Evolution V Religion

[Gozu]

I can't believe people are still believing in fairy tales (religion) in 2009? At best religion is harmless superstition at worst it is a virulent contagion hell bent (no pun intended) on controlling and exploiting people. Darwin is arguably the most influential Briton of all time ( Newton would be a rival), perhaps one of the most influential thinkers of all time. His ideas have much to do with the decline of the influence of religion in Western civilisation.

Another good post, Mick. You're starting to make a habit of this

[Rik E Boy]

my 2 cents worth

Religion is one of the leading causes of War whereas I dont think the Idea of Evolution has caused any wars ?

The Nazis considered themselves the master race and set about a war of racial extermination. The theory of the superman and 'social Darwinism' could be put down to a war of evolution.

regards,

REB

[mick]

my 2 cents worth

Religion is one of the leading causes of War whereas I dont think the Idea of Evolution has caused any wars ?

The Nazis considered themselves the master race and set about a war of racial extermination. The theory of the superman and 'social Darwinism' could be put down to a war of evolution.

regards,

REB

Nazi theories on race and eugenics were pseudo science at best. Hitler and many of his henchmen put their faith in astrology FFS (no wonder they lost the war!) many of them particularly those in the top echelons of the elite SS believed (including Himmler himself) in neo pagan Nordic religion (thor, Woden etc). I think it is drawing a long bow to suggest "social darwinism" was responsible for WWII, if anything the treaty of Versailles made war inevitable, Hitler simply exploited German bitterness after WWI and focussed it on the Jews. In any case belief in National Socialism and the Fuehrer Principle was more akin to religion, than scientifically based evolutionary theory.

[nuggety goodness]

my 2 cents worth

Religion is one of the leading causes of War whereas I dont think the Idea of Evolution has caused any wars ?

The Nazis considered themselves the master race and set about a war of racial extermination. The theory of the superman and 'social Darwinism' could be put down to a war of evolution.

regards,

REB

Nazi theories on race and eugenics were pseudo science at best. Hitler and many of his henchmen put their faith in astrology FFS (no wonder they lost the war!) many of them particularly those in the top echelons of the elite SS believed (including Himmler himself) in neo pagan Nordic religion (thor, Woden etc). I think it is drawing a long bow to suggest "social darwinism" was responsible. Belief in National Socialism and the Fuehrer Principle was more akin to religion, than scientifically based evolutionary theory.

my recollection is that Hitler was exterminating the Jews, but also anyone who didn't fit the mould that he wanted. he had over 12 million people killed with 5-6 million IIRC of those being Jews. he killed anyone with a disability (physical or mental), homosexuals, POW's and anyone who opposed him and effectively tried to 'purify' the gene pool...

[Pseudo]

Nazi theories on race and eugenics were pseudo science at best.

Balderdash! I've never worked on eugenics!

[Sheik Yerbouti]

I'm now going to call you 'Nuggety GODness' from now on.

I'm going to call him Jimmy Swaggart

not even close!!! that's a bit insultng actually...

You are exactly like him. You're a preacher.

Good on you NG, it's your faith, definitely not my cup of tea but if that's what you believe.

It's a good sport on here, let's gang up on the christian, but heaven help anyone belittling any other doe eyed virgin rooting or volcano sacrificing ''God'', there would be a resounding click echoing around the streets of SA of Wedgies minnows simultaneously hitting the delete button.

Before you all double bolt your front doors in the fear that NG might come a calling, I've, without knowing the bloke under this user name, spent a few hours talking to him when he's been running a barby to save his footy club from extinction early Saturday mornings at our kids footy. Not once has the subject of religion been bought up, not once. God knows the opportunity was there with the long breaks in between quarters & the bullshit some of the subjects us parents drag up.

If that's the worst a penticostal christian can do I'll take that any day over a hand wringing bitter & twisted agnostic who can't wait to shove their views (usually on an internet board) on any & everyone.

[mick]

Good on you NG, it's your faith, definitely not my cup of tea but if that's what you believe.

It's a good sport on here, let's gang up on the christian, but heaven help anyone belittling any other doe eyed virgin rooting or volcano sacrificing ''God'', there would be a resounding click echoing around the streets of SA of Wedgies minnows simultaneously hitting the delete button.

