Evolution

[Jackalope]

This one is a serious waste of time.

[Drich]

Sorry, I don't know if this has been discussed/answered already, but where is it that the Garden of Eden used to be in the world? Or it's not possible to tell?

Genesis records it to be bordered by 4 rivers.
10 Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads. 11 The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which skirts the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 12 And the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and the onyx stone are there. 13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one which goes around the whole land of Cush. 14 The name of the third river is Hiddekel;[b] it is the one which goes toward the east of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates.

We don't know where the first three are, but the Euphrates run through the middle of Iraq. So some where under the sands of the desert out in Iraq.. Which could be the explanation of what God did to protect it from ever being found. (He place an angel with a sword set a blaze to guard it) Being scorched and under the sands of the world largest desert, would ensure no one ever found it again.

---

[quote='Cthulhu Dreaming' pid='258734' dateline='1332283560']
So let's see if I've got this straight.

You (alone, apparently) are suggesting that the time span (in Genesis) between "In the beginning..." and "GTFO of Eden" was 5.4 billion years minus 6,000 or so?

Edit to add - ... and that during this time, the Earth and all of it's life forms evolved as they appear to have done, while inside of Eden, everything happened according to Genesis?

Pretty close!

so during the 5 odd billion years where life evolved outside of Eden into these monkey-men of which you speak, who are(genetically) identical to humans but have no soul.

And considering that man is made in gods image.

It would appear then that evolution seems to have done a remarkable job in building an exact replica of Gods image using only the power of natural selection(minus the soul of course)... ?

You can look at it two ways. Either an all knowing God created Man in the Garden to reflect the current evolutionary progress of monkey man at the time He knew the fall would happen. Or He influences the events that shaped monkey man to reflect what He had created...

"Or maybe it's alittle of both"
-Forrest Gump

[NoMoreFaith]

Replace the words "Bible" and "God" with Theory, and the same rehearsed arguments all of you seem to be sharing. If anything this points to a hive mind mentality on your part. So truthfully no matter what is believed how does this statement not apply in some form or fashion to everyone?

Nobody is making extraordinary unsubstantiated claims hence the need for extraordinary evidence.

If you think the arguments are shared, its because you have not refuted one thing.

I do it with my 7 year old as well, if he's trying to hide something, you keep asking.

Its nice that you think you're special. You have credit for an original take on things. However, the fact that it is original should tell you something about how well regarded it is (EDIT: I should mention, that doesn't make it weaker than any other apologetic).

Since you aren't going to defend your hypothesis, let's return to the original question since your eden posture fails to convince.

You start from a premise that Evolution does not cancel out Creationism, and you need to realise this is not necessarily the position many of us take. Evolution just is, you may as well fit the bible around gravity. If the facts point towards something, we can accept it as the best theory of the moment. Is evolution through natural selection a definite answer? Who knows, but what seems evident is that it merely will be refined, but unlikely to be replaced.

Its fundamentalist literal christians who see it as a threat to their views, whereby you have taken a middle road. I can respect that, but I'm sure you can understand why nobody takes it very seriously. After all, we don't even take christians who call it allegory all together seriously either.

But to simply answer the original question;

Why do we think Evolution cancels out Creationism? We don't. We will defend it against absurdity, and promote education on the matter, however, the cute little mythologies of the world bear little relation to scientific fact. It wasn't proposed to disprove anything, simply explain why we have such diversity of species (in terms of natural selection).

We see a lot of silly people, with unsubstantiated ideas, but an organic cell doesn't care what you believe.. it just is.
So be it with science, and theories of evolution, whether definitely true or not, you simply look at the evidence and see where it leads you.
Absolute faith, well, it can guide and comfort many people who are lost, but like a sat nav, its probably safe to be absolutely sure that bridge actually exists before you put all your faith in it.

[Drich]

---

LOL, why would I have to crack open a bible for that, that's a story you learn in sunday school. "Proper exegesis of scripture" is that the authors believed that Adam lived 930 years, all you're going on about now is apologetic bullshit.

Which is EXACTLY What I said as well, where are you confused?

"And all the days (except some other days, to the tune of billions of years as evidenced by modern science and here omitted) that Adam lived were nine-hundred thirty years; and he died" Gen5:5-Drich Expanded Version.

This is fun i am genuinely glad to see someone take such an in depth interest !!

In the Transliterated Hebrew Genesis 5:5
yowm (day, time, year)
'Adam (The First Man)
chayay (to live, have life, remain alive, sustain life, Etc...)

As Apposed to the Breath of Life God imparted into Adam upon His creation in Genesis 2:7 The Hebrew word there is
nĕshamah= breath, spirit (of God)

Obviously the life Adam lived in the beginning (Gen 2:7) was very different than the life Adam lived after the Fall (Gen 3) when God promised "For The Day You Eat Of This Forbidden Fruit You Will Surly Die."

Adam did not die in the traditional sense or our understanding of the word. Adam's Previously Privileged life was taken (The Breath of God or nĕshamah) was taken and He was sent out amongst the monkey men to live. thus beginning His 930 Chayay (life) as we understand it.

