•
•

*** QUIZ ***: Why believing evolution theory is INCOMPATIBLE with evolution theory (self.Christianity)

Kyoon_ が 投稿

According to evolution theory, believers in evolution theory will be among the first victims of predators.

Is anyone able to explain this, or are you all so brainwashed that you can't even see this simple logic that a child can?

Hints

Hint 1: start with one of the two assumptions of evolution theory.

Hint 2: that assumption is NOT "every form of life is based on common ancestors" (as implied in the article above).

Hint 3: to solve the puzzle use scientific methodology: Mathematics (Logic).

Hint 4: children do NOT need to look at the basics...

http://www.dmoz.org/Science/Math/Logic_and_Foundations/

... since they still have all the knowledge required to solve this quiz, as explicitly mentioned in the article above.

全 36 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]Anglican Church in North AmericaFather-Michael 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

wut

[–]Roman CatholicSaint_Thomas_More 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That about sums things up.

[–]SupremeWizardry 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Care to rephrase.... all of that?

Incredibly disorganized post. I'm not sure what you were trying to say, or get us to do, or anything.

[–]Episcopalian (Anglican)adamthrash 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

What does this have to do with Christianity?

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ 4ポイント5ポイント  (5子コメント)

According to evolution theory, believers in evolution theory will be among the first victims of predators.

No...

According to evolution, changes in species occur over time based off of selective pressures. Evolution has little to do with what you believe.

or are you all so brainwashed that you can't even see this simple logic that a child can?

Based off of a quick look at your profile, you've got bigger issues to deal with than we do.

[–]AtheistHoundOfGod 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Based off of a quick look at your profile, you've got bigger issues to deal with than we do.

Wow, you really weren't kidding. Well, if the Illuminati want me to believe in evolution so badly, it seems rather rude of me to disagree with them after all the work they've put in fabricating mountains and mountains of evidence.

[–]Kyoon_[S] -2ポイント-1ポイント  (3子コメント)

Evolution Theory - the most important hoax and weapon for the destruction of the natural values.

Religion is an explanation of who created all forms of life. There are two basic exclusive explanations:

  • God (creationism) or an accident (evolution theory).

Believers are people that believe there is some evidence to prove that a religion is true. There are two types of believers:

  • true (without doubts) and partial (with doubts).

Believers without doubts are those who believe there's no evidence to prove that his or her religion is impossible. From my definitions we conclude that partial believers might believe in more than one religion.

Evidence proving that a particular religion is impossible leads (logically) to abandoning that religion.

[–]ElementalBrain 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Religion is an explanation of who created all forms of life.

No it is not. I can make a religion that is centered on worshiping grass if I want to, no need to explain who created it.

There are two basic exclusive explanations: God (creationism) or an accident (evolution theory).

No. Evolution is not "an accident", nor are they exclusive.

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

lol, you really don't know what you're talking about

[–]the_real_jones 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

There are two types of believers: true delusional (without doubts) and partial reasonable (with doubts).

FTFY- believing without doubts is, simply put, delusional. Look through the Bible and you won't find any figures who did not have at least some doubts. This whole you have to believe without doubts to be a "true" believer is just a defensive position and tends to reveal that one is more afraid of the validity of opposing arguments rather than a strong belief in the validity of one's own beliefs.

[–]Southern Orthodoxsuperherowithnopower 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

I don't see a link to an article...?

[–]Kyoon_[S] -3ポイント-2ポイント  (7子コメント)

The article is one line long:

According to evolution theory, believers in evolution theory will be among the first victims of predators.

[–]Southern Orthodoxsuperherowithnopower 6ポイント7ポイント  (6子コメント)

That's not an article. That's a sentence. Insofar as it is a claim being made, it is wholly unsubstantiated.

I give you an F and recommend you repeat Remedial Lit.

[–]Kyoon_[S] [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

This thread is supposed to be about people using my hints to find the answer.

So far nobody started that process.

For instance, if you use Hint 2:

  • that assumption is NOT "every form of life is based on common ancestors" (as implied in the article above).

So what is the assumption that you should use?

[–]Southern Orthodoxsuperherowithnopower [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's because we're not your playthings, and we're not going to do your work for you.

If you have a point, make it. Substantiate it. Defend it. Argue for it.

