Topic awaiting preservation: Evolution vs. Creationism (Page 3 of 13)

First, sorry about the double post.
Second, thanks for the site Tao, that is what I was looking for.
Third, yes, I would hope that those who ask questions in order to attack Creation would at least be familiar with some Bible theories, and that is one reason for the question: I would like to know an answer. You don't just ask questions with no intent.

Good job of turing that question around WS, and yes I would ask Him about the eyeball. Won't be my first question, but I will get around to it.

quote:

---

Emperor said:

(and reading from actual "evolutionist" books and sites rather than Creationist
ones)

---

Why is that? It is the same info, just from a different perspective.

Something that I have been pondering about lately is natural selection. Wouldn't that disprove the theory of evolution from amino-acids/protozoa? With each new generation, variables are lost. Doesn't that mean that there is no possibility of organisms with more variablility coming from organisms with less? (eg. man from single cell organism)

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Oh, that's a book! Uh, do you know of any web sites I don't have to spend money to look at? I'm kinda short on cash. (I'm not lazy. I could easily look through the entire web for a site, I was wondering if any of you have some suggestions of web sites you liked.)

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

Why is that? It is the same info, just from a different perspective.

---

in most cases, no it most absolutely is NOT.

Most creationist sites that I have seen exist for one purpose: to debunk any theory that runs counter to the bible.

That is not science. Science does not set out to debunk.

You clearly do not get the factual scientific info from these creationist sites - that is demonstrated time and again here.

quote:

---

Gideon said:


quote:Emperor said:

(and reading from actual "evolutionist" books and sites rather than Creationist
ones)
Why is that? It is the same info, just from a different perspective.

---

As DL has said - it just isn't and even asking that question shows that you really need to expand your reading.

quote:

---

Gideon said:

Oh, that's a book! Uh, do you know of any web sites I don't
have to spend money to look at? I'm kinda short on cash. (I'm not lazy.
I could easily look through the entire web for a site, I was wondering
if any of you have some suggestions of web sites you liked.)

---

I'm afraid that if you want to full information then you will have to read the book - it is an extensive chapter and part of a much broader theme.

Luckily there are some great places to go that get you books to read for free - libraries. If the books aren't there then they can order them.

While you are there grab Steven Jay Gould's books and reveal in the true awesome range and beauty of evolution. Important essays (these are from recent books "Dinosaur in a Haystack" and "Life's Grabdeur" - called somehting card related in the States I believe) include:

The evolution of the whale - we have a lot of proto-whale fossils which show vesitgal back limbs. Most wahles still possess them in some form or another. We can see how the evovled from land animals returning back to the water.

The evolution of internal parasites - even though they have widely diverging ancestors with many different morphologies they actually look remarkably similar. It is an important lesson that evolution is not to increasing complexity but towards optimisation for their niche and these animals have actualy become simpler over time losing nearly all distinguishing features.

Both cause genun problems for Creationa nd Intelligent Design but you won't find this out by looking at only Creationits tracts and you won (necessarily) find it all online I'm afraid.

You should also dig out Gould's "Wonderful Life".

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

You can find some of Gould's essays here (look in the growth for and function in particular):

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library.html

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

I managed to dig this up curtesy of good old "Aunty Beeb" Transcript for programme one: Richard Dawkins
It can be a bit dry at times and it covers a fair bit of his personal life, though that is pertinent too. Hopefully it will give you a glimpse of the ideas that have been dicussed here just recently.
I found it facinating, I think I heard the actual interview a while back.
It was "Climbing Mount Improbable" that I meant Emps, I just got so carried away with multiple tabs open on Dawkins and gould that I became befuddled

Tao: "The Selfish Gene" and "The Blind Watchmaker" are also well worth reading although they can be a little dull

CMI is much more relevant and accessible for the average reader with those kinds of Creationsts questions - the Arguement by Disbelief: "I can't believe this happend.......".

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

And, of course, while you're looking for good reading on evolution, MAKE SURE you don't leave out Darwin's own 'On the Origin of Species'. Before you try to point out his errors, you must at least know what it was he had to say...

quote:

---

MAKE SURE you don't leave out Darwin's own 'On the Origin of Species'. Before you try to point out his errors, you must at least know what it was he had to say...

