Atheistic Evolution

[random evil guy]

Evolution can be a stick to beat most religions since they have a creation myth that is disproved by Darwin's theory.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually, I believe almost all the religions have creation stories that can either be taken as an allegory or generalised enough to make evolution possible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

this is just one of many things i find a bit strange with christianity. who decides what in the bible can be taken metaphorically and what should be taken literally? i guess every time science disproves something from the bible, it is considered an allegory...? "

[Cantousent]

I'm just one of the sheep.

 

Baaaaaaah

 

:Eldar'ssheepicon:

[SteveThaiBinh]

this is just one of many things i find a bit strange with christianity. who decides what in the bible can be taken metaphorically and what should be taken literally? i guess every time science disproves something from the bible, it is considered an allegory...? "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Over the centuries, that is indeed what has happened. But it's not helpful to rub people's noses in it, and the elements of religion that have been 'downgraded' to allegory are not the fundamentals that make believers believe. All religions have a core that is not challenged by science - usually that there is a supernatural being who loves us. Their faith in that is as resolute as ever, it seems.

[FaramirK]

Evolution can be a stick to beat most religions since they have a creation myth that is disproved by Darwin's theory.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually, I believe almost all the religions have creation stories that can either be taken as an allegory or generalised enough to make evolution possible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

this is just one of many things i find a bit strange with christianity. who decides what in the bible can be taken metaphorically and what should be taken literally? i guess every time science disproves something from the bible, it is considered an allegory...? "

 

Well, you raise an excellent point, one that christians should ponder before they bend their beliefs. Me personally, I take it literally, unless the text specifically shows it to be an allegory. Yes, I believe God created the world according to the Genesis account. Flame away.

[Cantousent]

...And the core tenets of Christianity were ever to make specific laws? The nature of religion has always been moral in character, not scientific. It serves as a moral compass and that's its place for most people. Progresses in science are only offensive to folks who feel threatened on the specifics, but those specifics are not reason for religion.

 

On the other hand, it's quite easy to level such damning accusations as "sheep" against folks who believe. Why? The world progresses and mankind progresses. Believers, atheists, and agnostics all make contributions... not only to science, but to every endeavor.

 

Here's my question, though: why do you care? Is it a matter of superiority? I mean, do you feel somehow better than believers and therefore you feel compelled to ridicule them in one way or another? ...Or perhaps you believe that it is your obligation as a right thinking atheist to gently welcome straying believers back into the fold of dis-belief. Maybe you think folks who believe are weak.

 

If there is no God and there is no afterlife and there is no higher purpose, then why do you care what those terrible fundamentalists have to say? After all, don't fundamentalists have a right to console themselves in the manner that gives them the most happiness? ...Or did the fundamentalists accost you once by actually talking to you regarding their religion? The horror! Well, then attack those terrible fundamentalists right now! Nothing shows your tolerance better than ridiculing wrong minded folks.

 

Furthermore, your aim is quite indiscriminant. After all, your understanding of who are and are not fundamentalists seems to include everyone.

 

No, evolution does not conflict with my core faith. Indeed, my core faith is that there is a supernatural being who loves me. I will gladly take the mantle of either sheep or weakling. I like the company better in the weak group anyhow.

[213374U]

Here's my question, though:  why do you care?  Is it a matter of superiority?  I mean, do you feel somehow better than believers and therefore you feel compelled to ridicule them in one way or another?  ...Or perhaps you believe that it is your obligation as a right thinking atheist to gently welcome straying believers back into the fold of dis-belief.  Maybe you think folks who believe are weak.

 

If there is no God and there is no afterlife and there is no higher purpose, then why do you care what those terrible fundamentalists have to say?  After all, don't fundamentalists have a right to console themselves in the manner that gives them the most happiness?  ...Or did the fundamentalists accost you once by actually talking to you regarding their religion?  The horror!  Well, then attack those terrible fundamentalists right now!  Nothing shows your tolerance better than ridiculing wrong minded folks.

Alas, overzeal is not exclusive to religious fundamentalists.

[WITHTEETH]

We have already discussed the impact of fundementalist. they are very active in gay rights, abortion, assisted suicide, imposeing there will on others. they do make an impact for good or bad depending on which reality you are living in.

