Homeschool World Forums     Home     Mall     Catalog     Articles     Contests     Events     Groups     Forum     Contact  
Homeschool World Forum Forum Index Homeschool World Forum
Read thousands of forum posts on topics such as homeschool law, getting started, curriculum, special needs, homeschool vs public school, and much, much more!
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Creation vs Evolution (split from other thread)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Homeschool World Forum Forum Index -> Religious Discussion / Topics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 12:15 pm    Post subject: "Lucy" is only 40% of a skeleton... Reply with quote

"Lucy" is only 40% of a skeleton, and even these bones weren't all in the same place (the knee bones were found 1.5 miles away, which makes it highly unlikely they were even part of Lucy in the first place). Considering that fact, and that the primary evidence for Lucy being transitional is the angle of the knee (modern orangutan and spider monkeys have the same angle as humans), it's laughable at best to call this proof for evolution. Lucy's skull is anatomically the same as a modern chimpanzee, and it's likely "she" was just some species of monkey - not a missing link.

Quote:
Who can say that God didn't create man as a neanderthal and gave us the power to evolve on our own.


I suppose that in the 1600 years between Creation and the Flood, man evolved enough to build and use the technology that built the ark? You can believe what you want, but evolutionary theory is still incompatible with the Bible.

Quote:
After all, look at how much more we know now, in comparison to 2000 years ago when Jesus walked this earth.


That is entirely external to the debate at hand. Would you say that we've taken a quantum leap forward in the last 500 years in terms of evolution? Of course not - even the minor differences in height and so on can be attributed to better food and less disease. But have we (re)learned a huge amount of scientific information in the last 500 years? Yes.

Quote:
...but I really don't think we should just throw out the idea of evolution.


Considering that all the evidence for evolution is either faked, incorrect, or open to wide interpretation, what other option besides throwing it out do you have? I suppose you can continue to believe in it even so, but like I said above, that makes it a religion, not science, and one incompatible with the Bible at that.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nancette
User


Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 2:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SophiesMom wrote:
, it was recorded by man, and there is no man alive or dead who did not make mistakes.


Ummm Jesus was a man on this earth, he never made a mistake and HE believed creation as it was written.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paladin165
User


Joined: 28 Apr 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:03 pm    Post subject: Evolution is a system of thought Reply with quote

Man I hate to see all the otherwise reasonable and intelligent homeshool supporters on this site jump up and down about evolution. You don't need to feel defensive about your faith when evolution is brought up. Children need to slowly come to realize that the world is a complex place, adults don't know everything, and adults disagree about things. What better topic to put them on their own path to philosophical thinking than evolution?

Evolution is a fruitful system of inquiry, a way of thinking about nature that leads to progress. That's all it is. Its just like quantum field theory, or non-euclidean geometry. Its a system of thought, a way of explaining a set of observations. Systems of thought are not mutually exclusive. Its not about capital R-Reality, so it doesn't have to threaten christian beleifs.

Christian or other religious beleifs do not exist primarily to explain a set of observations. They define the world one lives it, they are a guide to living. They are about what we really think, deep down, not about making sense of the results of our latest research project.

Some of you might take a cue from Kant: tell your children, "science is about appearances, religion is about reality". I would rather say they are two different ways of talking about reality, but you might not feel evolution deserves that much credit.

What you shouldn't do is tell your children evolution is completely worthless, or to pretend that the bible covers modern genetics. It doesn't, and saying things like that risks some teenage rebellion later I think. The important point is just teaching them not to take science too seriously.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That sounds like evading the question rather than answering it. According to the following definition of the scientific method...
  1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
  2. Formulation of an hypothesis to explain the phenomena.
  3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
  4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.

...is evolution religion or science? My view is that the masses of evidence against evolution, and the total lack of evidence for it, make it a belief system rather than science. But public school textbooks assume the opposite, that evolution is science, and conveniently ignore any opposing views, even well-documented and proven ones. That's propagandizing, not supplying information and letting the students make up their own minds.

And there are many mutually exclusive systems of thought. For instance, what if one group of people thinks it's ok to cheat anyone that's not part of their clan, while another group thinks the opposite? One view or the other has to go, if the two groups are going to interact for any length of time. But which view? Without any absolute moral basis to work from, what you end up with is majority rule, which as you know from your study of the French Revolution, works so well. Not.

Bottom line, evolutionary theory is worthless, but everyone needs to learn it anyway, if only to be able to argue one way or the other. By all means, teach it for purposes of debate - just don't call it science.

You are correct that the Bible does not cover modern genetics, but genetics shows just how complex the human body is, and how difficult it would be for even the tiniest part of the human body to evolve by accident.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Paladin165
User


Joined: 28 Apr 2006
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Theodore,

If the question is "evolution or creationism, pick one" then yes I'm "evading" it, because its a bad question (complex question fallacy).

