Christian Discussion/Debate

[debellator]

@Geektronex

I could say the same about your belief in God. Its not a fact. And also since the theory of evolution is pretty much Unchallenged, i guess we could only accept the most plausible explanation

Yes, one cannot prove 100% that God exists. It requires faith, just like belief in evolution does. From researching on various sites it just seems like the most plausible explaination to me.

@Geektronex

They belong to different species

You know what I mean. Birds to reptiles to mammals. Again, you’re going around and around adaptation, but not differentiation from one species to another

@Geektronex

And I hereby rest my case. Won’t be taking part in further dialogues since the conversation is moving to philosophical side and I am not an atheist.

Hmm…why so? It looks like less evidence…Just curious, are you an agnostic then? Or you belive in God and evolution perhaps?

@The_wild_perception

Evolution and big bang are the kind of things scientists have dedicated their lives to proving right.

True, but reputed institutes have also proven it wrong.

The Big Bang Wasn't The Beginning, After All

The Scientific Evidence Against the Big Bang - LPP Fusion

@The_wild_perception

I know its a tough pill to swallow to understand what made big bang happen then?

Which is what we began with. Nothing inside this Universe could have cause the BIg Bang. It had to be of an external, uncaused cause. Not too many objects fit this description- check out my previous post on necessary and contigent beings if you will.

@The_wild_perception

Im in no way saying people to stop believe what they wanna believe, but it must be backed by something concrete. Just as @Geektronex pointed out, darwins finches for one are great example of adaptation and eventually speciation. Now thats how evolution works. Hell coronavirus mutating is also an evolution.

Adaptaion is a fact. It’s science. I agree with it 100%. I do not agree on species going to different kingdoms/genera. Please stop going in circles on this

@The_wild_perception

So in short believe what you think is right. But be open to the idea that what you believe might be wrong too.

The fact that I cannot be 100% sure I am right is why I am posting this anyway no one can be 100% sure of anything. But if you can give me a credible example of species going from one kingdom to another, I will be highly compelled to believe in evolution.

[The_integrous_one]

Damn instead of writing Christian debate you guys should have named this thread as cool science and philosophy debate , I didn’t open this thread till now because I am not a Christian , But I think I gotta read all the messages now .

[GOVIND-19]

@The_integrous_one

cool science and philosophy debate

Bruh your naming skills need improvement. Obviously the better choice for a thread name is " The big bang theory"

[The_integrous_one]

@GOVIND-19

The big bang theory"

Yeah that must have attracted more audience.

[GOVIND-19]

@The_integrous_one

Yeah that must have attracted more audience.

Exactly! These peeps don’t know marketing at all! Learn from the pros homos homies

[The_integrous_one]

@GOVIND-19

Learn from the pros homos homies

hail hydra!!

[GOVIND-19]

Hail Hydra!

[Dean_Ambrose]

Am I missing some fun here

[The_integrous_one]

hydra is a marvel organization, you won’t get it if you haven’t watched marvel movies
the hell you won’t get it even if you watched them @GOVIND-19

[GOVIND-19]

Yeah man it’s an inside joke.

[Geektronex]

@debellator

You know what I mean. Reptiles to birds and mammals. Again, you’re going around and around adaptation, but not differentiation from one species to another

Reptiles to birds and mammals is evolution. No one is discarding it. But its an evolution whose difference between individual units go beyond order level. Its in the class level. Birds, Mammals and Reptiles belong to Kingdom Animalia and they also belong to Phylum Chordata. But they belong to different classes such as Aves, Mammalia and Reptalia respectively. It means that the adaptation and natural selection lead to such a genetic difference which was clearly inheritable and as a result as the difference build up, they had to belong different class.
This is what Natural Selection as explained by Charles Darwin:
“principle by which each slight variation [of a trait], if useful, is preserved”. The concept was simple but powerful: individuals best adapted to their environments are more likely to survive and reproduce. As long as there is some variation between them and that variation is heritable, there will be an inevitable selection of individuals with the most advantageous variations. If the variations are heritable, then differential reproductive success leads to a progressive evolution of particular [populations] of a species, and populations that evolve to be sufficiently different eventually become different species"

