Marry Christmas Jan-evolution goes down in flames

by clash_city_rockers 75 Replies latest jw friends

Erich

clash:

The main problem is that most people (sorry, reputable scientists too!) confound "auto-adaptation" and "self-optimization" behavior in biologic structures with a "type of process/concept which lead to evolution". In truth, mechanisms for

A) Self-adaptation / Self-optimization and
B) "evolution through natural selection"
are two completely different pair of shoes.

A) is
observable, provable and (even) retracable and reconstractable in empirical tests (see new results in informatics and robotics!)
Therefore, it matches with the presupposements you had pointed out in your first posting, namely (Guided by natural law, Explanatory by reference to natural law, Testable against the empirical world, Tentative in its conclusions, Falsifiable etc. etc.)

B) is neither observable (alleged, but not true), provable and retracable and reconstractable in empiric tests...

So, it indeed doesn't match to those presupposements. Easy to understand.

But note, sorry: THE SAME PRESUPPOSEMENTS ARE MISSING FOR CREATIONISM TOO !
Ergo: Neither evolution theory nor creativism are "theories". They are religion, not more and not less.

On the other side, there is a MOST deeper problem.

Scientists today know definetively HOW auto-adaptation processes and self-optimism behavior operates in biologic structures, BUT they have to deny to know it !! That's much more dirty than all dirty restrictions Johnson describes in his books! Because they are observable, provable and empiric-testable scientific facts! THEY NOT ALLOWED TO BE PUBLISHED! If any scientist (reputable or not) would go to try to publish his wisdom in any scientific gazette, he would have no chance !!

Do you guess why ????

BECAUSE THE WISDOM HOW THESE PRINCIPLES OPERATE COULD BRING THE WHOLE EVOLUTION-THEORY-BUILDINGS IN GREATEST DANGER !!!

Yes, its incredible for most of all who will read these lines. But nevertheless, it's true!
mommy

Hey Clash,
I tried responding to you last night, but the pc ate my post and I was way tired so I thought I would come back and try again today. I am not denying that my morals were based on the christians ethical code or the 10 commandments. I was raised a christian and remained one for 26 years. What I have a problem with is, you thinking that because I am no longer a christian I would throw all my morals out the window. I still have to answer to the same person I had to answer to for 27 years, myself. And truth be known I am way hard on myself, much more so than anyone else I know. So I assure you that if another atheist tried to persuade me to abandon my own conscience I would not be jumping on that bandwagon. As a matter of fact I have never met an atheist that would even try to impress their own moral code on me.
The question for the Athiest is "If there is NO ABSOLUTE MORAL OR ETHICAL STANDERD, then why should I or anyone reject the evils of murder and rape as being morraly wrong?"
If you are asking that question, then please answer mine. Question for the christian: If all that is needed is repentance, then what is to stop a christian to commit any of the above acts, ask for repentance and then be saved?
Of course I do not want an answer to that question, I just used it to show you that it boils down to not if one is atheist or christian, but what moral code(conscience) the individual person has.
I would glady take you up on going out to lunch. And if you are ever in NY, or I in Cali, I would love to meet you. As I said before I do not blame you for your ignorance, I was once a christian, I understand why you think the way you do. It was not long ago that I also felt the same as you. Perhaps if we were ever to meet, and you saw how I am, I may be able to show you a side of an atheist you have never seen. And then you can grow a bit in your limited views.
As far as your pop quizzes go, it does nothing but show you are acting like an arrogant person, imo. I am assuming that the only ones who know the answers to those questions are those who are interested in them and those who are required to learn them. It does not show me any of your ideas or thoughts on this matter, more along the lines of useless info.
I would really be interested in your ideas on what Alan F. said, about God's arbitrary rule. As you know there are places in the bible that even imperfect humans questioned God's judgements. Why do you think that was? Why would a human even question god's commandments? How could a human have a higher moral code than the man who created the morals to begin with?
Have a great day and Merry Christmas
wendy
edited for typos
When I leave, you will know I have been here
D wiltshire

I would like to say this about morals for the christian and atheist.
Being created in God's image both the beleiver and nonbeleiver have a inner sense of right and wrong.
Which can be quite faulty or good sometimes.
Evolution in my estimation could not logically account for this inner sense.
There are good and bad(morally speaking) atheist and theist.
So if evolution is true and it is survival of the fitest morals don't fit into the processes that make evolution work.
If someone lived a trillion X longer than you, and had a billion X more reasoning ability would he come to the same conclusions as you?
mommy

D,
I understand what you are trying to say, but I am afraid that it is just one outlook on this. Part of survival is getting along with others so that you will prosper. Now you are saying survial of the fittest is the evolutionary way. This does not mean that you kill everyone but yourself. That would serve no purpose. If you want to get down to the nitty gritty and pick apart why we have the morals we have, you will need to look individually at them. Do you want to? I hate to spend all that time if you are not interested. But I could probably pick every act and explain in a logical way why we should not commit them.
wendy
When I leave, you will know I have been here
larc