The definition you gave about science is the naive version. After all there are whole branches of science that don't do experiments, and others that only pretend to do experiments. It is closer to the truth to say that "science" is whatever scientists say it is.

Its your creation science vs. their evolution science, and unfortunately for you, they've got all the big-name scientists. The debate is so stacked against you guys that they won't even allow you to call it "science". Contrast this to the APA, which has a bona fide "parapsychology" chapter in its organization.

About evidence. If you look at things the way evolutionary biologists do, there is plenty of evidence for evolution, there's no use denying it. There are a million websites out there that cover this topic in fine detail, so I think its a waste of time to address it here. Suffice it to say, it doesn't really matter how much evidence there is, short of a DVD of the past in its entirety, we are never going to be 100% certain about what exactly happened. Both creationism and evolution only give us the vaguest idea.

The question is, what do you infer from the sparse evidence available? What I'm pointing out is that some reasonable people look at the evidence and say "creation", while other reasonable people look at the same evidence and says "evolution". I think there is value in each side coming to understand the other's way of thinking, instead of each side ridiculing each other as if they weren't both human and rational. I think you want your children to be able to look at the evidence, and see two, three, or more ways it could be viewed rationally.

About the mutually exclusive systems of thought objection, perhaps I didn't put my meaning very well. What I meant is that knowing about one system of thought doesn't preclude you from learning another, even if you think one is right and the other is wrong. Mentally, they're not exclusive. Sure they may recommend different courses of action in a given situation, but then you simply have to pick the best one for the situation. Systems of thought don't decide actions for you, you do.

Since you brought up politics, I would point out that societies always maintain multiple systems of poltical thought that often conflict with one another. In fact our system of checks and balances between the branches of government relies on this kind of conflict to inhibit tyranny.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Sat Apr 29, 2006 1:35 pm    Post subject: Re: Evolution is a system of thought Reply with quote

Some good points there. I guess the basic question is, are scientists who subscribe to evolutionary theory ignoring or modifying data in favor of their base assumptions, or modifying their assumptions in favor of the data? The former is religion, the latter science. An old skeleton is not automatically the missing link, nor is a particular rock sample automatically millions of years old because it's dated using the radiometric dating method for that time range. And if a fossilized tree is standing vertical through millions of years of rock layers, then the rock layers obviously do not span millions of years. You see what I'm getting at? It's not a matter of interpreting the data differently, it's a matter of ignoring data that contradicts your assumptions. Any reasonably intelligent mind without bias one way or the other will come to the conclusion that at the least, the large majority of evolutionary theory is contradicted by the available data. Those parts need to be removed for evolution to retain any sort of status under the definition of the scientific method.

Really, the pro-con evolution debate reminds me of Aristotle vs Galileo. Aristotle had very nice theories, so everyone ignored Galileo's evidence to the contrary. Which side followed the scientific method?
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
momo3boys
User


Joined: 14 Feb 2006
Posts: 574
Location: Western Mass

PostPosted: Sun Apr 30, 2006 6:39 pm    Post subject: In public school? Reply with quote

Paladin165 you have some great points, you have argued admirably and better than any other science oriented person I've heard (read). My Father is a scientist that firmly beleives in evolution, my question for you is, if evolutionists are so secure in their findings and theories, than why won't they look at creationists evidence with scientific eyes? My father thinks that I am a crazy person for thinking that anything but the "big-bang" created the universe. Why can't public schools be ok with showing both theories if they are so sure that evolution is the logical choice?
_________________
Phi 4:13 I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bobbinsx5
User


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Mon May 01, 2006 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
We cannot forget that while the bible is the word of God, it was recorded by man, and there is no man alive or dead who did not make mistakes.


So, SophiesMom, are you saying that God, who is powerful enough to save you and I from Hell if we ask Him, isn't powerful enough to preserve His perfect Word? I'd sure hate to put my trust in a god who wasn't that powerful!

I'm curious, exactly how do you teach your children to believe the Bible when it comes to salvation, but then not believe it when you disagree with it? How are they supposed to be able to discern that? I've heard there are people who don't believe the entire BIble is God's Word, I've never encountered one before, so I'm very curious. Thank you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bobbinsx5
User


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 10:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Can anyone answer this for me?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MeganWiles
User


Joined: 30 May 2006
Posts: 22
Location: California

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I certain can't answer for SophiesMom, although I personallly know many people who believe that portions of the bible are fable and metaphor not neccessarily historical fact, so I am surprised to hear that you have never met ANY of these people.