[FaramirK]

If Genesis is the foundation of your faith ... well its not much of a faith.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Without Genesis, my faith is meaningless, so I'll keep it thanks...and I find my faith my more inspiring than yours. Its a matter of personal choice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I respect your attitude towards all the criticism you have receieved. thanks for the oppertunity to let us understanding eachother clearer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Forgive me, I can't tell if your being sarcastic or not. :"> I sometimes have a hard time fully understanding more subtle meanings in modern english, it's not even my second language...it's all the way at third.

 

I'll go with my original hunch and say your being serious:

 

I grew up in a country where my family was persecuted for their faith in Christianity. I escaped this by joining the Communist Party, and professing atheism. It wasn't hard to see that Orthodoxy was pretty much a puppet of whatever power was in charge.

 

I have to say though, that the Communist Party was one of the most brain dead organisations I ever discovered. They flatly refused to admit that the Soviet Union had made any mistakes. The war in Afghanistan was really hard to justify in my own mind...the oppressed, poverty stricken afghans were supposed to welcome our troops and help us destroy the muslim rebels and embrace workers paradise, and instead they fought us and died for their God. I began to study the Koran, and found that he was a very angry deity indeed. I remember one Afghan prisoner saying he would rather be tortured to death by us than face Allah as one of the unfaithful.

 

I wasn't to impressed with Islam, but I did begin to study the Bible, unknown to my peers at first. The God of the bible seemed equally enraged at sin as Allah, but unlike Allah, he had died for me. After much deliberation, I converted to Christianity. The country was getting more tolerant, and I didn't really feel very persecuted any more. The original Soviet Constitution allowed for religious freedom, and I stayed in the party, hoping people like Gorbachov would reform the party. The rest is history. Ol' Regan made us write a check we couldn't cash...

 

In finally left the party in 2001 when the branch of the Party I was in refused to accept that the Communists had engineered a famine in the Ukraine in the 30's, despite eye-witness accounts and undeniable proof.

 

Many of the American Christians I met seemed to want to create a conservative christian nation out of the US, and I thought that might be a good thing, until I found that history painted a pretty bleak picture of the experiments in "Christian Government". Much to the disgust of many of my Christian aquaintences, I began to disagree with their striving to create a Christian Theocracy, and instead decided to back whichever government party sought to offer the most freedom to everyone.

 

I have not lost any of my belief that the Bible is both literal and true. But I have decided that it is best for everyone to be left to their own devices. I feel that I can adhere faithfully to my chosen faith and still be tolerant and even compassionate to those whose believes completely contradict mine.

 

While I realise that my belief in the Genesis creation may seem archaic or even ignorant, but I believe it with all my heart. I also believe that you all have the right to disagree. Many have died because no one was willing to fight and die for the rights of another. There are more mass graves in Russia than I care to think about, filled with those who disagreed with the ruling power. And if I have to risk my life to protect the freedom of an atheist to believe Atheism is true, I will, because in protecting they're freedom I am protecting my own. But my faith has survived a long time, and I will not simply disregard/modify it with every whim and speculation of the opposition.

 

And as long as people like Nur Ab Sal call for the banning of all faiths except one that pretends all the contradictory beliefs in the world can actually be right at the same time, I live in constant fear that the persecution of my faith will one day rise again, and the world will again fall into the nightmare of despotic thought-control.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Here's my question, though:  why do you care?  Is it a matter of superiority?  I mean, do you feel somehow better than believers and therefore you feel compelled to ridicule them in one way or another?  ...Or perhaps you believe that it is your obligation as a right thinking atheist to gently welcome straying believers back into the fold of dis-belief.  Maybe you think folks who believe are weak.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not sure who you're addressing, so I'll assume that you're addressing all atheists. Well, there are unfortunately some who do believe that they are superior to believers, although they're not guilty of anything worse than many believers themselves.

 

As a humanist, I think we should discuss these things in order to achieve better understanding of each other. I strongly believe that human beings are capable of making the world a better place through their actions and without supernatural intervention, and that mutual understanding and respect are key to this. That's my agenda, if you like. There's no point in prosyletising or ridiculing other belief systems, as this acts as a barrier to understanding.