---

Great point! Ouch!

I believe that is what Creationists say to Evolutionists, right? "Gotta read the bible first..."

Nice one!

Thanks. I greatly appreciate all the help. One problem is that I rarely have time to even get on the internet let alone go to a library. So my choices are limited about book useage.

Thanks for the links though, they will surely be some help in answering my questions (at least I hope so).

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

any of you have some suggestions of web sites you liked.)

---

http://www.dhushara.com/book/genesis.htm
http://www.root-1.co.il/thesadduceeprintouts.htm

On the issue of Creationist's insistence that children are taught both theories of creation/evolution I thought this article was very interesting and really touched on the problems I have with that:

httP://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/Opinion/Editorials/03OpOPN52120404.htm

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

(Edited by Emperor on 12-06-2004 16:51)

quote:

---

For those who are so adamant about teaching creationism in our schools, whose creationism shall we teach?

---

Exactly!

quote:

---

Singlehandedly, biblically literalist Christians are causing entire school districts to launch themselves into intellectual darkness, not by content, but by approach. The irony is that these proponents of "creation science" or "intelligent design," or whatever misleading label they are using this year, ignore and/or deny the ancient roots of their own creation story.

---

And it is notably the stupidest thing I have ever witnessed.

quote:

---

We should not allow any of these mythologies, however, to masquerade as science, especially in our school districts, that are at least partly entrusted with the task of preparing young people to attend colleges and universities that correctly and responsibly do not permit religious storytelling to be confused with hard science.

---

And THAT is the bottom line!

Thanks for posting that, Emps.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

task of preparing young people to attend colleges and universities that
correctly and responsibly do not permit religious storytelling to be confused
with hard science.

---

Except that is not case

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Oh? You know this for a fact? So, when asked about the various properties of Evolution, they answer with?

Answer that, please.

Just having discusions with you, for example, has shown a great lack of knowledge of hard science, for example (especially in the area of Evolution).

(Edited by WebShaman on 12-06-2004 18:07)

I was actually refering to a public college (again I am sorry about my memory failures, but this is the best they can do) that required a course in Islamic history and mythology. I would consider that as confounding the facts.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

Just having discusions with you, for example, has shown a great lack of
knowledge of hard science, for example (especially in the area of
Evolution).

---

Well, I will confess, I am no scientist. I am no palientologist. I have not visited any excavation sites. I have not read all the articles on evolution or creation. I go on what I know and what I have learned from school, pastors, doctors, and scientists I have had the oppertunity to listen to. I am sorry if this is not enough information for you to have an educated conversation with me.

I will be the first to admit that I do not know everything. What I do know I have researched. I unfortunately have a memory problem that blocks some mental passages that keep me from remembering some vital information like names, places, dates, etc. If you cannot accept these things, then you do not have to listen to me or talk to me. I am not forcing you to do as such.

Whichever choice you make just please in the future try to refrain from insulting me. I don't really care for it.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

Just having discusions with you, for example, has shown a great lack of knowledge of hard science, for example (especially in the area of Evolution).

---

This is not intended as an insult - it is an observation. If you have taken it as an insult, then I apologize, for that is not how it was meant.

And this is not meant at the college level, but at the level of schooling before that. Emps said

quote:

---

On the issue of Creationist's insistence that children are taught both theories of creation/evolution

---

And although there are gifted students that one could call children in college, that is not what is meant here.

Ok, I understand.

Yes, there are not many public schools who ram religion down children's throats. The thing is, though, that they do ram the idea that the world had to be formed through evolution. Through my schooling experience not once was any other theory even thouched on as having any proof at all. I don't really call that an unbiased learning.

Maybe schools shouldn't teach children a religious background, because granted there are many, but they should not exclude them. My problem is that they provide the facts, and assume that they have the one and only possible outcome for those facts, when they could have it wrong. Why couldn't they at least touch base with the fact that many people believe that those things are true? Are they afraid that a religion might have more proof than the teacher does?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

Through my schooling experience not once was any other theory even thouched on as having any proof at all

---

Good reason for that. There are no other theories that have any proof at all. It is not the public school's job to teach religion. That's what the churches are for.