I can understand your mistake if all your working with is a sunday school memory and an english translation. If you wish to dig alittle deeper I used the, The Bullinger Critical Lexicon and Concordance if you like to look it up for yourself..

---

[quote='Cthulhu Dreaming' pid='258862' dateline='1332310113']
Explain? Seriously? How about providing the evidence you have that corroborates the Genesis narrative with reality.

Don't worry about the comment re: the alleged global flood. I was distracted a bit and the connection isn't as well-developed in my mind as I thought at first.

So let's hear your evidence.

We are not discussing evidence at this point. We are discussing the plausible incorporation of the evolutionary fossil record into the creation account. That means if you are apart of this conversation then you accept (for the sake of this argument at least) the genesis account for the purposes of finding incompatibility issues with evolution.

If you wish to change topics please explain to me what "evidence" you would be looking for? What would it look like? Because any evidence you can provide, the new Genesis understanding I have provided can also claim.. So again what am I supposed to be providing to you?

Or are you just arguing a pre programed argument? I say genesis and evolution in the same post, and you warm up the old evolution argument check list. Starting with EVIDENCE!!!

If you took the time to read this thread or if you understood what is being discussed "evidence" as you know it anyway, is no long a valid goto for you. (that is why it wasn't being discussed by any of your buddies) Because Everything you can use I can use. That is why your brothers are attacking my education, me personally, my credentials, my interpretation of scripture, and even my integrity (When you can not kill the message kill the messenger right?) These are all last resort efforts. designed to extract something they can use to dismiss my efforts. Why else do you think you are the first to call for EVIDENCE in over 100 posts???

If you wish me to break my argument down further for you i would be happy to help you understand better, so you can skip the evidence part and go to attacking the messenger rather than the message like so many of your peers.

---

So, in other words, no you don't have any?

I could give a flying fuck what my peers have been doing in this thread.

You have made several positive material claims, if you want to be taken seriously, then provide some demonstrable evidence. You know, the kind that other people can examine and verify/falsify, and that exists somewhere other than in your imagination.

If you can't or won't do that, the only conclusion I can draw is that you're full of shit.

Oh no I do have evidence!! I just want you to explain what you would consider to be true evidence. Otherwise if you do not know what you are looking or looking at then good will it do you even if the evidence is before you?

So again given this senerio, what evidence? What would constitute "proof" in your mindseye?

[Phil]

Its nice that you think you're special. You have credit for an original take on things. However, the fact that it is original should tell you something about how well regarded it is (EDIT: I should mention, that doesn't make it weaker than any other apologetic).

Gap theology is nothing new. Drich is just another idiot drone spouting long debunked bullshit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gap_creationism

[Minimalist]

As has been noted, a single fossil out of place in the fossil record.... a tyranosaur next to an Australopithicus or a wooly mammoth locked in the jaws of an Allosaurus would be damning evidence.

You don't have that though, do you?

[Drich]

It explains nothing unless you have evidence for existence.

Other, than that, it is surplus to requirement. Occams Razor prevails.

Just for the record Drich, I posted directly after the 'garden of eden' hypothesis you proposed.

First post and several after asking for evidence of your proposal Drich. You declined to offer any, so there is no point to debating it.
Now you claim nobody asked.

You may as well argue that faeries are compatible with evolution, because they were made in the seelie and unseelie kingdoms unreachable from this plane of existence.

As a proposal, this has equivalent theoretical status unless you can provide evidence for the existence of this garden of eden on earth.

You've been called out as a weasel who avoids the questions, and I call you out on it again.
Evidence or a faery gets it.

Sadly I know your sort, by using questions instead of proof, or even logic, you can remain in an imaginary offensive without justifying your self-authenticated illusions.

If you asked for "evidence" I know I asked you to provide an example of it (Read my last post) If you could not or would not provide an example of "evidence" then the conversation rightfully stopped at you lack of participation..

Again if i provided evidence and you did not know what you are looking at what good will it do?

[NoMoreFaith]

Oh no I do have evidence!! I just want you to explain what you would consider to be true evidence. Otherwise if you do not know what you are looking or looking at then good will it do you even if the evidence is before you?

So again given this senerio, what evidence? What would constitute "proof" in your mindseye?

Cute. The mysterious witholding of amazing evidence.
No-ones seen that trick before. You blamed us for being unoriginal.

You make the claim, you provide what you THINK is evidence, and defend it against criticism.

If you had evidence, why be coy?

EDIT: RE the above, theres lots of ways to prove things, some things go for hundreds of years before people realise it was proof of anything (eg Gravity) why don't you give it a shot anyway Don't think I didn't notice you answered with a question again. Weasel.

[Jackalope]

For fucks sake, present what you have or shut the fuck up.

I already told you what sort of evidence I'm looking for. It'll be weighed and judged accordingly.


It's your hypothesis. Make your case or be summarily dismissed.

[Minimalist]

I'd settle for him just shutting the fuck up.

He's got nothing but the usual xtian bullshit.