Before you all double bolt your front doors in the fear that NG might come a calling, I've, without knowing the bloke under this user name, spent a few hours talking to him when he's been running a barby to save his footy club from extinction early Saturday mornings at our kids footy. Not once has the subject of religion been bought up, not once. God knows the opportunity was there with the long breaks in between quarters & the bullshit some of the subjects us parents drag up.

If that's the worst a penticostal christian can do I'll take that any day over a hand wringing bitter & twisted agnostic who can't wait to shove their views (usually on an internet board) on any & everyone.

Good to see your parents didn't waste their money sending you to Blacks, unlike mine, I think I'm the only atheist in the family by the way good post

[Q.]

so a quoestion for the non-believers, what is gonna happen when you die? everyone believes something and we all know that there is more to life than just being here on earth. everyone is intrigued with the afterlife and all that.

what's gonna happen? what are you hoping for?

If indeed we are destined to be more than just worm food, then I believe life is infinitely more complex than we realise and that the nature of existence is almost beyond comprehension.

But at the end of the day, this world, this life, it is nothing more than what you make of it. That is something tenable and doesn't need to be confined by the constructs of institutions like religion and government.

[mick]

so a quoestion for the non-believers, what is gonna happen when you die? everyone believes something and we all know that there is more to life than just being here on earth. everyone is intrigued with the afterlife and all that.

what's gonna happen? what are you hoping for?

If indeed we are destined to be more than just worm food, then I believe life is infinitely more complex than we realise and that the nature of existence is almost beyond comprehension.

But at the end of the day, this world, this life, it is nothing more than what you make of it. That is something tenable and doesn't need to be confined by the constructs of institutions like religion and government.

Being dead is exactly the same as before you were conceived.

[Q.]

so a quoestion for the non-believers, what is gonna happen when you die? everyone believes something and we all know that there is more to life than just being here on earth. everyone is intrigued with the afterlife and all that.

what's gonna happen? what are you hoping for?

If indeed we are destined to be more than just worm food, then I believe life is infinitely more complex than we realise and that the nature of existence is almost beyond comprehension.

But at the end of the day, this world, this life, it is nothing more than what you make of it. That is something tenable and doesn't need to be confined by the constructs of institutions like religion and government.

Being dead is exactly the same as before you were conceived.

"When I was a sperm I had a lot to learn..."

[JK]

"When I was a sperm I had a lot to learn..."

Im always learning

[devilsadvocate]

"When I was a sperm I had a lot to learn..."

Im always learning

Constantly?

[Dogwatcher]

I'm just laughing at the fact that Devil's Advocate is posting on a thread about religion

[devilsadvocate]

I'm just laughing at the fact that Devil's Advocate is posting on a thread about religion

It's purely a football allegiance.

I'm with Nuggety Goodness when it comes to religion.

[nuggety goodness]

No one is guaranteed a deathbed you are correct but if that is the case then a lot of good christians shall not make it into heaven as I would think that at one stage or another we have all sinned regardless of how piuous you are. Remember, Jealousy is a sin. If you aren't able to repent your sins in front of god your screwed.

As for the contradictions I will list a couple that have been outlined to me.

For or against?
MAT 12:30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
(not with is against)

MAR 9:40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
(not with is for)

LUK 9:50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us.
(not with is for)

Which is right?

In the same way you are arguing that who are we to say you are wrong about the existence of god without proof, you are also wrong in denying the results of science in the same way. Science has a lot more tangible evidence to believe than Religion does.

firstly, yes i'm sure there are many 'Christians' who have missed the boat because of an unrepented of sin or two, this is an unfortunate thing. this is why we must live in total obedience to Christ. the way i look at it is this;

at the beach we have flags to show the safe areas to swim. if you stay inside the flags you have nothing to worry about, as soon as you stray from that you put yourself at risk. God's Word is exactly the same, it is not a burden or a set of rules to follow but it is a safe area. if you live your life inside these boundaries then you have nothing to worry about.

secondly they aren't contradictions, read them again...

I don't deny the results of scientific tests, however when talking of the creation of the universe and the evolution of man theory there are ALWAYS assumptions made, The scientific method makes two general assumptions, we have never seen an exception to either of these

1. Any phenomena can be understood as an effect of the laws of nature.
2. The laws of nature are the same everywhere, no exceptions.