^ Amen.

^ Which is basically the summation of everything we've been saying for some time now.

The crackpot theories of 'creation science' that you and others have brought up here are just that: crackpot theories.

When the scientificcommunity at large comes up with something credible other than the theories currently taught in science classes, they will be taught as well.

When the religious community wants kids to learn religious lessons, they can be free to do so when their parents bring them to a religous place for that purpose.

Science classes are for learning science. And no argument you (or anyone else) has brought up has shown 'creation science' to be based on any sort of scientific premise.

quote:

---

Gideon said:

Yes, there are not many public schools who ram religion down children's
throats. The thing is, though, that they do ram the idea that the world
had to be formed through evolution. Through my schooling experience not once was any other theory even thouched on as having any proof at all. I don't really call that an unbiased learning.

Maybe schools shouldn't teach children a religious background, because
granted there are many, but they should not exclude them. My problem is
that they provide the facts, and assume that they have the one and only
possible outcome for those facts, when they could have it wrong. Why
couldn't they at least touch base with the fact that many people
believe that those things are true? Are they afraid that a religion
might have more proof than the teacher does?

---

As has been pointed out alreay these aren't mutually exclusive - although I would have prefered more emphasis on comparing different religions rather than dissesting the Bible in minute detail this is pretty much what I was taught at school.

I think where we differ is that you seem to think that arguements Creationists have come up with to explain evolution are actually more credbile than the desperate forcing of a square peg through a round hole that it is. They are trying to prove that the words in your holy book are somehow not only more valid than words in other people's holy books but that they are actually on a par with the theory of evolution.

Don't try and compare apples and oranges.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

When the scientific community at large comes up with something credible
other than the theories currently taught in science classes, they will be
taught as well.When the religious community wants kids to learn
religious lessons, they can be free to do so when their parents bring
them to a religous place for that purpose.

---

I think this is what makes me so angry. Religious institutions are not manditory, schools are. Even if you disagree with something in the school system, you have to go to it. There is no option there. At least not a feasible one. The curriculum in a school is manditory, and there is no way of avoiding getting it rammed down your throat.

quote:

---

briggl said:

There are no other theories that have any proof at all.

---

Have you read anything in AnswersinGenesis.org? There is plenty of proof for Creation.

quote:

---

briggl said:

It is not the public school's job to teach religion. That's what the churches
are for.

---

True, but it is also not the school's job to brain wash young people, that is what armies are for. The public school is there to teach, but it shouldn't just conform to the one theory. If they get rid of the theory of Evolution and just teach the facts then I would be satisfied that it is unbiased, but they don't. They teach one theory and not the other.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

crackpot theories

---

What? I doubt it. Crackpot theories have no proof behind them. Creation does.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Science classes are for learning science. And no argument you (or anyone else)
has brought up has shown 'creation science' to be based on any sort of
scientific premise.

---

Nope, and thank God for that since Science theories change every year. But where the Bible does touch on Science can be trusted. The theories are proved with scientifical observation and experimentation. Not just by blindly following faith.

quote:

---

Emperor said:

Don't try and compare apples and oranges.

---

I'm not, I'm comparing theories of how the Earth came to the state it is in right now.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

think this is what makes me so angry. Religious institutions are not manditory, schools are.

---

Right. And that's the way it should be.

quote:

---

Even if you disagree with something in the school system, you have to go to it.

---

What you "agree" with is irrelevant. Have you been paying attention?

If you disagree with gravity, it does not stop existing.

If your religion tells you that 7*6=89, that does not change what the real answer is, and does not exclude you from having to learn math.

quote:

---

Have you read anything in AnswersinGenesis.org? There is plenty of proof for Creation.

---

Yes, I have. And no, there is not. There is a bunch of horseshit - as Emperor noted, a square peg jammed through a round hole with very little finesse or care.

quote:

---

The public school is there to teach, but it shouldn't just conform to the one theory. If they get rid of the theory of Evolution and just teach the facts then I would be satisfied that it is unbiased, but they don't. They teach one theory and not the other.

