MEETING DAVE MATTHEWS

[skiizalot]

It is my understanding that Homo erectus and Homo habilis are in themselves theories. After all, can you really take a small portion of a skeleton, probably primate to begin with, and then using an "artist rendition" really call that a link.

Either way you say it, it all comes down to faith. You have faith in evolution that says after 10 plus billion years of accidental, random atomic collisions, we end up with the formation of some simple form of life. Call it spontanious generation, a abiogenesis, what ever. Then, over the next 3 plus billion years, life evolves into the plants, animals, and humans we see today, the results of microevolutionary changes. The whole process being macroevolution. This only leaves one conclusion about your future. You are the product of random chance and when you die you will cease to exist.
I find it easier to put my faith in creation. Both theories have unanswered questions, but I like the outcome of believe in a divine creator that is without begining and cared enough for me to come in the flesh to redeem me.

[skiizalot]

I apologize for discussing the creation/evolution issue at length.

[dagoba6@aol.com]

right on skiizalot.

[AnandPatel]

I am a firm believe in evolution, along with the big bang theory....my two cents ..back to dave discussion now...

peace.

[tomek322]

read that book in hs about the first teacher that decide to teach darwins theory and he wemt to trial... and from that book, my parent(hard core cathlics), their priest... evolution does not disprove an existance of "god" or vice versa.... going from memory... the sun(or night and day) as we know it wasn't created i believe until the fourth day... and the arguement was that how do we know how long the first four days were... what if each "day" was 100 million years our time and evolution could of taken place during that time.... and another evidence of scetchy time keeping by the religious folk is the fact that adam and eve lived to be 800 years old... some discrepencies for sure... i do believe in a god or a higher power but not the church or religion... anyways thats my 2 cents

[skiizalot]

The problem with the integration of creation and evolution, or saying that God used evolution to create the world is that the theory of evolution is not perfect by any means. It has many loopholes that are without explaination, and at least one law that would have to go backwards and tossed out the window for it to work (2nd law of thermodynamics). At the same time, creationists believe the Bible to be the inspired, inerrant word of God. God, according to his word, is without fault or error. Since evolution is not without error, it would not be a way in which God created the earth. If God is capable of bring the world into existence and being infinite, our ability to understand him with our finite minds is all speculation outside of what He says about Himself in His word. If God says he created the earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th, then I believe he did just that. The first chapter of Genesis covers the 6 days of creation. The first day God separated the darkness from the light, not the fourth day. The only reference that you could take out of context as to the “sketchy” recordkeeping of the Bible has to do with a verse where the writer says something to the effect of “A day is like a thousand years, a thousand years is like a day in your sight.” The verse explains the infinite character of God. As far as Adam and Eve living to be 800 years old, there are many references in the book of Genesis to men/women living close to a thousand years. If you read the entire book, you will see that in Genesis, soon after the flood, God numbers men’s years to 120. This will all make much more sense if you read it. Church and religion is imperfect man trying to understand a perfect God. In light of our imperfect nature, it is destined to be interpreted in multiple ways.

[gravedigger]

Hi, this is the roomate again.

I'm not sure that the whole second law of thermodynamics thing really fits with evolution but as I am not all that familiar with it, I will refrain from discussing it. As for the loopholes of evolution, the loopholes are in our understanding of it. This is primarily because only hard parts of animals such as bones or shells usually get preserved. Because of this we cannot gain exact images of what the organisms were exactly like. One area where the soft parts of animals were preserved was the Burgess Shale in British Columbia. At this location they found a myriad of strange new species and found that some species that had already been found were not as they had imagined.

As for the bible, I have read most of Genesis though that was a while ago, and I am actually Catholic, but I think there has to be a middle ground between Evolution and Creation. I dont think that believing in Evolution means you have to not believe in Creation or God. I dont think that Genesis is meant to be taken so literally, i think there is a lot of metaphor in it, along with a lot of the rest of the Old Testament.

I noticed yesterday that you said you believed the world to be only about 6000 years old. I am very interested to see what makes you beleive this.

[dmfollower]

i was going to post something here, but now i've decided not to.
dave mathews is a really good guitar player and lyric writer.

[skiizalot]

I apologize for what may end up being another long post.