DW,
The idea of morals fits very nicely within the concept of the survival of the fittest. It has been explained many times, and much discussion has been given to it by developemental psychologists as well.
rem

Clash,
Evolution is a scientific theory, not a philosophy. It's not even inherently atheistic. There are millions of god believers who accept Evolution. Your position has no support.
I suppose claiming that your side of the argument "won" makes you feel better, but I think that neither you or I are in the position to make that judgement. Disinterested 3rd party observers would be best qualified to say which side "won". I'm not really interested in winning arguments, though. For me the discussion is an end in itself; not simply a means to an end.
You have yet to show that there really is any such thing as absolute morals. Can you construct a moral code that 100% of the population of earth will agree on? I don't think so. Also, the fact that Christian morals are based on a punishment/reward system doesn't look very appealing to me. Also, it can be shown that morals have changed even in the bible. At one time polygammy was accepted, then later in the bible it was not. Prostitution was tolerated, now Christians do not tolerate it.
Where did these "absolute morals" come from anyway? Did god make them or does god have to follow a set of absolute morals that predate him? If he made them, then morals are arbitrary - whatever god says goes. If God has to follow a moral code he did not create, then he is not all powerful. Either way, this position is nonsensical.
Have a great time with Johnson! You two deserve each other.
rem
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain
larc

rem,
I agree with your comments. When I told DW that the idea of morality and survival of the fittest are not in conflict, I was referring to more general concepts, such as parents nurturing and raising children, and, society developing rules of behavior that promote harmony. DW, and I believe clash also, asserted that the concept of evolution and the survival of the fittest implied a lack of regard for others, which is nonsense.
rem

Larc,
I totally understood. We were both talking about different things.
Thanks!
rem
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain
funkyderek

Being created in God's image both the beleiver and nonbeleiver have a inner sense of right and wrong.
Which can be quite faulty or good sometimes.
Evolution in my estimation could not logically account for this inner sense.
That's an argument from incredulity. In your estimation evolution can't explain something you see, therefore it can't be true. In my estimation such an "inner sense" is perfectly and beautifully explained by neo-Darwinian theories. But that's because I've taken the time to research the subject. Read The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins. It's a good primer for exactly how evolution can account for such things.
--
"The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, 1794.
clash_city_rockers