---

uh...............

This is to the point of being plain stupid. The "theory" of evolution is not just a theory. Evolution happens. Evolution has been observed and measured and documented.

You disagree? Fantastic. Doesn't change a damn thing.

quote:

---

What? I doubt it. Crackpot theories have no proof behind them. Creation does.

---

Wrong again. Been through it several times now.

quote:

---

The theories are proved with scientifical observation and experimentation. Not just by blindly following faith.

---

Horseshit. Been over this several times now...

And with that - this thread has become about as useless as can be.

You can feel free to cling to the half-ass bullshit that places like 'answeringenesis' splurt out, if that makes you feel better.

But science - real science - has proven them wrong over and over and over.

~shrug~

bye bye.

^ And irregardless of what I think, that is the Truth. Thank you, DL, for that post.

I personally wish they would take all those Creation "evolution-doesn't-exit-I'll-just-close-my-eyes-and-it-will-go-away" whiners and burn them at the stake.

Good thing things aren't done according to my wishes, isn't it?

Same goes for all you crackpot creation "evolution-doesn't-exit-I'll-just-close-my-eyes-and-it-will-go-away" junkies.

quote:

---

Crackpot theories have no proof behind them. Creation does.

---

That's the one that really gets me.
There is no 'proof' of creation beyond 'because the Bible says so'.
You can point to all of the 'physical evidence' you want to, but it always boils down to 'because the Bible says so'.

I also find it a ironic that Gideon mentions 'blind faith' as a pseudo-arguement against science.
Got me giggling with that one.

Gideon: As you don't seem willing to actually look into things other than websites then at the vey least look your concerns up here:

www.talkorigins.org

I know I mention it a lot but it does cover a lot of territory.

----------------
More generally here is a report on a trip to Hovind's dinosaur park:

www.csicop.org/si/2004-11/hovind.html

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

And a demonstration of evolution in action:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4073359.stm

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

Gid:
I think it was you (back up there^^somewhere) who said something along the lines of ; ....if school's mandatory why not religious insitutions.... What did you have in mind there? Are you talking about all , let's call them, 'main-stream' religous institutions... islam... christianity... shatnerology? Well why not Shatnerology... I'd say all of them have been blessed with equal amounts of silliness. In this evolution/creation case.... a 5k time frame to get where we are now. Really... how silly is that. BIG silly...that's how silly.

http://www.shatnerology.com/[Here]at the First Church of Shatnerology, we worship the holy essences of the most benevolent ShatnerBeing!

Religions are 'all about' power and control. Those 'in control' will, and do claim the way they see it.... the way they interpret / read "it" (evolution in this case) is an absolute 'truth' when in fact it is an 'absolute belief'.

You really must test out that 'free will' bit. =)

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

Right. And that's the way it should be.

---

Why? Why must we be forced to learn something we don't agree with?

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

If your religion tells you that 7*6=89, that does not change what the real
answer is, and does not exclude you from having to learn math.

---

But my "religion" doesn't tell me something that is wrong. It doesn't say that 7*6=89. It tells me this:

quote:

---

Proverbs 14:15
The naive believes everything, But the sensible man considers his steps.

---

The Bible says to consider everything before you believe it. God doesn't want pessimistic blind followers.

Dl, I am sorry. I feel really bad. I really hope that someday you can have your heart opened. Seeing with your eyes is not believeing. Just like the old man in Hitchhiker's, you can't trust yourself, or your perceptions about others. I really hope that you find what you are looking for.

Webshamman, I hope you know that there are many men, grown men with doctorates in many fields, putting their reputation on the line for Jesus. You can sling as many insults at them as you like, but you won't be able to shake them. I want you to talk to one of them sometime. Call one up or e-mail one of the researchers/executives on AIG. I think you might get something good out of it.

quote:

---

warjournal said:

You can point to all of the 'physical evidence' you want to, but it always
boils
down to 'because the Bible says so'.

---

I have a question for you, where does the Theory of Evolution come from? Isn't it from books, and looking at 'physical evidence' here and now?