Natural selection

If you read carefully , you will see the words adaptation and speciation in it. Its a part of evolution.
“The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection; or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” This was the title of Darwin’s book. Now since it is clearly mentioned that Natural Selection means adaptation and speciation and the origin of species is by the means of natural selection, I think nothing more needs to be added to be prove my point that speciation is part of evolution. Kindly think twice before disproving Charles Darwin. It is the foundation of evolutionary biology.

On the Origin of Species

When we study evolution of Humans. According to you we don’t study since it is adaptation of Humans but we still study it as Human evolution, Australopithecus evolved into homo habilis then into homo erectus then going further down we could see them further trifurcates or more in to several branches like homo sapiens , homo neanderthalensis, homo denisovan, homo florensis etc. Through natural selection, at the end the only species remaining is homo sapiens. Homo sapiens are evolving , but the chance of it becoming a different species is less cause there is less chance of genetic drift, but the loss of third molar or wisdom tooth and palmaris longus, tendon in the wrist, in some individuals, somewhat points out that humans are evolving.

@debellator

True, but reputed institutes have also proven it wrong.

They never proved it wrong. People are free to publish research papers and all. Still it is the most plausible explanation. There would be many theories saying this and that happened but the most plausible explanation is still Big Bang theory. what is the purpose of existence or why it happened the way it happened is philosophical. At the end of debating philosophy, most probably it would reach at a point where everybody says i have my own beliefs and you have your own.

@debellator

Hmm…why so? It looks like less evidence…Just curious, are you an agnostic then? Or you belive in God and evolution perhaps?

Lol…Like the god theory have the most evidence and you showed all the evidences. I think I have covered the topic very well in terms of evidences and It doesn’t matter what I believe in. Now, it is you who dont accept evidences, told you about Darwin’s finches you told me they are of same species but when i said it is not and presented proof you are not talking about it. You talked about vestigial organs a lot but when I said the part where you are not talking about the ancestor part in its definition, you are not talking about it. Now you say , you believe in taxonomical categories such as reptalia, Mammalia and aves and even Kingdom. The basis of this classification is also based on evolution. The Linnaean taxonomy is also known as evolutionary taxonomy in modern times and the idea of evolution is carried forward till the end of every taxa. Whittaker classification is also based on phylogenetic relationships. The most recent one is by Thomas Cavalier Smith, he is an evolutionary taxonomist. If you believe in classification of organisms, you are indirectly believing in evolution till the species level or further more and you can’t selectively delete the idea of evolution from the lower levels of classification according to your own wish cause its written all over the definition. You can’t say, ok, I like the definition of evolution till class level but beyond than nah, it goes against my beliefs and i discard it . Whether you considered it as evolution or not , it is still evolution. You can call it apples or something else at the species level, but according to definition it is still evolution.

Taxonomy (biology) | Modern system of classification

Phylogenetics

@The_wild_perception

Whats your opinion @Geektronex

True @The_wild_perception , I am not against anyone believing in anything.
There are people who still believe in flat earth. I cant just force anyone to believe in anything. When I feel like something is futile even after explaining so much , I leave. Like what else to do. Leave people to their own beliefs

Footnote: There is slight issue in calling in something till species level adaptation and not evolution. One, is that I can adapt to be strong by going to gym or doing something else, but I can’t inherit it to my future generation. Second , when it means adaptation, It mean I can adapt to be a tiger or lion or a dog or a cat who differentiate each other not in class level but you can’t . Why?? because you evolved into some other species. Unfortunately, if you are mentioning adaptation in biological sense, you again should be ready to correct your mistakes cause the word evolution is right in the face of the definition

Adaptation

[debellator]

@Geektronex

Reptiles to birds and mammals is evolution. No one is discarding it. But its an evolution whose difference between individual units go beyond order level. Its in the class level. Birds, Mammals and Reptiles belong to Kingdom Animalia and they also belong to Phylum Chordata. But they belong to different classes such as Aves, Mammalia and Reptalia respectively. It means that the adaptation and natural selection lead to such a genetic difference which was clearly inheritable and as a result as the difference build up, they had to belong different class.

