Therefore, IF God is said to have created every thing, by someone, then, to them, every thing, including ALL individual socks is evidence.

BUT, for people like yourself who wholeheartedly believe, and absolutely insist, that there is no such thing as God, then all of this is just a waste of time discussing as it will make ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE AT ALL, TO YOU, as previously stated.

Also, and by the way, there is no problem at sll with what I said, from my perspective.

I'm not assuming prior to examining the sock that "There are no gods."

So, are you now admitting to the fact that the sock could in fact be evidence that God actually exists? Or, will you not go that far?

Is it possible to you that there is a God that created every thing?

I'm looking at what the sock can provide evidence of. The sock can provide evidence of things like cotton, say, because it's made of cotton (if it is). Or it can provide evidence of polyester, or whatever it's made of. It can provide evidence of dyes, knitting techniques, etc. Because that's what's present in the sock--materials, ways the materials are put together or treated, etc. We can't assume before examining the sock that there are or aren't any gods, especially if we're concluding that the sock does or does not provide evidence of gods.

You accusation that you are not assuming something here just does not come across as being true, in the way you write. Anyway, the sock is evidence that it was created, right?

If yes, then it was created by who/what?

The way you are looking at the sock is to see what it is made out of and the way those materials were put together. You are over-looking and missing the simple and easy thing of who and/or what created it, which is what this discussion and topic is about.

[evolution]

Because a sock is a thing. And, if God is said to have created every thing, then obviously a sock is evidence of God and Its ability to create.

Sorry to inform you but my socks were created by Marks & Spencer.

And who and/or what were those "marks" and "spencer" things created by?

[Mans]

LOL

evolution, your manner of discussion is interesting! I love your care to the words, but I think you try to ignore their meanings and philosophies

Are you aware that different people see and have different meanings, for the same word?

If you assume there is one meaning for each and every word, which everyone agrees with, then you will find that you are sadly mistaken.

If you think that I am ignoring 'the'meanings to words shows that you appear to not be aware that words mean different things to different people.

Most of the time the meaning of a word is one, but the interpretations that comes from different concepts are many.

I think those who with agnostic tendency try to make a divine discussion mixed up and complex to confuse he who brings some simple proofs about existence of God! I think in addition to other factors, one of the key reasons of disbelief in God is just this manner of thinking which they leave the vivid and simple proofs and go to the complex words, phrase and philosophies that take them away from the subject more and more, because a group of them think this manner of philosophy is more develop than theistic belief and is closer to nowadays science and technology, while today a trivial microbiological beings with a particular genetic array has made man, science and technology unable!

Are you even aware that I am trying to show, with evidence and proof, how God exists, and who and what God is as well?

Are you also aware that this can be done very simply and very easily? That is; when you people who believe, and those who disbelieve, STOP believing and disbelieving.

?... excuse me, your expression shows multiple concepts that made me confused! Do you believe in God?

The material sciences is just a page of creation book and there are so many knowledge and mysteries upon these issues that man doesn't know! How can we travel to the Mars with an airplane?! And how we can travel to the farthest galaxies with a spacecraft with hydrogen and oxygen (or even atomic) fuel?! I think if it is possible, it will take long about thousand trillion years!!

(despite I love astronomy sciences and NASA researches very much, I had to bring this example)

I have no idea what this example is for exactly.

I wanted to show the smallness of man and shortness of his ability against the unknown things in the universe. When we even don't know the record of the Mars in the solar system history (the airplane was an example about the insufficiency of our knowledge and recognition) and are not aware about a so far galaxy in the space, how we can expect to know their creator sensibly?

I was going to answer some of your questions but my English is slow and writing long comments makes me tired. I will reply to the questions later. But let me I answer one.

Yes, the computer mouse is my own design. It is not among those mouses that are taught in the internet or instruction articles


Okay, if you say so. But did you mean 'the' computer mouse is your own design, or, 'that' computer mouse is your own design?

?... excuse me, I couldn't get this complicated philosophy or probably it is because of my incomplete English that I don't know the difference between "the" and "that"

Also, you are taking me toward your manner of answering quote by quote.

Okay, I follow it but am careful not to lose the path ... LOL

[Steve3007]

viewtopic.php?p=359448#p359448
viewtopic.php?p=359491#p359491

Darwin deny this axiom and offer this philosophy that the nature and the beings in it are included a continuous evolution autonomously. This philosophy is opposite to the axiom that says the regularity and orders in the objects is not accidentally and every regularity needs an intelligent regulator.

Hi Mans. I see from your posts that you're making the classic argument by analogy with human design, often associated with William Paley and his watchmaker analogy. It's been discussed here many, many, many times before. Have you discussed it previously with others? If so, what kinds of arguments against it did you encounter? Were any of them interesting? Given that it's such a well worn subject it would be interesting to try to find a new angle.