Hi every one
I'll try to respond to most of you Like David, Windy, rem and Erich....
David, Your getting it down.... keep at it we ought to do lunch this week. Pick a place you name it.
1. This Italian place on the south end of Winchester Blvd. in Cambell/San Jose near Safeway and these movie theater and a Kung Fu acadamy.
2. We could do Sushi at the Kenokinia Shpping Plaza on Saratoga Ave Just South of 280 in San Jose.
3. We could hang out at The Lion and Lamb Christian Book Store (the coolest book store in the Bay Area that sells the coolest calvinist, puritian, Van Tillian Presupposionalist Apologetics books that everyone loves) Located on the courner of Stevens Creek Blvd and De Anza Blvd in Coupertino.
4. We could hang out at Berean Book store and walk over to McDonalds on Meridian Ave in San Jose.
5. How about some Korean BBQ in K-town in Sunnyville on El Camino Real near Kyopo Market.
6. There is this pretty good Jewish Deli on Alameda ave. south of 280 Near Bascom Ave. San Jose
7. How about Mexican Downtown SJ near 2nd and Santa Clara.
8. Another Itailan place that has the best strombolis in the world. Its near Almeden Expressway and Camden Ave about one block near this huge calvery chapel mega church is at.
9. Finaly Cantoneese place on University in Palo Alto
pick a place.
Wendy Responding to David writes: snip
"I understand what you are trying to say, but I am afraid that it is just one outlook on this. Part of survival is getting along
with others so that you will prosper. Now you are saying survial of the fittest is the evolutionary way. This does not mean that you kill everyone but yourself. That would serve no purpose. If you want to get down to the nitty gritty and pick apart why we have the morals we have, you will need to look individually at them. Do you want to? I hate to spend all that time if you are not interested. But I could probably pick every act and explain in a logical way why we should not commit them."
Response: Wendy, Wendy, Wendy,
You can not explain why we should not commit acts of moral evil and yet at the same time hold on to the athiest dogma of moral relitivism. The dielectical tention(internal contradiction) is too great for you to overcome. On one hand you want to impose a moral standard, on the hand you want deny any notion of absolute standards that may objectively rule over you in morals and ethics in which you want to ground your notion of morals and ethics on. Your claim to be logical and yet as a selfproclaimed logition as yourself why are you insisting in violating the law of contradiction in your apologetics of athiesm. Your just demonstraiting the SELF-REFUTING nature of athiesm and that athiesm is not an intelectual persute but a rejection of ones own personal gifts of intellegence. As Francis Scheaffer would say "Wendy, you have your feet firmly planted in mid air. Wendy, your a sharp lady, but I think inside you know better.
Look, all David or anyone else can ask you is "why should I not commit acts of moral evil, by what absolute standard" At that point your athiestic world view is in jepordy. You eather live by your athiestic world view and say "there is no absolute standard, so philisophically why not an ethical/moral free for all". Or, you can deny your athiestic world view and live and act as if athiesm were "a bunch of crap" and impose an absolute standard for right or wrong in which you will have no other place to go but to barrow capital from the christian world view.
Wendy, in response to me writes:
"Of course I do not want an answer to that question, I just used it to show you that it boils down to not if one is atheist or
christian, but what moral code(conscience) the individual person has."
Response:
The Christian World View is the only world view can provide the intelectual (logical and epistomological--how we know what we know)
answers to give a reason why there is an absolute standard for ethics and morals. Athiesm can not. To use your words "what is BOILS DOWN TO" is that Christianity can give an account to and give a reason for morals, ethics and an orderly society. Athiesm can not. So I can see why you don't want to answer my question.
Acourding to your athiestic world view why should we have ethics and morals?
Wendy Posts:
" I was raised a christian and remained one for 26 year. What I have a problem with is, you thinking that because I am no longer a christian I would throw all my morals out the window. I still have to answer to the same person I had to answer to for 27 years, myself.
And truth be known I am way hard on myself, much more so than anyone else I know. So I assure you that if another atheist tried to persuade me to abandon my own conscience I would not be jumping on that bandwagon. As a matter of fact I have never met an atheist that would even try to impress their own moral code on me."
1. you said "I was raised a christian and remained one for 26 years"
Q1: where you raised a Jehovahs Witness? if so then you where not raised a christian, because Jehovahs Witnesses is not Christianity.
Q2: Where you raised in an Protestant bible believing evangelical home? Either Baptist, Presbyterian, Reformed, Congragational, Independent, or Lutherian home? If so what are you doing in a JW chat room with us x-JWs since you grew up in an evangelical home for 26 years and on your 27th revial that you were never converted to Christ, (by Christ since He does the converting, not man). Did you spend a few months studying with the JWs?
2. You said "And truth be known I am way hard on myself, much more so than anyone else I know"
Q1: I'm just trying to apply YOUR athistic world view and go consistanly to its logical conclusion. So then why go through all the self-bashing and being so hard on yourself? If there is no Absolute moral standard then why go through all the fuss. As your people would say "hey, relax a little, take it easy, smoke a few joints. There is no God so there is nothing to worry about"
Q2: If you do have a moral standard which you say you have, What do you base your standard on? Feelings, popular public opinion, female intuition, the feeling that as Rodny King would put it "we nee to get along", mathamatical calculations, your favorite song?
When you reject the bible that's all you got.
3. You said: "As a matter of fact I have never met an atheist that would even try to impress their own moral code on me"
Response: Why should they thier world view teaches that there is really no real absolute standard for right and wrong. "Just do as you please" they say but for pragmatic reasons they might add "as long as you don't go to jail"
Wendy, as far as the pop quizes go, the reason for them is to demonstraite that they have absolutly no Idea what they are talking about. This way they can be exposed for misrepresenting the Christian position. These poeple pull of the same dishonest garbage tactics as the WT does. As for rem and the others thier antagonism against the Christian message is nothing new. Going from JW to Evolutionist Atheist is just going from one form of rebelion (JW) against God to another form of rebellion (Atheism) against God. Both forms of religion worship the creation rather than the creator.
One more thing. Wendy you wished me a Marry Christmas. Why, if you are an athiest and don't believe in Jesus are into Christmas. Christmas is suppose to be about the birth of Christ(whom you dont believe). Are you contradicting yourself or just living off the fruits of the christian? Why celabrate the birth of a potental enemy(one who will send you to hell)? Is in it more consistant to say happy winter solstus?
Could you imagen your kids comming to you and saying "mommy why do we celabrate christmas when we are athiest and don't believe in Christ?" "Please be consistant mommy"
Wendy, I have looked at some of your other post and think your a cool person so please dont take offence. I am praying for you...
check out http://www.reformed.org
Saint Satan had a Pius little quote:
"He who doesn't live his faith doesn't have any."