Has this ever in the history of mankind been recorded to have occured? Even once?

@Geektronex

If you read carefully , you will see the words adaptation and speciation in it.

Yes, see, adaptation is proven. We have seen many examples. Sure, you consider adaptation as part of evolution and I consider it as part of God’s creations’ tendency to survive. but at any rate, adaptation inside a species is proven with evidence, but evolution to another species is not.

@Geektronex

Kindly think twice before disproving Charles Darwin. It is the foundation of evolutionary biology.

True that it is the foundation of evolutionary biology. I’m not trying to disprove Darwin, he did that himself when he called his theory ‘grievously hypothetical’ and edited the Origin of Species with each edition that came out. In fact, if I’m not wrong, Neo-Darwinism, which I think you believe in, doesn’t agree with all the Darwin says.

@Geektronex

When we study evolution of Humans. According to you we don’t study since it is adaptation of Humans but we still study it as Human evolution, Australopithecus evolved into homo habilis then into homo erectus then going further down we could see them further trifurcates or more in to several branches like homo sapiens , homo neanderthalensis, homo denisovan, homo florensis etc. Through natural selection, at the end the only species remaining is homo sapiens.

1. That would be more believable if we found actual fossils, not parts of fossils from which we recreated the entire organism.
2. If only Homo sapeins is left, why didn’t in the past according to this, the Australopithecan descendants wipe out their counterparts that evolved into modern day apes?

@Geektronex

They never proved it wrong. People are free to publish research papers and all. Still it is the most plausible explanation.

Sorry, please read my previous post again. People have proved it wrong.

@Geektronex

Lol…Like the god theory have the most evidence and you showed all the evidences.

Let’s suppose that you know all of humanity’s knowledge in the whole history of humankind. Let’s give that a very generous estimate of 4% of the knowledge of the universe. There is still a high probability that God exists in the 96% of the universe that you don’t know about.

@Geektronex

Now, it is you who dont accept evidences, told you about Darwin’s finches you told me they are of same species but when i said it is not and presented proof you are not talking about it.

I have spoken of it, if you will but read my posts

@Geektronex

Now you say , you believe in taxonomical categories such as reptalia, Mammalia and aves and even Kingdom.

I don’t even know where this came from of course, since that’s the most efficient and current system of taxonomic nomenclature in use, why should I go against it?

@Geektronex

You can’t say, ok, I like the definition of evolution till class level but beyond than nah, it goes against my beliefs and i discard it . Whether you considered it as evolution or not , it is still evolution. You can call it apples or something else at the species level, but according to definition it is still evolution.

If evolution is true, it has to be 100% true. I agree that adaptation is a part of evolution, but unless inter-general or inter-classal evolution is recorded in a scientific paper, the rest of evolution is a belief. just like I believe in intelligent design.

@Geektronex

There is slight issue in calling in something till species level adaptation and not evolution. One, is that I can adapt to be strong by going to gym or doing something else, but I can’t inherit it to my future generation. Second , when it means adaptation, It mean I can adapt to be a tiger or lion or a dog or a cat who differentiate each other not in class level but you can’t . Why?? because you evolved into some other species. Unfortunately, if you are mentioning adaptation in biological sense, you again should be ready to correct your mistakes cause the word evolution is right in the face of the definition

You can take that up with your fellow evolutionists

The thing is, referencing this paper:
Ch. 2 - Epigenetics of Reproduction in Animals (BUILDING THE MOST COMPLEX STRUCTURE ON EARTH, 2013) | Request PDF (researchgate.net)

The finches adaptation, the adaptation of carps and all the rest has:

1. Been proved to be a result of biological engineering rather than trial-and-error death and survival.
   So you can’t argue that this is evolution. It’s equally intelligent design.
2. All these adaptations occur within one generation or less, which is far too rapid for Darwin’s notion of trial-and-error natural selection.

