(June 13, 2015 at 11:03 am)Jenny A Wrote:(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: The atheist delusion:
evolution does not prove god or no god.
So far so good.
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: It does not show if god is not needed or needed yet.
What do you mean yet? And needed for what?
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: The bible does not say how god made man. It only said it did make man.
Out of dust or mud yes? Because that's not exactly how the models for abiogenisis work.
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: evolution does not mean "death", it means "growth".
Evolution doesn't mean anything. It's a description of what does happen and an explanation of how it happens. Both growth and death are described.
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: evolution is not anti-bible.
The Bible is wholly irrelevant to evolution. Whether evolution contradicts the Bible depends on how the book is interpreted. But evolution does not square with a literal reading of Genesis. Man was not made out of dust in a day.
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: all evolution shows is how man was assembled from the dust of the earth. And for two thousand years ago it was a good guess to even see that we came from smaller pieces that were assembled into a larger thing.
The theory of evolution says nothing about how life began, it only addresses how life changes. And two thousand years ago modern man had been around for roughly 200,000 years.
(June 13, 2015 at 10:21 am)comet Wrote: Evolution is how god did it. Of course that is a logical look.
Until you explain where this god entity comes in or how we know there is one, let alone that it made things, there's nothing logical about that statement.
yeah, I pretty much agree with ya here But my post stands good enough as is. You made good arguments but I did not make some of the claims you argued against. That "evolution means nothing" I don't agree with. It has a minimum reason(s) it works the way it does. 'no-nothing" doesn't have any observational support. we can believe if we want. but that's not my thing.
Over all A literal approach to any belief systems usually does not match observations.
anti-logical Fallacies of Ambiguity