Response: Sappy sentamantalism never explains why men and women need Christ and his redemption. The only one who ever lived his faith perfectly as demanded by God was Jesus Christ. The good news is that perfect life is imputed to those who trust Him(this ability does not rest with man but is given by God) Romans 3:19-4:5
So you see SS your sentamental quote has a touch of leagalistic perfectionism, law with out redemption.
Let me explain the order of salvation.
1.Election or Predestination---->2.Efectual calling or Regeneration ----> 3.Faith and Repentance---->4. Sanctification----->5.Glorification
1. God choses not on the bases of what man does but by his good mercy. You might say well thats not fair. Then again does he have to chose to save anyone at all? Eph 1:1-14
2. God makes some one alive in Christ (by the preaching of the word of god) James 1:18 Romans 10:17(faith comes by hering the word of God)
Acts 8:4,5 (keyrigma) http://www.kyrux.com The sinner can now choose the things of God. before his free will was bound to sin.
3. Now he can truely trust God and Repent.
4. Now he grows in holiness(Phil 1 "he who began a good work in you will complete it) no falling from salvation
5. The consumation of the covenant promise.
Look at it this way individually the nice guy down the street who doent believe nor trust Christ but does good deeds of civil rightiousness he will go to hell. But Gansta man who use to pimp sell crack and smoke sucka G's on the down stroke(shoot rival gangsters). Well lets say God will do his rescue mission on him. He gets saved grows in Godliness and walks away from gangsta life because Christ is in him. This man shall surely live.
rem writes:
"Evolution is a scientific theory, not a philosophy. It's not even inherently atheistic. There are millions of god believers
who accept Evolution. Your position has no support."

Response:No rem, you are so wrong, it presents an athiestic alternative to the Christian World View. Look, if this topic continues after Christmas I will personally take time to marshall quotes from athiestic evolutionist professers(you people) from universities all over this land like Stanford, Texas A&M, Harvard, all the way down the list to refute your silly cliam that evolution "is not even inharently athiestic" that is so full of it, even your own athiestic people will tell you that.
Who are these millions who are as you abrataraly put it "god believers"? (as if you had a standard of what a "god believer" really is)
Roman Catholics, buddist, hindies, islam, these people dont count because they are not christian and they do not hold to the biblical view of creation so your claim has no marit. Look man go to school and take logic and rhetoric and learn how to marshal a good argument.
To equivocate and use arbratrary terms does not boster your case. Stop being lazy and read some books and think through your arguments..
Just because induviduals whom you falsly claim as Christian say that they believe in evolution does not make evolution true.
example: I could go to you and say all the people on the 8th floor say that windows NT 4 never crashes. Well we know given all the technical white papers and working on the systems that that claim is full of it.
and yet rem, that is exactly the type of argument you give me in reguards to the defence of evolution.
our dialog is kinda going like this:
jr: rem, do you believe in evolution?
rem: Well, because, just because, um.. kay...
rem wrote:
"Can you construct a moral code that 100% of the population of earth will agree on? I don't think so."
God given laws are not based on democrocy. God gives his laws that settles it it doesn't matter wether I believe it or not. We dont sit around and say "All in favor of outlawing armed robery say I, all against say Ney. The I's have it by a margen of 60-40."
rem wrote:
"Also, the fact that Christian morals are based on a punishment/reward
system doesn't look very appealing to me."
Response: If that's the case then by your standard your not to fond of American constitutional government, which has far more punnishments than rewards.
I guess America "land of the brave, home of the free" is not your cup of tea.
God's laws are a reflection of his Unchanging Holy character this is why God creates moral laws that he does not break because they are reflective of who He is.
rem, dont give me this junk of "well prostitution was o.k in the O.T and now not o.k. in the N.T. Give me one passage where prostitution was O.K. I hate to say it but you are as ignorant of the context of the bible as JWs are.
Look, remI don't like beating you down like this but your view do not reflect and hard effort to seek the truth, but only a reflection of a lawless reprobate heart. The only good news for you is that you are never too far away from the salvation of christ.
One more question rem, on what ethical/moral standard are you to keep your marrage together? If there is no moral absolutes then who is to say that is right or wrong to cheet on eachother? You see athiesm has practical personal implications that you should think through.
Don't think I have anything against you personally. Yea, I think your views are wacked. But I do hope to be friends. So your still invited to hang out with us.
one last thing
Saint Satan, wrote:
[quote]" Did you know that the founding fathers of the american republic were not christians?........
Response: Your historical reference is as about as acurate as your average WT magazine. Truth is the founding fathers of America where a mix of christian and non christian If you really want to go there SS then I'll call you on it and challenge you by asking you for all the names of those who signed the declaration of Independance what there religious position were and of those who where Christian what was there denoninational leaning? This should be eazy for you SS since you have claimed on this board historic expertise. If not keep quite on the matter and stop advancing false information. I'm sure people on this board has hade enough false info from the WT with out you adding to the mix.
go Lakers,
jr

Marry Christmas Jan-evolution goes down in flames

Share this