See, I’m not trying to disprove evolution I’m just saying that both evolution and God require belief.

And if you believe in evolution, and you are correct and I am wrong, nothing changes really we will both die and become atoms etc.etc. Just that we will believe different things.
But if God is real, then when we die there will be an eternity of difference, which is why I am concerned about this.

Brother you are free to believe what you want. Just be sure to alway look for the truth if you think that is evolution, believe it. It’s up to you anyway

[neveragaintw]

can we stop here?
I feel like there are so many interesting things to discuss. There is so much value to share.

With evolution, we will not come to a point.
Let’s adapt to the situation that we have to different opinions here and that we won’t come to an agreement

[debellator]

@neveragaintw

Let’s adapt to the situation that we have to different opinions here and that we won’t come to an agreement

True, which is why I said,

@debellator

Brother you are free to believe what you want. Just be sure to alway look for the truth if you think that is evolution, believe it. It’s up to you anyway

Maybe we can close the topic, if it’s no longer needed…

[PaperBoat]

@The_wild_perception

Devotion takes alot of heart and energy.

I don’t agree with that. Being a devotee of god , I never felt like it takes my energy.
But seeing the current scenario of Indian youths , I can understand why you felt like this. If you see the current generation they just take devotion as a pressure from society. I feel like it would be better if they just be an atheist instead of showing fake devotion.
I really like that you simply call yourself an atheist instead of showing fake devotion.

[The_wild_perception]

Yea… Fake devotion is the worst

[PaperBoat]

I don’t know about any other religion or country but I feel like most of the Indians just takes devotion as a pressure from society. I am personally surrounded with them too. I have not found anyone in real life yet who is truly committed to what he believes.
Sadly I live in a very toxic area where people just always fight and abuse with eachother. But during the festivals , they pray like they are true devotees.
Take the example of Navratri If you don’t know about it , It’s a festival of 9 days in Hindus.
Usually noone eats Non veg in these Nine days. What’s the point of just abstraing for 9 days? If you eat non veg whole year without even limiting youself. Not eating it for 9 days don’t do anything good.I am myself A hindu , And I think that it’s nowhere written in vedas that we should eat non veg .

[GOVIND-19]

@PaperBoat

Usually noone eats Non veg in these Nine days. What’s the point of just abstraing for 9 days? If you eat non veg whole year. Not eating it for 9 days don’t do anything good.

This kind of abstinence in food is not just in Hinduism. It’s common in all religions. Us Christians have to observe lent for 50 days before Easter, 25 days before Christmas and 8 days before the birth of mother Mary. Muslims fast during Ramadan.

@PaperBoat

What’s the point of just abstraing for 9 days? If you eat non veg whole year

You can also ask Muslims why fast during the day if you are going to eat anyway afterwards…

Bruh the point of abstinence during days of religious importance is all about the sense of sacrifice. This is my opinion and it’s from what I know from Christianity. You are sacrificing something you love and enjoy during that period to show gratitude and be spiritually stronger.

[Dean_Ambrose]

@PaperBoat

Usually noone eats Non veg in these Nine days. What’s the point of just abstraing for 9 days? If you eat non veg whole year.

Well I’m not Hindu and the point that you made seems legit , but I think that’s a religions believe and we should respect that whether if there is a reason behind it or not …

[PaperBoat]

I actually forgot to mention a point that Eating non-veg is always consider bad in our culture. We worship those animals. But sadly Those who worship animals have themselves started eating them. Basically what I wanted to say that a true devotee or a religious person will never eat non-veg if he is truly committed to what he believes. It’s never written in any of the vedas that you should eat non-veg but People still do.

But your reply really makes a lot of sense, I will think more about it. Thanks