What are the biggest holes in evolution?
you know that, right?
Welcome to the JW! "They will know... they will surely know.." JW attest to another evidence. That is what convinces them and even trumps the kind of evidence that you refer to as the only evidence that exists.
The next reply is not to mock you or make you an atheist. I just want to make you think about your reasoning.Thank you for that. I don't take offense at any civil exchange of ideas and will, of course, consider your comments. As to your first reply, I will concede that evolution does not rule out God, but it certainly has been used by atheists to attack the concept that there is a divine creator. But the Catholic, Anglican and other Christian sects that hold out the possibility that though evolution may be the instrument used by God in the creation, only God can create man's immortal soul. The "Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God," that church states. "So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are." Though I can't say that most Christian churches accept evolution, some apparently do.
You said that the theory of evolution explains how all life on Earth evolved, and that everything we understand so far "does not need divine action to be explained." Perhaps not, but it doesn't explain how life sprang from the the seething cauldron of the Big Bang nor how those simple organisms can mutate into increasingly complex ones over any period of time. You answered by asking if it is easier to accept that an omniscient, omnipotent invisible being always existed or came to existence without cause? It's a good enough question, but it's a deflection.
The entire heart of the theory of evolution is very simple organisms mutating into very complex ones. Remember, too, that Christians see the creation as only part of the overall package -- not the whole -- while the theory of evolution exists solely to answer the question of the development of life. I see the beauty and complexity of life as evidence of a creator. Whether it came by way of evolution or not is a question I can't answer, but then, speaking of the invisible and unquantifiable, explain dark matter. Many scientists believe in the stuff but they can't produce a thimble of it. Like God, I believe in it even though I can't see it, measure it or even detect it.
You also ask if the level of evidence I require to accept evolution is equal to the level of evidence I require before accepting the existence of God, noting that the Bible contains "claims about God, not evidence."
First, my faith in God comes not from or in the Bible, but through revelation. When Peter told Jesus that he believed he was the Messiah, the Son of the living God, Jesus told him that "flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father, which is in Heaven." In fact, this is the only way man can know the nature and reality of God at all. Again, it's like dark matter in that we can know God lives, yet not be able to see him or detect him. We also can have faith in God through the testimonies of those who have seen him and who have known him. If one can actually see God and commune with him as easily as one man speaks to another, one doesn't actually have to question his existence. He may not be believed, but others may find the testimony credible.
Finally, can life and intelligence evolve from a spontaneous action? Again, a deflection on your part by asking: "as in...a living and intelligent God?" Yes, certainly. I've never heard the theory of evolution address it. But in my faith, the universe is composed of two primordial, eternal elements: intelligence and matter, or simply, that which acts and that which is acted upon. All life is intelligence, even God, the greatest of all. Matter has no intelligence, but can be changed or acted upon. It can be altered, but not destroyed. God used it to create the earth.
Intelligence, on the other hand, also is eternal; however, as far as we know, it cannot be recycled as can matter. I believe that anything that is intelligent cannot be created. Intelligence has no beginning or end. It can be developed, added upon and nurtured, or it can be returned to what it was. All humans, animals and things that can move and act upon matter are made up of intelligence. But though God can and does manipulate matter, he cannot create either out of nothing.
So yes, for me to accept the theory of evolution, it would need to be compatible with my spiritual beliefs. Evidence is like a compass; it doesn't always point the right way under all circumstances. I believe when the Lord comes, he will reveal everything you and I want answered, and that it will make perfect sense. It may not turn out the way either of us now thinks, but the knowledge will completely satisfy us. And remember, the Bronze Age tribal chief may have been amongst the first of those who heard from God, but he certainly wasn't the last, so you can't put this at his feet.
it doesn't explain how life sprang from the the seething cauldron of the Big Bang
In a similar way my wife's umbrella is shit at predicting when it's going to rain. Evolution explains how every living thing evolved from a common ancestor.
The entire heart of the theory of evolution is very simple organisms mutating into very complex ones
No it isn't. You haven't ever read a book on evolution have you?
I see the beauty and complexity of life as evidence of a creator.
What about the parasites and the predators?
I do not think that it is possible to disprove evolution. Anything seeming not to conform to evolution can be shown to reconcile some way, and even if it can't, that doesn't invalidate evolution, it only means that aspect of the evolutionary process is not understood. So, I think that it is a waste of time to attempt to invalidate evolution.
Yes, and if there's no God it would be my theory of choice. And I can't even say it's a bad theory, but there are holes in it, I think, that try too much to infringe on God's role. Too many atheists use the theory as a weapon. As I see it, how can evolution be true and Adam also to have lived? And if there's no Adam there's no fall. And if no fall, there is no need for an atonement, so there is no need of Christ nor any reason for the resurrection. But my faith in Christ greatly outweighs my faith in man or science.
This is not to denounce science in any way, but historically science has had some spectacular failures. I'm old enough to remember scores of times when science had to back off on things it thought it had all figured out. This isn't to condemn it; it's just that for all its failures, science lacks humility. Pick up any astronomical, archeological, geological, medical or any other text book that's more than twenty years old and you can toss it in the nearest trash can. That great college textbook on astronomy I paid thirty dollars for back in 1977 ended up in the trash in 1995 because it was pathetically obsolete. So I see all the benefits of science, and many are amazing, but I've also seen science with its share of egg on its face.
It's curious reading that Cold Steel. For me, that uncertainty, that possibility to improve knowledge is a positive thing. So things changing, based on evidence, isn't so much 'egg on its face' but the willingness to perform evaluation and take the world as it is. A new fact can shift the foundations of a discipline. That's exciting, not a sign of failure. Science is evidence driven, as are humanities where evidence plays a role. Knowledge builds upon knowledge. There's rarely anything which doesn't require work done by others to provoke, inspire or create the foundations.
But, saying that, there's frequently fundamentals which will never be totally shifted because they have been proven to be accurate descriptions of how things are. Evolution for biology is as gravity to astronomy. It works, and it's moved into being applied science now. We are creating medicines using our knowledge of evolution. Took 250 years and another genius to figure out the 'why' of gravity. It didn't invalidate Newton's original conclusion or stop his calculations working in the meantime. Quite like how Newton summed it up. "It is enough that gravity does really exist and acts according to the laws I have explained, and that it abundantly serves to account for all the motions of celestial bodies" - Newton.
But my faith in Christgreatly outweighs my faith in man or science.
To rational people faith is not a substitute for facts
Faith in Jesus is no hole in evolution, it is irrelevant to it.
As I see it, how can evolution be true and Adam also to have lived? And if there's no Adam there's no fall. And if no fall, there is no need for an atonement, so there is no need of Christ nor any reason for the resurrection. - Cold Steel
Exactly. If you stop there what you say makes perfect sense. But if you see this as a hole in evolution, that it removes the need for Jesus then you are going round in circles. Just stop and try and absorb this logical thought of yours and what it means.
EQV I enjoyed your “ Just so” story about Tiktaalik, however except for the sarcasm, you make a good case of how illiterates must have interpreted things they found and had their ideas written down as holy truth.
For a more convincing illustration of evolution’s reality, might I recommend the philosopher Daniel Dennett in his book Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. He likens the process of evolution to a heartless tennis tournament where the losers are shot and the only winners go forward together to breed (Djokovic breeds with Williams!) The aberrant lizard types were the only ones physically equipped to survive the specific conditions in the lagunal backwaters where Tiktaalic was found, the fishy types all died in that environment. Amphibians rule!
The point being that no organism adapts itself... it's simply death before breeding if you can't cope with the environment. Life on Earth is a biological death and destruction derby whether you like it or not.