I do have a question for you though. If you believe that all the books of the bible are the preservation of "His perfect word", what are your thoughts on the editting of the bible, where certain books have been excluded? Are those books not just as valid as the others?? There are different versions of the bible that include and focus on different texts, not to mention the variations in translation, so I just wonder how someone who takes all of this text as literal feels about those books that have not been included.

Also, have you been reading or hearning about the translation of the book of Judas that has recently been pieced back together? What are your thoughts on that text?
_________________
Megan A. Wiles
http://www.homeschool-guidance.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 9:40 pm    Post subject: "Book of Judas" is almost certainly fake: Reply with quote

It's quite simple. Only those books that there were many different (but identical or virtually identical) copies of were kept. Also, the author had to be one of the known names, for instance someone with a connection to Jesus in the New Testament.

Through this method, you might theoretically leave out some Scripture, but you certainly weren't going to add to Scripture. My view is that it's better safe than sorry - anything outside the KJV is going to be doubtful, usually obviously so. The "Book of Judas" meets none of the requirements for inclusion.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
bobbinsx5
User


Joined: 17 Nov 2005
Posts: 60

PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I honestly have never met anyone who admitted to believing only portions of scripture as true. How do you choose what to believe and what not to believe? How can you believe in salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ, without having doubts?

As far as the book of judas, I don't think anything of it. God promised us His preserved, perfect Book, if the book of judas was part of God's perfect Book, it would have been included from the beginning.

So, back to my original question:
Quote:

Quote:
We cannot forget that while the bible is the word of God, it was recorded by man, and there is no man alive or dead who did not make mistakes.


So, SophiesMom, are you saying that God, who is powerful enough to save you and I from Hell if we ask Him, isn't powerful enough to preserve His perfect Word? I'd sure hate to put my trust in a god who wasn't that powerful!

I'm curious, exactly how do you teach your children to believe the Bible when it comes to salvation, but then not believe it when you disagree with it? How are they supposed to be able to discern that? I've heard there are people who don't believe the entire BIble is God's Word, I've never encountered one before, so I'm very curious. Thank you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Isikole
User


Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Man - I love this thread.......

Quote:
I'd sure hate to put my trust in a god who wasn't that powerful!


Oh really?!?!?!? Well, I wouldn't put my faith in this god:

"But in the cities of those nations which the LORD, your God, is giving you as your heritage, you shall not leave a single soul alive” (Deut. 20:16).

"And he said unto them. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel. Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exodus 32: 27-28 )

“Andit came to pass, that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon: and all the firstborn of cattle.
And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.” (Exodus 12: 29-30 )

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Thousands of innocent women have been put to death in the most horrendous, and “unchristian” manner because of this verse. (Exodus 22:18 )

“And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp ever leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.” (Numbers 5: 1-2 )

“And Israel vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said: If thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.
And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites: and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah” (Numbers 21: 2-3 )

“And the Lord said unto Moses. Fear him not: for I have delivered him unto thy hand, and all his people, and his land: and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Si’hon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Hesh’bon.
So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.” (Numbers 21: 34-35 )


Oh my, I could go on for hours about this “loving” god. Should I continue? I have plenty more in the book where these came from.....
Is this the God to whom you put all your faith and love???
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theodore
Moderator


Joined: 06 Oct 2005
Posts: 2122
Location: Missouri, US

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 4:40 pm    Post subject: Interesting series of Bible verses, but... Reply with quote

Quote:
"But in the cities of those nations which the LORD, your God, is giving you as your heritage, you shall not leave a single soul alive” (Deut. 20:16).


The nations which Israel was conquering were not friendly and peace-loving. There are numerous examples of them going out of their way to attack Israel, plus they practiced, among other things, child sacrifice (see Ashtoreth, Molech, Chemosh). In the cases where Israel left the inhabitants of the land alive rather than following this command, the inhabitants invariably turned the Israelites to worshipping idols, then multiplied and attacked them again.

Quote:
"And he said unto them. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel. Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exodus 32: 27-28 )


They've been shown endless miracles, they're sitting in sight of Mount Horeb, where Moses is communing with God, and they decide to make themselves an idol and have an orgy. Do you think being struck by lightning would have been less messy?

Quote:
“Andit came to pass, that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon: and all the firstborn of cattle.
And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.” (Exodus 12: 29-30)


Except, of course, the houses of the Israelites, and I assume any Egyptians who believed enough to shelter with them. You may that there wasn't a general outcry to let the Israelites go until the last plague, since as soon as each plague went away, the Egyptians were perfectly happy to go back to using them as slaves again. Did you forget this part?

And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in morter, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour.

And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives...And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him;


Quote:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Thousands of innocent women have been put to death in the most horrendous, and “unchristian” manner because of this verse. (Exodus 22:18 )


The problem was not the Bible verse per se, but rather determining who was a witch and who wan't. Salem obviously got out of hand due to superstitious fear, and the Inquisition went much too far as well, lumping heretics in under the heading of witches. You are correct that this was unchristian.