Thanks Emporer. Is that the same dino park that was on a thread a while ago?

quote:

---

NoJive said:

Religions are 'all about' power and control

---

That's funny because mine is all about love. There is no power and control in it for me. (Actually quite the opposite)

quote:

---

Matthew 5:44
"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

Mark 12:30-31
AND YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH.' "The second is this, `YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.' There is no other commandment greater than these."

Romans 5:8
But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

Romans 35-39
35 Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36 Just as it is written, "FOR YOUR SAKE WE ARE BEING PUT TO DEATH ALL DAY LONG; WE WERE CONSIDERED AS SHEEP TO BE SLAUGHTERED." 37 But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. 38 For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Romans 13:10
Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.

1 Corinthians 13:13
But now faith, hope, love, abide these three; but the greatest of these is love.

---

Love abounds in the Bible, not strife.

quote:

---

NoJive said:

....if school's mandatory why not religious insitutions.... What did you have in
mind there?

---

Actually I was wondering why hearing something in school is manditory. There are many religious things being outlawed in school, why not secular things too?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

I have a question for you, where does the Theory of Evolution come from? Isn't it from books, and looking at 'physical evidence' here and now?

---

The theory of evolution is not from books that were dictated from on high - but it is from physical evidence.

Lovely quote from Talk Origins (emphasis added):

quote:

---

Real scientists base their theories on the available evidence. They are not immune to the effects of prejudice, but they all understand that the facts dictate the conclusion. Conclusions are subservient to the data; data are not subservient to conclusions.

---

That has been pointed out several times in this thread.

Which came first, physical evidence or theory of evolution?
Physical evidence.

Which came first, physical evidence or theory of creation?
Theory of creation.

edit:

quote:

---

There is no power and control in it for me.

---

"Do as I say or go to Hell."

What was that Henry Ford quote?
Something like, "You can paint it any colour you want as long as it's black."

Heh.

(Edited by warjournal on 12-09-2004 21:31)

quote:

---

That's funny because mine is all about love. There is no power and control in it for me.

---

It's not supposed allow you to have power and control. It has been a very useful tool for the church heirarchies to control populations all throughout the history of mankind though.

THAT is the point being made.

As to everything else you've said: you have obviously not really paid attention to much of anything that has been said. Regardless of whether you agree or not, you have completely ignored the point that most people have made in their posts (not one particular point, but the various many points people have made).

You have obviously closed down your brain for the sake of what you "beleive in". That's certainly you're choice to make, but don't try to argue the points if you aren't even going to actually consider them...

(Edited by DL-44 on 12-09-2004 21:34)

quote:

---

Webshamman, I hope you know that there are many men, grown men with doctorates in many fields, putting their reputation on the line for Jesus. You can sling as many insults at them as you like, but you won't be able to shake them. I want you to talk to one of them sometime. Call one up or e-mail one of the researchers/executives on AIG. I think you might get something good out of it.

---

Education is no cure for blindness. And I do not sling insults at them - they (and you, and everyone else, for that matter) can believe whatever it is that you want to, as long as you keep your fucking beliefs to yourself! It's the moment when you attempt to force your beliefs on me, or on my children, that my voice grows louder. I will fight to the last breath that I have, to prevent that.

I have already talked to many learned individuals, of many different beliefs, faiths, and experiences. I have those that I deeply admire, and respect.

As for Love, I suggest you study the life and words of a man that I greatly admire and respect - the Mahatma Ghandi. And no, he was not a Christian.

In your case, I can only sadly repeat what DL has said

quote:

---

You have obviously closed down your brain for the sake of what you "beleive in". That's certainly you're choice to make, but don't try to argue the points if you aren't even going to actually consider them...

---

Also, my name is WebShaman.

Good day.

once more for good measure...

the science of god

it would seem only fair that both sides get to submit some required reading material...

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

And?

I read it...so what?

It "admits" that Science is better at discovering the Truth of Nature. It suggests that the Bible is better for discovering "spiritual" truths. Problem being, that any spiritual book is good for that - which one to choose?

It suggests that Science cannot answer the question of purpose. I disagree. We need only look to Nature, to see purpose. That is real, that is measureable. That clearly exists!

