And so, I refute evolution...

[tacoclimber]

Cheese Hey!! What about the Zombie theories? Cave men from Gico??? Gecko's that sell insurance?? You friend should be able to solve these as well: biased, apron his unsolvable argument!!

I, like, MTL RUNNER feel that you can not win this battle without dieing and comming back to tell us what was or is there? Ask your youth paster to go first!! TJ

Befuddling addition to this discussion...

"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of thing unseen."

If it could be proven to my highly limited human intellect, would it require faith?
Does the requirement of faith rule out the legitimacy of anything?

Hmmm...

Evangelical Christianity aside, I resolve to know one thing:
Christ and Him crucified.

Carry on.

[Henrythewound]

These are the kind of arguments that piss me off. My brother went to a christian high school and was IMO brainwashed into believing the creationism "science". He was not given the other side of the coin, only those views and so-called flaws in evolutionary theory that were then used to support creationism. If you pick up a creationist book it is filled with these kind of arguments.

Both sides are not going to convert the other. I am content to let someone else believe what they want and I expect the same. I dislike prepared arguments where someone comes armed with their point A, B, and C to convince me I am wrong in my belief. Many heated debates ensue.

I remember a National Geographic cover a while back that had a headline "Is Evolution just a theory?". When you turned to the page of the article there were the words NO in the hugest page-filling font imaginable. I thought it was hilarious. I subscribe to the mag and every month there are people writing in telling Nat Geo how wrong they are for supporting evolution, shame on them, etc.

Point is, there are at least 2 camps. Being a geologist you may be able to guess which one I belong to. I was raised in the church and things never quite sat well with me. Once I truly started questioning things for myself, things that don't make sense logically, I stopped going to church.

[tacoclimber]

I have found that my own "logic" is often anything but...

Church is not God, God is not church.
Of course, that's heading down another topic...

[Texas Jim]

ect.

Cheese Hey!! What about the Zombie theories? Cave men from Gico??? Gecko's that sell insurance?? You friend should be able to solve these as well: biased, apron his unsolvable argument!!

I, like, MTL RUNNER feel that you can not win this battle without dieing and comming back to tell us what was or is there? Ask your youth paster to go first!! TJ

Befuddling addition to this discussion...

"Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of thing unseen."

If it could be prov-en to my highly limited human intellect, would it require faith?
Does the requirement of faith rule out the legitimacy of anything?

Hmmm...

Evangelical Christianity aside, I resolve to know one thing:
Christ and Him crucified.

Carry on.

Faith has several meanings 1. unquestioning belief. 2 unquestioning belief in God,religion, ect. 3. a particular religion. 4. anything believed. 5.complete trust or confidence. 6. loyalty.


With what you have said in mind, I would say that you choose to, " Resolve in thefaith of one thing:" "Christ and Him crucified."

To answer your own question it does require faith to to believe in things that can not be prov-en. TJ

[BruceTS]

I will solve this problem once and for all.......

When I die I will come back and post what my findings are

now if I don't make said post then

[Cheese]

In Philosophy when discussing Moral Realism, we consider the idea that although some things do not require justification, they may in fact have justification. Some truths are perhaps self-evident, although they do not require proof, they can be proven.

Faith is believe in something that is not proven. If it were proven, it would be fact.

I think that enlightening discussion can occur in this arena. I do not think that it can easily occur after 11, at a bar, when one side has come looking for a fight.

[tacoclimber]

In Philosophy when discussing Moral Realism, we consider the idea that although some things do not require justification, they may in fact have justification. Some truths are perhaps self-evident, although they do not require proof, they can be proven.

Faith is believe in something that is not proven. If it were proven, it would be fact.

I think that enlightening discussion can occur in this arena. I do not think that it can easily occur after 11, at a bar, when one side has come looking for a fight.

I agree, Adrian, wholeheartedly.

When I was a much younger, and slightly less foolish youth in college, I would spend a good deal of my extracurricular time debating religion and philosophy with people who believed in ideas contrary to my own. I frequently was successful at "outarguing" them. But I eventually came to the understanding that although I was perhaps winning the battle, I was losing the war. The only thing I really succeeded in convincing them was that I was just another Evangelical jerk with a superiority complex who was on a personal Crusade. I say that to my own shame. I look at things much differently now.

I once heard it said that "if I can argue someone into believing in Christ, someone else can argue them out." I am content now with letting God do the work, since most of the time I just end up in the way, anyway.




So anyway, evolution...

[Texas Jim]

So true , I wonder what I would be if I wasn't?? lol TJ

[fustercluck]

As evolution and God seem to be integral subjects.....Pascal's wager.

[Cheese]

As evolution and God seem to be integral subjects.....Pascal's wager.

Yup.

I am not sure how you can argue against the reality that those best suited to the environment will survive.

The trick then is what do we mean by best suited? Those who are best suited survive, those who survive are best suited. It is not informative to say those who survive survive.