[random evil guy]

Evolution can be a stick to beat most religions since they have a creation myth that is disproved by Darwin's theory.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually, I believe almost all the religions have creation stories that can either be taken as an allegory or generalised enough to make evolution possible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

this is just one of many things i find a bit strange with christianity. who decides what in the bible can be taken metaphorically and what should be taken literally? i guess every time science disproves something from the bible, it is considered an allegory...? "

 

Well, you raise an excellent point, one that christians should ponder before they bend their beliefs. Me personally, I take it literally, unless the text specifically shows it to be an allegory. Yes, I believe God created the world according to the Genesis account. Flame away.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

heh, i won't. you're entitled to your own opinion. i guess there as many interpretations of the bible as there are christians... i have a few friends that are christian, but they never(and i do mean never) attend church and they believe most of the bible to be an exaggeration at best. they say they care about the message of the bible, not the excact wording... on the other hand you have these crazy tv-preachers that are, imo, just nuts.

[Drakron]

And how you feel about teaching religion as science?

 

Problem with god is that god can explain everything and so science can never use god as a agent.

 

If you take Genesis as factual truth then you have to ignore a lot fossil and geological evidence.

 

There is no debate over evolution and creationism, one is supported by evidence as the other is not.

[Cantousent]

I'm not sure who you're addressing, so I'll assume that you're addressing all atheists.  Well, there are unfortunately some who do believe that they are superior to believers, although they're not guilty of anything worse than many believers themselves.

 

I was responding to this post:

 

this is just one of many things i find a bit strange with christianity. who decides what in the bible can be taken metaphorically and what should be taken literally? i guess every time science disproves something from the bible, it is considered an allegory...? "

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Over the centuries, that is indeed what has happened. But it's not helpful to rub people's noses in it, and the elements of religion that have been 'downgraded' to allegory are not the fundamentals that make believers believe. All religions have a core that is not challenged by science - usually that there is a supernatural being who loves us. Their faith in that is as resolute as ever, it seems.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

As a humanist, I think we should discuss these things in order to achieve better understanding of each other.  I strongly believe that human beings are capable of making the world a better place through their actions and without supernatural intervention, and that mutual understanding and respect are key to this.  That's my agenda, if you like.  There's no point in prosyletising or ridiculing other belief systems, as this acts as a barrier to understanding.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'm willing, however, to take you at your word and so I will not try to convert you to Catholicism. Still, if you desire to understand me, I cannot deny my Christianity.

 

BTW, Faramir, would that I have such eloquence in my native tongue that you have in your third language.

[FaramirK]

And how you feel about teaching religion as science?

 

Religion is the relationship between man and the divine. Science is merely the study of how and why things are. They should only complement each other.

 

Problem with god is that god can explain everything and so science can never use god as a agent.

 

Some of the greatest scientist who ever lived were christians, and their belief in God only made them more eager to doscover the reason things are the way they are, knowing that the universe they were studying was ordered, designed, and full of purpose. Science only reminds me of how great a God I have, and the wonderous universe he created and governs, like I admire a master clockmaker.

 

If you take Genesis as factual truth then you have to ignore a lot fossil and geological evidence.

 

No I don't. And no matter how much evidence I show you, you will refuse to even contemplate that the genesis record is not dispproved by Science. But if you wish to trade proof for disproof, go ahead.

 

There is no debate over evolution and creationism, one is supported by evidence as the other is not.

 

Where is your evidence that we evolved from lower life forms? You, my friend are blinded by your faith in atheism. If you can find one proof of one species turning into another, I will denounce the Genesis Creation as false. Find one example of an animal developing the new genetic information required to grow wings, or gills or learning to speak and study its origins.

 

Don't come to me with peppered moths. Moths are moths are moths. Don't come to me with Archeoteryx, its a fully functioning flying animal. Don't come to me with examples of adapting to an environment, thats not the evolution your faith requires to explain life without God. Animals and plants are designed to adapt to changes by evolving and discarding unnecessary things, like cave fish becoming blind and island beetles losing wings to avoid being blown ouit to sea, not write new genetic code and turn into people.

 

And don't hide behind the holes in your data that you can't explain...if it's a choice between your hole-filled theory and the Bible's narrative of the creation, I know which I'll be choosing. I'll read any evidence you can muster, and post my response.

[Drakron]

Disprove the Theory of Evolution then.

 

And sorry but lossing wings (as well your other examples) is a genetic mutation and very much a part of evolution.

[Atomic Space Vixen]

Though it's already been gone over in that it's moot to a conversation about evolution, and I don't really want to get too much into this thread as I'm already banging my head against a wall elsewhere and there are only so many minutes in a day, I need to bring this up...

 

A religionist asks, "Where did matter come from?"