Also, there are going to be a horde of "literal" Bible beaters who disagree with that book.

The book does make a rather good point however - the one about expertise. It is true, that most Bible experts are not experts in Science and vice versa. The book uses this to explain away most of the "controversy" and "animosity" of both sides towards one another.

It occurs to me, that there are not very many (if, indeed, there are at all!) experts on all of the major religions! Thus, we have no idea of which "religious knowledge" is most appropriate. And since Religion has no reliable peer approval system, or reliable rules for validating and disproving theories, it remains an unserious method of truth-finding!

(Edited by WebShaman on 12-10-2004 09:59)

quote:

---

Gideon said:


I have a question for you, where does the Theory of Evolution come
from? Isn't it from books, and looking at 'physical evidence' here and
now?

---

You seemed to miss the whole bit about what science is about and what it does. No one has written a book on evolution and then set out to prove it.

What happens is something like this (although obviously it may vary a bit):

1. Scientists draw up hypothesise.

2. They analyse data.

3. They compare their models to their hypothesise.

4. If it fits they continue the next round of investigation if it invalidates they discard and try another line of approach.

5. Some of them right books to draw the various strands of their studies together.

Without physcial evidence, models, theories, hypothesise, etc. then the books would just be someone telling you how it is. If it got popular people might then work to make the facts fit the book but that is actually starting with your conlusions and working back and as I've said that is like fitting a square peg in a round hole.

They may call it Creationist Science but that doesn't make it so. As I've said you can't compare apples and oranges.

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org | Justice for Pat Richard | FAQs: Emperor | Site Reviews | Reception Room

Gid:

Let me put the 'power and control' bit another way. The '10 suggestions'... are what to you??? Commandments... right? And a 'commandment' is what? It is an 'order.'

Ask any soldier what happens if he/she doesn't follow a command. It's off to 'The big house'(Levinworth.) Now here you are a soldier in the army of god and if you don't follow the orders your 'commander' hands down you're off to the brig (hell) forever & ever and ever. Deep shit you might say.

And if every member of all other known religions do not accept jesus as their savior they don't get a ticket into 'The big house' (of the lord.) And that is what? Intimidation is what that is...and intimidation is about what? Power & Control.

And that 'ticket in' bit is the absolute essence of christianity. You can interpret, misinterpret read whatever you will into everything and anything else in the bible but if you don't 'beleive' that... you are not a christian. Don't know what you might be but certainly, not a christian. There are no... 'Yes but'/s here. In the labor movement it's called a 'closed shop.' Closed shop equals 'closed mind/s.' No room for other possibilities on that one period.

If that's not going after absolute power and control... don't know what it is. If adolf h. accepts christ as his savior moments before he kills himself he gets a 'ticket in' but all the jews he 'ordered'... killed did not????? And that's what you believe.... you have to... you must. It is the one 'order' in the entire bible you cannot disobey or you my friend are not a christian.

Sorry.... won't be signing up for that club. And I will not for a moment accept that sort of unequivical bigotted codswallop being served up public schools.

Here's an 'audio' archive. As a creationist you and others will not agree but I hope you will at least listen to it.

quote:

---

Professor Richard Dawkins seems to have a talent for bringing new perspectives to thinking about evolution. In his new book, The Ancestor's Tale, the perspective is looking backwards. He traces our evolution from today back to the "meetings" we had with other species in our evolutionary past:

---

http://radio.cbc.ca/programs/quirks/archives/04-05/dec04.html


For others interested in science 'stuff'.... quirks & quarks is very likely my all time favorite
radio program .... it airs every Saturday 12noon PDT. it's available on-line and is also 'archived'.... so you might want to listen (check the schedule.) and cruise the archives..

