by Blueblades 33 Replies latest jw friends
(((HA)))
Balistic after watching W W cavemen my wife and I turned to each other and said O. K.
I thought it a strange show. In fact, I said that it is something I'd see on a BBC program. Thanks for the update.
Evolution is no threat to the Bible IMO. God changes to meet our understanding of it.
Our understanding and our conceptualization of God has been changing in response to our changing understanding of and insights into the sciences since the establishment of the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm over 400 years ago. And it will continue to change until our understanding of both God and science is complete. There should be no argument between religion and science whatsoever. The fact that there is speaks volumes about our continuing ignorance in both areas I'm afraid.
I thought the program last night was very good and provided basic information which should help the open-minded bible thumpers understand. No amount of information will help the closed-minded, such as JWs and their leaders, to understand anything. The mind is a wonderful thing, but like an umbrella it only works when it's open. The program last night could have been made better if the producers had used someone else, almost anyone else, besides Alec Baldwin. Was he in Merry Ole England hiding out from Bush finally?
francois
I've always found the bibles account of creation hard to believe, but I can see no way that things could hve happened by chance to creat the equilibrium that we find in nature today, so I tend to believe creation.
Scientific evidence proves man, in whatever form, has been on the earth for much longer than 6,000 years. But whenever I make something I usually have to make 2 or 3 prototypes until I get a result that I'm happy with. Could this not be what 'cave men' ect really are?
Gadget;
I've always found the bibles account of creation hard to believe, but I can see no way that things could hve happened by chance to creat the equilibrium that we find in nature today, so I tend to believe creation.
Take it from me; I was a Dubbie with a voracious reading habit, and loved Science, especially the nautral sciences. After I left it took probably two years of college education for me to stop resisting and accept that naturalistic methods provided a good (better) explaination for why we are here. It goes without saying that theories come and go in light with new material evidence and methodology/techniques, but the basic theory remains the same, and is demonstrable in the world around us in as much as timescales allow.
You're welcome to believe what you like, but if it takes a sceience enthusiast two years at college to understand enough to put it all together, your desicison to 'tend to believe creation', whilst your right, is not neccesarily one you would make if you knew all the information. Oh, and nature isn't really in an equilibrium; it's just from our timescale it looks like that sometimes.
Scientific evidence proves man, in whatever form, has been on the earth for much longer than 6,000 years. But whenever I make something I usually have to make 2 or 3 prototypes until I get a result that I'm happy with. Could this not be what 'cave men' ect really are?
So god needs prototypes? I thought god was perfect? Ah, but it says that in a book that also says the world is 6,000 years old, and we know that second fact is wrong, so maybe the first fact is wrong too... but if that isn't right, what is right in the Bible as far as the origin of life goes?
Realise you can believe in evolution and god. There is no need to shackle yourself to a creation myth supposedly written by a well educated goatherd 3,500 years ago. Realise that all creationists hide the fact they have no way of explaining how god got there, and then attack evoltuionists and cosmologists for not being able to 'prove' certain theories. Read! Read more!
Abaddon, very well said!
I watched only a brief segment of "Walking with Cavemen" The part that I saw was what I expected (men in ape men costumes making growling and grunting noises). I would much prefer renting "Planet of the apes" for entertainment value. As to scientific stuff, those who wish to see a creationist prespective on the evidence for human evolution as well as dating methods can research from the following links:
http://www.answersingenesis.org
Ah, what a great place to go for accurate information. I looked at that site quite a bit when I was struggling with evolution and my JW faith. At least the JWs are not young earth creationists.
Unfortunately the series "Walking with Cavemen" does have one serious scientific flaw.
Neanderthal Man did not become extinct. Anyone who has been on a night out in Manchester can see dozens of these creatures walking the streets at night.
OK, the nitpicker has arrived on the thread (you can throw things if you like )
repeat after me...hominid...hom-i-nid...not "humanoid"...hominid (hey, it's a common and easy mistake to make) Australopithecines were hominids but I wouldn't call them 'humanoids' ("huminoid" is something from a sci-fi movie )
Neanderthal Man did not become extinct. Anyone who has been on a night out in Manchester can see dozens of these creatures walking the streets at night.
Very funny. As late as a year or so ago, there was still debate among Physical anthropologists whether Neanderthals completely died out or whether some few interbred with H. sapiens who migrated into Europe (Neanderthals were there first). There was also debate about whether the species should be Homo neanderthalensis or Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. Last I heard, the jury was still out on that, but it's possible that genetic testing in the past year or so has settled it and I didn't hear (it's been a year and a half since my last phys anth class).
hominid...hom-i-nid...not "humanoid"
You're right of course... I don't know what I was thinking. I will go sit in a corner.
