• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:94]THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION

As have I. Since the tactic remains, I was left with no choice but to largely gloss over anything that poster says. It's literally painful having to read those posts, and I'm not here to get a freaking migraine.

Very inconsiderate.


OM

I'm glad that you've exercised your freedom to read, or not.
I understand where you're coming from. Maybe you should TOTALLY just ignore ALL my posts?
 
Originally Posted by JustHanging View Post

tosca uses it for the points that can't stand on their own, and feels that adding color enhances their argument.


Hahahaha - I EMPHASIZE through colours or sizes!

Actually, they usually are the very point of the argument.....

....................that's why I'm trying to make sure you see them!:)




Because you know, an argument made in crayon is ever so mature and persuasive.

A mature person shouldn't be bothered whether the argument was written in crayons, or with a pen!
It's all about what was written! THE MESSAGE!



Anyone who tries to use the color or size of how the message is written for an EXCUSE, is simply trying to deflect from the fact that.......

...................... he has nothing to give as a rebuttal!
 
Last edited:
Of course I do.

Then.....problem solved. I'm glad for you.


Okay. Back to the topic.


----------------------------------------------

As a reminder about the issue:


The purpose of this thread is to show how theistic evolutionists (scientists) can say that theistic evolution is in-lined with the Bible.
There are quite a few versions as to how scientists see the compatibility of the Genesis narrative with evolution......

......but the fact that there are many versions only strengthen the argument and validity for DESIGN by the ABRAHAMIC GOD.


The following are evidences that have been given so far.

Posts # 2, 4, 14, 17, 20, 23, 24, 43


More will be posted, and they won't be limited to the Book of Genesis.
 
Last edited:
I'm glad that you've exercised your freedom to read, or not.

Wish I could say the same thing about exercising your freedom to intentionally antagonize readers with your format. It literally takes you twice as long to post a reply, so it's not as if you're not putting thought into it. Even after so many in here constantly tell you that it's extremely annoying. So yeah, let's talk about exercising freedoms.

Maybe you should TOTALLY just ignore ALL my posts?

Me, and all the others then as well. Sadly, it doesn't even have to be that way; all that would be needed is a modicum of consideration on your part, and nobody would be having these continual side conversations.

But hey, thanks at least for not including seizure-inducing colors and angry bolded fonts into this reply this time.


OM
 
Wish I could say the same thing about exercising your freedom to intentionally antagonize readers with your format. It literally takes you twice as long to post a reply, so it's not as if you're not putting thought into it. Even after so many in here constantly tell you that it's extremely annoying. So yeah, let's talk about exercising freedoms.



Me, and all the others then as well. Sadly, it doesn't even have to be that way; all that would be needed is a modicum of consideration on your part, and nobody would be having these continual side conversations.

But hey, thanks at least for not including seizure-inducing colors and angry bolded fonts into this reply this time.


OM


Oh, so true, and more often than not, the content is quite lacking in quality and tends to be little more than a vapid rant.
 
Oh, so true, and more often than not, the content is quite lacking in quality and tends to be little more than a vapid rant.

And making a marquee out of it doesn't add anything to the content; rather, it becomes the content instead. Completely detracts.


OM
 
As someone else has already said, it's all in the presentation/delivery...
 
Wish I could say the same thing about exercising your freedom to intentionally antagonize readers with your format. It literally takes you twice as long to post a reply, so it's not as if you're not putting thought into it. Even after so many in here constantly tell you that it's extremely annoying. So yeah, let's talk about exercising freedoms.


I may be antagonizing posters that I'm debating with by emphasizing points in my arguments that they want to ignore.
It makes their arguments illogical - for all to see - when they keep ignoring and moving past particular points.

You think that I intentionally antagonize you.......... because I don't do as you dictate. :shrug:
That's the way I see it.

A poster here doesn't use punctuations - and I had mentioned it to him that it gives me a headache trying to read his posts.
He still does it. That's his own way, I suppose. To each his own.
I just don't bother reading them most times.




As someone else has already said, it's all in the presentation/delivery...
:roll:

That may be for you. Don't impose it on me.





But hey, thanks at least for not including seizure-inducing colors and angry bolded fonts into this reply this time.


OM


You're welcome.
 
Last edited:
Back to the topic.


Here's a recap of all the evidences presented so far.


The purpose of this thread is to show how theistic evolutionists (scientists) can say that theistic evolution is in-lined with the Bible.
There are quite a few versions as to how scientists see the compatibility of the Genesis narrative with evolution......

......but the fact that there are many versions only strengthen the argument and validity for DESIGN by the ABRAHAMIC GOD.


Check out the evidences on:

Posts # 2, 4, 14, 17, 20, 23, 24,

# 43 (stretching universe)



--------------------------




Genesis 2

7 Then the Lord God formed a man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.







That biblical description is consistent with science findings that the human body is made up of elements that comes from dirt/dust.