But don't expect us to play these games.

[–]Christian (Cross)jofwu [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

To find the answer to what?

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The answer to OP's incredibly vague, irrelevant, and dumb question.

[–]Evangelical Lutheran Church in AmericaPanta-rhei [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

There are populations that vary and reproduce?

[–]Kyoon_[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Thanks for trying but that is not the second base assumption to which I'm referring.

[–]ElementalBrain 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

According to evolution theory, believers in evolution theory will be among the first victims of predators.

By what twisted logic? How many humans do you know that were killed by predators?

start with one of the two assumptions of evolution theory.

Which are?

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Which are?

I think OP wants us to figure it out, or at least, figure out what OP thinks the two assumptions are, not what they actually are.

Unless you answer "god isn't real" and "man isn't made in the image of god" as the two assumptions, OP will spout off about the illuminati 'n stuff.

[–]william_nillington 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I met a child yesterday who thought the sky was blue because his favorite color was blue.

Children are not always shining examples of intellect and reason.

Truth be told however, they're more promising than you.

[–]Secular HumanistJoJoRumbles 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

It looks like the OP spilled a bag of Scrabble letters and decided to post the mess he saw on the floor.

[–]volci 1ポイント2ポイント  (9子コメント)

I agree that evolutionary theory related to the origins of life is incompatible with a Supreme Creator God (one which, theoretically, "Christians" agree exists in more-or-less a consistent form)

This post, however, makes you look like a loon

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ 2ポイント3ポイント  (8子コメント)

I agree that evolutionary theory related to the origins of life is incompatible with a Supreme Creator God

Why?

This post, however, makes you look like a loon

At least we can agree on that much.

[–]volci [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Why?

Speaking from a biblical worldview, if God made everything (which any Christian should have to agree with), then life didn't originate "evolutionarily"

Whether God used evolutionary processes to push life on from some primordial form to today is another discussion - an not related to the conversation at hand.

If you think God didn't make everything, then you're either a) not a Christian, or b) want to form God into your own view rather than that which is presented in the bible.

Muslims have a similar view regarding Allah.

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Speaking from a biblical worldview, if God made everything (which any Christian should have to agree with), then life didn't originate "evolutionarily"

Evolution explains the diversity of life, not the origins. Abiogenesis is what would explain the origins of life. They're two different concepts, and I think you're confusing the two.

Whether God used evolutionary processes to push life on from some primordial form to today is another discussion - an not related to the conversation at hand.

On the contrary, that is the conversation at hand here essentially.

or b) want to form God into your own view rather than that which is presented in the bible.

I'm not convinced that there are many christians that don't do this, including creationists and fundamentalists.

Do you disagree with god in any way?

[–]volci [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

I disagree with God often - but find myself always on the losing side of the argument :)

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

but find myself always on the losing side of the argument :)

So you quickly change your mind when you disagree with him?

[–]volci [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

As quickly as I'm brought to the realization, yes

Sometimes that is not "quick", however

[–]volci [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Abiogenesis is widely presumed to be a part of an evolutionary worldview. I realize there are some who separate them in their minds, but most do not.

[–]AtheistT_Rollinue_ [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Abiogenesis is widely presumed to be a part of an evolutionary worldview.

It's the part leading up to evolutionary theory, but is not necessary for evolutionary theory. Even if life was created by aliens, god, whatever, evolution could, and has taken places despite that.

I realize there are some who separate them in their minds, but most do not.

If you realize people separate it, why did you say "evolutionary theory related to the origins of life is incompatible with a Supreme Creator God"? It really isn't.

[–]volci [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I didn't separate it because it typically isn't separated in conversation, writing, etc - and [almost] certainly isn't being by the OP

[–]orr250mph [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Since OP has clearly devolved, then one may infer evolution as true )

[–]Episcopalian (Anglican)Agrona [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

"Every form of life is based on common ancestors" isn't an assumption of evolution, it's a consequence.

The only assumption that's coming to mind is the same one behind all of the physical sciences: that things are repeatable and consistent.

If you're so enlightened, why don't you share your logic with us? Wouldn't that be the kind, charitable thing to do—to help guide us out of our ignorance?

[–]Kyoon_[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

So far nothing...