Tomorrow...for example"

quote:

---

Dr. John Smol of Queen's University was awarded the Herzberg Gold Medal, and the million-dollar prize that accompanies it, for his work as a paleolimnologist. Twenty years of studying the sediments and ooze at the bottom of lakebeds has enabled him to contribute to our understanding of pollution, climate change,

---

etc.

thanks WS. i was simply looking for someone to at least acknowledge it to start with the fact you've read it is a plus

i agree with you on some points. literal bible folks absolutely will have huge issues with it, but those people also tend to be ones who ignore a lot of very clear scientific fact. i find myself somewhere in the middle, believing that the bible is truth but knowing that all parts of it aren't necessarily meant to be interpreted literally.

i'll also agree that its hard to know what's "right" when it comes to issues of faith and religion, or at least hard to be able to prove what's "right". i believe that what i believe is true, but i'm exploring why i believe that and what real "proof" there is other than my personal knowledge. i'm actually reading another book now that delves into that somewhat that's been interesting, i may post more when i'm done.

i'm not entirely sure about science giving purpose tho, i'm curious how you'd define the truth that you find inherent in nature. and does that same truth apply to us human beings.

also, what did you think of the large amount of information that schroeder presented that very much lined up between the bible and modern science? coincidence or something more in your opinion?

chris


KAIROSinteractive | tangent oriented

The idea of "purpose" is a purely human construct. The only actual purpose for us is the same as any other species - recreate and die.

IMO, the reason religion exists at all is because people are unwilling to accept that purpose, and feel the need to create a grander one. The idea that we are not the center of the universe is simply appalling to large numbers of people. The idea that we can make a purpose for ourselves and be good people without needing a great big melodramatic institution and reward/punishment system is very foreign to most people.

quote:

---

warjournal said:

Which came first, physical evidence or theory of evolution?Physical
evidence.

---

Physical Evidence was here before the Theory of Creation came about too. Creation theory was only started after the Torah was written on Mount Siani. Also, the Theory is a theory from some facts, yes, but it must be able to be proven and disproven. That is what scientists are now doing to both theories (and everything in between). They are still useing facts to try and prove thier theorems, it isn't like they have totally proved either yet.

quote:

---

warjournal said:

"Do as I say or go to Hell."What was that Henry Ford quote?Something
like, "You can paint it any colour you want as long as it's black."

---

You still have a choice, and unfortunately many people choose to "go to Hell."

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

a very useful tool for the church heirarchies to control populations all
throughout the history of mankind though

---

That is correct. Unfortunately mankind has a habit of taking something absolutely beautiful and corrupting it. In the case of Jesus, the church (I believe you are refering to the old Roman Catholic Church in specific?) used Him as an excuse to abuse people. Slave holders in the 1600-1800s used His name to do evil deeds. It happens. I find it interesting hoe they were very selective of what parts of the Bible they quoted from, becuase if they had gone by the entire Bible, there would be a lot fewer problems.

quote:

---

DL-44 said:

You have obviously closed down your brain for the sake of what you "beleive in".
That's certainly you're choice to make, but don't try to argue the points if you
aren't even going to actually consider them...

---

Thanks for the repremand, I will definitly try harder next time to read carefully everything that is posted. I am sorry that I have done that. Please remind me if I do it again, and make sure I respond to what you want me to respond to.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

as long as you keep your f***ing beliefs to yourself!

---

I'm sorry if i have offended you by posting my beliefs on this subject. I thought that was what you were looking for, I guess I was wrong. I don't want to ram my personal beliefs down your throat, your children's throats, or anyone else's for that matter. I personally think that you have a right to believe what you want. But, I don't want to have the regret of not telling you what I believe, and then you go throughout your life without knowing the Bible's point of view. I will say this: You go on believing what you want, but just be very sure that it is right. You are staking your life, even your eternal soul on the line here, and just hope that you are right and the Eternal God of the Universe is wrong.

(And I am terribly sorry about your name .)

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

It suggests that Science cannot answer the question of purpose. I disagree. We
need only look to Nature, to see purpose.

---

If you look at nature for purpose, the purpose is this: live, eat, have sex, teach your offspring in your old ways, then die. That is what nature does.

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

it remains an unserious method of truth-finding!

---

Actually it is quite serious. When men, women, and children are willing to stake their lives on claims of faith it becomes a very serious issue. If people are dying for it there has to be something good about it. I know in my heart which one is true, but that is becuase I have been through the real love of Christ. That is what makes me different.

more to come...

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.