The Chemistry of Life: The Human Body

Roughly 96 percent of the mass of the human body is made up of just four elements: oxygen, carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen, with a lot of that in the form of water.


The Chemistry of Life: The Human Body | Live Science
 
Then.....problem solved. I'm glad for you.


Okay. Back to the topic.


----------------------------------------------

As a reminder about the issue:


The purpose of this thread is to show how theistic evolutionists (scientists) can say that theistic evolution is in-lined with the Bible.
There are quite a few versions as to how scientists see the compatibility of the Genesis narrative with evolution......

......but the fact that there are many versions only strengthen the argument and validity for DESIGN by the ABRAHAMIC GOD.


The following are evidences that have been given so far.

Posts # 2, 4, 14, 17, 20, 23, 24, 43


More will be posted, and they won't be limited to the Book of Genesis.

Thank you for the normal post.

All of your "evidences" would apply equally well to Allah, Harry Potter, Haida Nation, Zulu, or Santa Claus beliefs. So it's rather a moot point, don't you think?
 
Some darwinist scientists claim that Genesis talks about evolution. But there are some differing versions, in how they see them in-lined with the Bible.


One scientist - an agnostic - wrote the book called The Genesis Enigma - showing in details how Genesis talks about evolution!
His science version on "Let there be light...." is quite interesting.



The Genesis enigma: How DID the Bible describe the evolution of life 3,000 years before Darwin?


Andrew Parker is a leading scientist in his field: a research fellow at Oxford University, research leader at the Natural History Museum, and as if that weren't enough, a professor at Shanghai's Jiao Tong university.


When Genesis says: 'Let there be lights... To divide the day from the night,' it is talking about eyes.

'The very first eye on earth effectively turned on the lights for animal behaviour,' writes Professor Parker, 'and consequently for further rapid evolution.'

Almost overnight, life suddenly grew vastly more complex. Predators were able to hunt far more efficiently, and so prey had to evolve fast too - or get eaten.

The moment that there were 'lights', or eyes, then life exploded into all its infinite variety.

And yet again, that's what Genesis says happened, and in the correct environment too. In the sea.

For on the very next day of Creation, the fifth day: 'God said, "Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life."'

That is exactly what happened. Life that had hitherto been lived in the dark, by simple, slow-moving, worm-like creatures, erupted into dazzling diversity. We know all about it from the world famous Burgess Shale fossils.
The Genesis enigma: How DID the Bible describe the evolution of life 3,000 years before Darwin? | Daily Mail Online




I'll say it again:
that there are differing versions from scientists on how they see science in-lined with the Bible, only strengthens the argument for the ABRAHAMIC GOD, as the Creator!


Parker has a theory on vision, and it must be through his theory that he had seen the compatibility with Genesis. I suppose scientists who believe in the compatibility between Bible and science, have seen it through their fields of expertise.


In his 2003 book In the Blink of an Eye, Parker proposes that the Cambrian Explosion, as the sudden diversification in animal fossil forms at the start of the Cambrian Period, was due to the development of the vision faculty and the consequent intensification of predation.[2][3] He calls this the "Light Switch Theory." In particular he concludes that predation with vision led to the development of hard body parts, explaining why the fossil record displayed the Cambrian Explosion at this point in time.[


Parker is also an agnostic. His 2009 book The Genesis Enigma argues that the Book of Genesis (and especially chapter 1) is surprisingly accurate and in accord with science.[3] This caused him to conclude that the author of Genesis might have been inspired by God, although his work since demonstrates a neutral stance on religion.[
Andrew Parker (zoologist) - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
I may be antagonizing posters that I'm debating with by emphasizing points in my arguments that they want to ignore.
It makes their arguments illogical - for all to see - when they keep ignoring and moving past particular points.

Writing an argument in crayon, or the computer equivalent thereof, does not emphasize your points. It makes it look like it was written by someone with the same intellectual capacity as typical crayon users.
 
Writing an argument in crayon, or the computer equivalent thereof, does not emphasize your points. It makes it look like it was written by someone with the same intellectual capacity as typical crayon users.

It is redolent of junior school.
 
There's also Francis Collins.


The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
by Francis S. Collins


Until now, most scientists have argued that science and faith occupy distinct arenas. Francis Collins, a former atheist as a science student who converted to faith as he became a doctor, is about to change that.

Collins's faith in God has been confirmed and enhanced by the revolutionary discoveries in biology that he has helped to oversee.

He has absorbed the arguments for atheism of many scientists and pundits, and he can refute them.
The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief by Francis S. Collins



The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief is a bestselling book by Francis Collins in which he advocates theistic evolution.

Collins raises arguments for the idea of God from biology, astrophysics, psychology and other disciplines.
The Language of God - Wikipedia





God seems to "talk" to them on that level that involves science!
 
Last edited:
Genesis 1

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.
25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27
So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.