 

Now one of the things I find very difficult to wrap my brain around when it comes to religious belief is why religious people can't accept that matter and energy just may have always existed in one form or another, but they can readily accept a supremely intelligent, omnipotent being who just happens to be there without having been created.

[FaramirK]

Disprove the Theory of Evolution then.

 

And sorry but lossing wings (as well your other examples) is a genetic mutation and very much a part of evolution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Very well, but I need at least a day or two. I'll get back to you with at least three different examples of why I rejected Atheistic Evolution.

 

And you really need to understand that losing the ability to fly is fundamentally different from gaining the ability to fly...you are confusing adaptation (micro-evolution) with macro-evolution.

[Cantousent]

Though it's already been gone over in that it's moot to a conversation about evolution, and I don't really want to get too much into this thread as I'm already banging my head against a wall elsewhere and there are only so many minutes in a day, I need to bring this up...

 

A religionist asks, "Where did matter come from?"

 

Now one of the things I find very difficult to wrap my brain around when it comes to religious belief is why religious people can't accept that matter and energy just may have always existed in one form or another, but they can readily accept a supremely intelligent, omnipotent being who just happens to be there without having been created.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then you're engaging is a religious argument as a true believer? After all, you've just put us on equivalent grounds.

 

I know what you're saying about the minutes of the day, though. I've been coming here as I continue to do some writing I have to do. Lucky me. The damned message board is a major distraction. If we only had more time, huh?

[213374U]

A religionist asks, "Where did matter come from?"

 

Now one of the things I find very difficult to wrap my brain around when it comes to religious belief is why religious people can't accept that matter and energy just may have always existed in one form or another, but they can readily accept a supremely intelligent, omnipotent being who just happens to be there without having been created.

Turn the argument around, and answer your own question, if you can.

[Atomic Space Vixen]

Occam's Razor.

[Cantousent]

I love how the atheists have now asked us to prove a negative. Nuts. Now it's a free for all. Anything goes and no holds barred. We've all argued so long we've become each other. How I pity you all.

[Oerwinde]

http://republic-news.org/archive/111-repub/111_wilkinson.htm

 

The gist of the article is: They've pretty much proven evolution as much as it can be proven, and in fact the theory of evolution is backed up by more evidence than the theory of gravity. The difference is that evolution goes against religion, while gravity doesn't.

[213374U]

Occam's Razor.

Yes, that's the atheists' magic wand, isn't it?

 

Unfortunately, that's a non sequitur fallacy inconsistent with Occam's Razor. If it wasn't, the existence of God would be already disproved. Forgive my skepticism, but I don't think you can succeed where all those great philosophers and theologists have failed. Anyone said arrogance?

 

Ignoring all the particular myths, it is not against Occam's razor to assume that, in order to explain the inner workings of reality, something had to assemble reality for it to be so... rational. The other alternative to that is the idea of the multiverses, an infinity of realities each with a random set of rules. It is logical to think that in a reality with random rules, it would be hard for life to prosper to a point in which it could question these things. So, again, we must assume that we are living in the one universe that, due to the randomness of that multiverse has a set of rules that has allowed life to exist.

 

As you see, in either case you need to introduce entities in order to explain reality. However, you just choose to dismiss the one theory that doesn't suit your purposes.

 

It is simply aburd to think that our single universe has existed forever along with the rules that govern it. Because, for starters, it hasn't. The universe is thought to have begun as a quantum fluctuation, whatever the hell that means. So, yeah.

[FaramirK]

http://republic-news.org/archive/111-repub/111_wilkinson.htm

 

The gist of the article is: They've pretty much proven evolution as much as it can be proven, and in fact the theory of evolution is backed up by more evidence than the theory of gravity. The difference is that evolution goes against religion, while gravity doesn't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Once again, they are proving that birds can adapt and evolve/devolve to be better adapted to the current environment, not molecule to man evolution. The Atheists are desperate, and will grab on to anything, no matter how illogical.

[Kaftan Barlast]

The Atheists are desperate, and will grab on to anything, no matter how illogical.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

That's comming from the right mouth.. Hahaha :D

 

 

 

comedy gold.

[thepixiesrock]

Once again, they are proving that birds can adapt and evolve/devolve to be better adapted to the current environment, not molecule to man evolution. The Atheists are desperate, and will grab on to anything, no matter how illogical.[/

 

I found this rather hilarious...