Evolution

by DonExodus 50 Replies latest members adult

• 

  Gopher

  Welcome to the forum, jeminijad. I disagree with this assertion about Jesus:

  he was a charismatic leader whose life is as well documented as many secular kings, and changed history more than any.

  Here's what I have read: No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.

  More here: http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
• 

  Awakened07

  Welcome jeminijad!

  I'd just like to add to the thread that Charles Darwin didn't invent evolution. He didn't really even 'invent' the hypothesis (now theory). If Charles Darwin hadn't been born, or had done something completely different with his life, the theory would most likely have been almost identical today. That said, Darwin did of course do a lot of important observational work and had a better and more elaborately formed hypothesis than others at the time. But others were right behind him, so to speak. So I'm pretty sure it would have been proposed around that time frame regardless.
• 

  Liberty

  Hi jiminijad,

  Just saw Gopher's post and wanted to comment in a similar vein. I have been looking for evidence of a real Jesus for some time and have come to the same conclusions as Gopher. If you have some evidence please cite it. As to Jesus's ability to change history wouldn't it be on par with the mythical Allah you refuted earlier. The Roman state used Christianity to change history just as Islamic statesmen did but that doesn't prove that Allah is real or that Mohamed really talked to an angel. Joseph Smith changed history too but does that mean Mormonism and its Golden Tablets were real?
• 

  jeminijad

  Gopher:

  Thanks for the welcome. Quick replies around here.

  Scrambling as I am, all that came to mind re contemporaries or "credible," secular writings proving Jesus existance would be Josephus.

  http://http://www.religiousstudies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/cruc-josephus.html

  It is my understanding that he was born 37 years (?) after Christ's death, and compared to most of the New Testament, that is contemporary. I have heard arguments that he was confusing Jesus with someone else or something along those lines... I am not an expert and cannot comment on that. Neither can I speak to the lack of official Roman documentation of the execution, except that the Jews themselves largely handled it, and I didn't believe that executions of every common criminal (in the manner Jesus is supposed to have been killed) were indexed and available to us now.

  I do know that Tacitus referred to him and the fact that Pilate the Procurator of Judea executed him... Tacitus lived from about 50 years after Jesus death on- when so many scholars argue so passionately on both sides of this issue, it feels presumptuous for me to, but I suppose that is what the board is about.

  In attempting to be as objective as I can (probably not very,) I attempted to imagine established historical teachings of today to be completely fabricated. Holocaust deniers come to mind, although that sounds very offensive and I don't mean to be!
• 

  Gopher

  jeminijad,

  I didn't mean to jump on your very first post here. And my comments were a bit off the evolution topic.

  I appreciate your open response to my doubts about the historicity of Jesus. I have my doubts about the motives of Josephus, he seems to have played on both the Jewish and Roman sides as suited his needs. A lot of what he wrote provided insight into first century history. There is some question about whether the texts attributed to him about Jesus were forgeries.

  The lack of contemporary records about Jesus could lead a reasonable person to believe that the details about Jesus as we have read them (in his follower's writings) did not happen that way, in spite of the rather large following he has acquired ever since "Christianity" was nurtured by the Roman Empire after its initial persecution.

  Back to the subject of evolution, I do agree that since it is the most scientific method of explaining how life on our planet has developed, it would be unreasonable to blindly deny it.
• 

  serotonin_wraith

  Does anyone here believe in the god of the Bible and evolution? I know BurnTheShips does, so anyone else?

  If so, I'd be curious where Adam and Eve come into it. If they were here 6,000 years ago (which they had to be if you follow the genealogical line from Adam to Jesus), then they weren't the first humans. So the 'original sin' becomes meaningless if there were numerous cultures of humans before them, and it follows that Jesus dying for our sins becomes meaningless too. Which is the whole point of Christianity, I thought.
• 

  darkuncle29

  I'm mostly open and flexable with my beliefs and worldview, but I do not believe in the God of the bible or any Abrahamic faith.
• 

  DonExodus

  "You're absolutely right! With your post 1 of 1, you've been able to convince me that we all came about by a process of random mutation through a combination of law and chance! And you managed to do it in just one sentence!"
  Im sorry, I missed the part where I suggested I was offering evidence for evolution. To me, it merely seemed as if I was asking, not offering empirical evidence. Thanks for the sarcasm though, it was truly warranted!
• 

  DonExodus

  Not really- evolution is easily falsifiable, hence it requiring no faith. Thats one advantage of being supported by every shred of empirical evidence. People may speculate as to how God fits in to evolution, but no one in the scientific community speculates as to whether or not it happens.
• 

  Kudra

  the thing about the gills in utero etc isn't used as evidence for evolution.
  
  Maybe FunkyDerek or someone with a better knowledge of biology can explain why
  
  -K