According to their kinds - in relation to reproduction - without any mention of genders, except to humans - male and female - is consistent with science discovery that some species don't require a mate in order to reproduce. Some creatures are asexual.


Asexual reproduction:

A mode of reproduction in which the offspring comes from a single organism, and not from the union of gametes as it is in sexual reproduction .

In asexual reproduction, the organism is capable of reproducing an offspring in the absence of a mate. As a result, the offspring is a clone of the parent and therefore results in low genetic variation in the species as a whole.
Asexual reproduction Definition and Examples | Biology Online Dictionary
 
Pro tip: If you really want people to go back and read former posts, hyperlink the post numbers.

Thanks for this suggestion. Here it is:


The purpose of this thread is to show how theistic evolutionists (scientists) can say that theistic evolution is in-lined with the Bible.
There are quite a few versions as to how scientists see the compatibility of the Genesis narrative with evolution......

......but the fact that there are many versions only strengthen the argument and validity for DESIGN by the ABRAHAMIC GOD.


The following are evidences that have been given so far.




Posts # 2 (the universe has a beginning)
#4 (Inflationary Big Bang)

#14 (Infant Earth; frame of reference)
# 17 (Infant Earth; gases and clouds)
#20 (One ocean, one land - Pangaea)
THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION



#23 (elements of Genesis creation story compare to science)
#24 (Non-marine eukaryotes)
THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION


#43 (expanding universe – first written Big Bang model))
THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION

#85 (human body)
#87 (Genesis Enigma)
#90 (Francis Collins)
THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION


#92 (reproduction)
THE ABRAHAMIC GOD and THEISTIC EVOLUTION




to be continued......
 
Moderator's Warning:
People need to tone it down, stick exactly to the topic, and not discuss other posters, even in a backhanded manner. Snipe less, post on topic more. There may be infractions coming for posts prior to this warning.
 
Genesis 1

24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.
25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

27
So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.





According to their kinds - in relation to reproduction - without any mention of genders, except to humans - male and female - is consistent with science discovery that some species don't require a mate in order to reproduce. Some creatures are asexual.



Asexual reproduction Definition and Examples | Biology Online Dictionary

Oh oh, looks like the author of that article is in trouble with the almighty for worshiping the wrong god. Doesn't that buy the nonbeliever eternal torture? Turns out it was the Quran that had it right. So it's paradise for the Muslims, and eternal torture for everyone else.

What's your religion tosca?

The Quran and Modern Science | Facts about the Muslims & the Religion of Islam
"According to modern science, the separation process resulted in the formation of multiple worlds, a concept which appears dozens of times in the Qur’an. For example, look at the first chapter of the Qur’an, al-Faatihah:( “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” Qur’an, 1:2 ). "
 
Last edited:
Oh oh, looks like the author of that article is in trouble with the almighty for worshiping the wrong god. Doesn't that buy the nonbeliever eternal torture? Turns out it was the Quran that had it right. So it's paradise for the Muslims, and eternal torture for everyone else.

What's your religion tosca?

The Quran and Modern Science | Facts about the Muslims & the Religion of Islam
"According to modern science, the separation process resulted in the formation of multiple worlds, a concept which appears dozens of times in the Qur’an. For example, look at the first chapter of the Qur’an, al-Faatihah:( “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” Qur’an, 1:2 ). "




That got me speechless for a while. Unbelievable.




LOL!

Why wouldn't they point that out, as I'm doing here?


Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy........





Who do you think they claim to worship?


THE GOD OF ABRAHAM!








also known as the ABRAHAMIC GOD. (just in case you don't know)
 
Last edited:
You're very solid in your belief of the "scientific" world.

What if we're living in a Matrix like simulation.

In the real world the acceleration of gravity is 15.2 m/s/s. In our simulation it's 9.8 m/s/s. Nothing you believe is real, your going by faith too.

That's not faith. That's reality as we all experience it, and requires no faith. Don't believe me? Drop something, and measure it's acceleration. Every time it's 9.8 m/s^2
 
Thanks for this suggestion. Here it is:
The purpose of this thread is to show how theistic evolutionists (scientists) can say that theistic evolution is in-lined with the Bible.
There are quite a few versions as to how scientists see the compatibility of the Genesis narrative with evolution......
......but the fact that there are many versions only strengthen the argument and validity for DESIGN by the ABRAHAMIC GOD.

You're welcome.

By the way, it would be child's play to take just about any old book off the shelf and perform the same exercise you're doing with the Bible. Especially an old book that's been translated many times and contains a lot of mythology and visions.

But no more convincing.
 
You're welcome.

By the way, it would be child's play to take just about any old book off the shelf and perform the same exercise you're doing with the Bible. Especially an old book that's been translated many times and contains a lot of mythology and visions.

But no more convincing.

That's an illogical rebuttal, JPN.

"Any old book," isn't mentioned particularly by scientists, analyzed thoroughly, and compared with scientific findings.
 
Back
Top Bottom