I mention the second law of thermodynamics because it states that the quality of energy in the universe is degraded irreversibly. This is the principle of the degradation of energy. It is this degradation of energy that caused Leon Brillouin to ask, "How is it possible to understand life when the entire world is ordered by a law such as the second principle of thermodynamics, which points to death and annihilation?" In the second law of thermodynamics we have a physical law of the universe that says spontaneous generation, or abiogenesis is impossible. The same idea of abiogenesis that says after 10 plus billion years of accidental, random atomic collisions, we end up with the formation of some simple form of life. That is about the same as saying you could take apart a wrist watch, place all the pieces in a box and if you shook that box long enough, eventually the parts would assemble themselves back into a wrist watch. When you have a physical law of the universe that says that thing are degrading and a theory that says things are generating what should take precedence scientifically? I have a theory that says when I throw a rock it will never hit the ground. My theory completely disregards Newton’s Laws and if I were able to throw the rock far enough out of site, who could argue against me that it ever landed.

We could argue all day about our loopholes in understanding evolution. Outside of the second law of thermodynamics I can not disprove it. I have simple tried to establish that it takes as much faith as believing in God. The facts that you present as “scientific facts” can be argued scientifically as with the dating of fossils in the layers of the geological strata and the problem with potassium argon dating rocks around fossils and assuming those fossils are as old as the rocks.

As for the Bible, the first 5 books (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Number and Deuteronomy) are known as the Pentateuch, The Law, written by Moses. While metaphorical speech is present throughout the bible, the Pentateuch is in no way meant to be taken metaphorically. Like I said in previous posts, God is perfect; he would not need, nor use evolution to create the universe. If evolution was because of God, you think it would make a whole lot more sense. Even more, you think he would have mentioned it in His word.

I can’t remember saying that the world was only 6000 years old. I am not really sure how old it is. I have seen some interesting documentaries on human genes that suggest through DNA sequencing, most of us are the decedents of a single woman (Your DNA signature is passed down to you through your mother). This information says that the bottleneck in humanity happened sometime around 10,000 to 4,000 BC. Of course it was a bunch of evolution believing scientist that conducted the study and they attributed it to some type of war or virus that took place or infected a family of humans leaving only one family left to pass down the DNA information to our modern world. It is interesting to note that the test subjects for this study came from every continent and multiple social groups. Each person tested the decedent of one mother. I guess the thought of the Biblical flood account and the family of Noah being the only ones left on the earth doesn’t make sense in light of this information.

Everything is based on Faith. The most important question you can ever ask yourself has to do with your origin. Where did you come from and where will you go. The problem with being agnostic, or idle during this life and not seeking out the truth is that if the Bible is true and the afterlife does exist then your chance to choose the path that leads to heaven and the path that leads to hell will have already passed. The only way you will know for sure will be once you have passed out of this life. This of course is according to the Bible, references available upon request.

Either way I love the music, and most of the time the message of DJM.

[gravedigger]

I'm not saying anything more on this subject because It's going absolutely nowhere.

As far as believing in evolution: "some people do, some people don't, but its ok it was meant to be that way" -Recently (L@RR)

The same goes for God.

peace,
Ken

[gcom007]

I've met Butch, Leroi, Carter, and Boyd (like a bzillion times) and I have yet to come close to meeting Stefan or Dave, especially Stefan...don't know why...it's just been hard...

[firedancer86]

Here is one for you thanks to ROLLING STONE magazine...Dave said that he doesn't know what the heck BARTENDER is about other than he was "REALLY drunk at the time"!!!

"LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL (drink, drink...ponder,ponder....) LOLOLOLOLOLO...here ya' go, 'roll one up for me...'!!!LOLOLOLOLOLO(drink - more)..."

DAVE
(this is not an actual quate lol)

[gravedigger]

I never really racked my brain over the meaning of Bartender. I just really like the song.

[deeds79]

ask him what the heck bartender is about

Dude! read the bible, The bartender is God the Father, hes asking him to fill his glass (dave or the singers spirit) with the wine that God Gave Jesus after he was crusified. 3 days later. (The Holy Spirit). So that he too can be saved. Hes also telling his family members not to worry for him if he dies because hes been saved. And Judas is the deciple that was the "cashier" for the 12 deciples who turned Jesus in for money, causing Jesus to be crusified. Sounds Christian to me. Any one wanna try any other songs on me?

Oh yeah and to ANYONE refrencing Darwin and Evolution together: FACT: DARWIN WITHDREW ALL THE THINGS HE SAID ON HIS DEATH BED!

[gravedigger]

ask him what the heck bartender is about

Oh yeah and to ANYONE refrencing Darwin and Evolution together: FACT: DARWIN WITHDREW ALL THE THINGS HE SAID ON HIS DEATH BED!

wtf are you on Crack?