Quote:
“And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp ever leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.” (Numbers 5: 1-2 )


Ever heard of something called quarantine and sanitation? They didn't have antibacterial soap and pipes and toilets and sewage treatment plants and so on back then, so anyone putting out infectious fluids was a health hazard. This just makes good sense.
_________________
Homeschool Articles - Events - Support Groups
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Isikole
User


Joined: 19 Jun 2006
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina

PostPosted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:41 pm    Post subject: Re: Interesting series of Bible verses, but... Reply with quote

Theodore wrote:
Quote:
"But in the cities of those nations which the LORD, your God, is giving you as your heritage, you shall not leave a single soul alive” (Deut. 20:16).


Quote:
The nations which Israel was conquering were not friendly and peace-loving. There are numerous examples of them going out of their way to attack Israel, plus they practiced, among other things, child sacrifice (see Ashtoreth, Molech, Chemosh). In the cases where Israel left the inhabitants of the land alive rather than following this command, the inhabitants invariably turned the Israelites to worshipping idols, then multiplied and attacked them again.


Mmmm, "the nations which Israel was conquering were not friendly and peace-loving?!?!?!?" So god is only the god of the friendly, peace-loving people and not all people on earth? Who created them?


Quote:
"And he said unto them. Thus saith the Lord God of Israel. Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.
And the children of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exodus 32: 27-28 )


Quote:
They've been shown endless miracles, they're sitting in sight of Mount Horeb, where Moses is communing with God, and they decide to make themselves an idol and have an orgy. Do you think being struck by lightning would have been less messy?


Is this a god of love who shows mercy to his "children", or does he just love a select few? They made themselves an idol and were doing the wild thing. Is that reason enough to slaughter 3000? And does that then give those that believe that the bible is the infallible word of god permission to kill buddhists who have statues of the Buddha in their homes? Or hindus who have statues of their deities? Or does the above passage only apply to certain people?

Quote:
“Andit came to pass, that at midnight the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon: and all the firstborn of cattle.
And Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.” (Exodus 12: 29-30)


Quote:
Except, of course, the houses of the Israelites, and I assume any Egyptians who believed enough to shelter with them. You may that there wasn't a general outcry to let the Israelites go until the last plague, since as soon as each plague went away, the Egyptians were perfectly happy to go back to using them as slaves again. Did you forget this part?


Not at all, we are all slaves in one way or another. And was that their only transgression against god? And can you tell me, if the Egyptians were not part of god's people, who were they, and who created them?

Quote:
And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in morter, and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour.

And the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives...And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him;


He was just the king - a man and human - not god, there's the difference!

Quote:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." Thousands of innocent women have been put to death in the most horrendous, and “unchristian” manner because of this verse. (Exodus 22:18 )


Quote:
The problem was not the Bible verse per se, but rather determining who was a witch and who wan't. Salem obviously got out of hand due to superstitious fear, and the Inquisition went much too far as well, lumping heretics in under the heading of witches. You are correct that this was unchristian.


Of course it was the bible verse! Why did they start the witch burning in the first place? Because of this verse. If it did not appear in the bible, it would not have been used as justification for murder.

Quote:
“And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying: Command the children of Israel that they put out of the camp ever leper, and every one that hath an issue, and whosoever is defiled by the dead:
Both male and female shall ye put out, without the camp shall ye put them; that they defile not their camps, in the midst whereof I dwell.” (Numbers 5: 1-2 )


Ever heard of something called quarantine and sanitation? They didn't have antibacterial soap and pipes and toilets and sewage treatment plants and so on back then, so anyone putting out infectious fluids was a health hazard. This just makes good sense.


Of course, how could I be so blind. It makes perfect sense to banish your sick and ailing, to die alone in the desert. But the verse says very clearly "In the midst whereof I dwell", and that does not sound like a sanitary issue, as god is god remember, he can cure these people if he wanted. He's a loving god not so? It smacks more of megalomania and cruelty to me.....

And if sanitation were an issue, why did god not provide them with a method to clean themselves? Was it because sending innocent sick people out to die was easier? Or was there some other reason?

My point is that this book called the bible, tries to convince us that god is all powerful, and a loving god, but at the same time he is being given human attributes and faults that make him seem very unscrupulous. We are told he is powerful, yet he chooses to commit people to their deaths rather than change them, or heal them?!?!? Makes no sense to me......
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Homeschool World Forum Forum Index -> Religious Discussion / Topics All times are GMT - 6 Hours (CST)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Homeschool World Terms of Use  •  Privacy Policy  •  Copyright ©1993-Now Home Life, Inc.