As a result, the scientific method cannot disprove the existence of God or anything supernatural. The method requires that we assume He doesn't exist as He is an exception to the rule.

[Psyber]

Evolution is not necessarily incompatible with religious faith. of course, only with the faith of Creationist fundamentalists.
The main stream Christian faiths seem to have accepted the evolutionary process as God's method..
[That is said purely as a comment on the broad reach of the title of this thread - I'm still not religious myself..]

[Pseudo]

The scientific method makes two general assumptions, we have never seen an exception to either of these

1. Any phenomena can be understood as an effect of the laws of nature.
2. The laws of nature are the same everywhere, no exceptions.

Exception to #2: the primordial universe.

As a result, the scientific method cannot disprove the existence of God or anything supernatural. The method requires that we assume He doesn't exist as He is an exception to the rule.

The point of this thread was not whether or not the scientific method can prove the existence of God. That problem lies outside the realm of science. That problem lies wholly in the realm of philosophy and/or theology. The scientific method, contrary to your claim, makes no requirement on the existence or non-existence of any deity. It is completely independent of religion. Therein lies the problem: you and yours see science as somehow encroaching upon religion, that religion and science are mutually exclusive. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[nuggety goodness]

The scientific method makes two general assumptions, we have never seen an exception to either of these

1. Any phenomena can be understood as an effect of the laws of nature.
2. The laws of nature are the same everywhere, no exceptions.

Exception to #2: the primordial universe.

As a result, the scientific method cannot disprove the existence of God or anything supernatural. The method requires that we assume He doesn't exist as He is an exception to the rule.

The point of this thread was not whether or not the scientific method can prove the existence of God. That problem lies outside the realm of science. That problem lies wholly in the realm of philosophy and/or theology. The scientific method, contrary to your claim, makes no requirement on the existence or non-existence of any deity. It is completely independent of religion. Therein lies the problem: you and yours see science as somehow encroaching upon religion, that religion and science are mutually exclusive. Nothing could be further from the truth.

i do agree that science is a key to us understanding the Universe and all that is in it. however if we bible believing Christians (or anyone else for that fact) concede that God didn't create the Universe or that it is billions of years old or that we as humans have evolved then we are embracing essentially that the bible has errors, that being the case, the bible is no longer the Perfect Word of God... it undermines our whole faith.

RE Genesis and creation and the time frame, the bible says this after God had created each thing (light, heaven and earth, trees and animals, sun, moon and stars, man)...

'...And the evening and the morning were the ....... day'

later on the bible tells us 'a day with the Lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day... this is reffering to God not being bound by time, everything is done in His timing, not ours...

[Pseudo]

...if we bible believing Christians (or anyone else for that fact) concede that God didn't create the Universe or that it is billions of years old or that we as humans have evolved then we are embracing essentially that the bible has errors, that being the case, the bible is no longer the Perfect Word of God... it undermines our whole faith.

Your belief system itself is subject to evolutionary pressures and changes. Your belief system will persist for as long as it is useful to help you understand the world. Occasionally your belief system will come into conflict with a real world phenomenon which it cannot account for. Either your belief system will evolve to account for the phenomenon, or it will be superceded by other belief systems which can account for it. This has already happened; it will continue to happen.

If the Good Book was literally true in all passages, then the Earth would be fixed in space and every other celestial body would move around it. This was indeed believed by the early church, until Copernicus, Galileo and others were able to demonstrate that the solar system was heliocentric. Even then the church took its time coming around; the powers within the church refused to believe that the Bible could have it wrong. Heck, the catholic church only pardoned Galileo for his heresies in recent years!

Suffice to say that the Bible is demonstrably NOT the perfect word of God - with the key word being perfect. Is it not possible that, being transcribed by human hands, a little noise might have crept into the signal? Is it not possible that parts of the text are metaphorical, not literal - including the story of Genesis?

The church adapted to Galileo's revelations. Either the church will adapt to Darwin's, or it will cease to be relevant. If your faith is undermined then let it evolve.

[nuggety goodness]

...if we bible believing Christians (or anyone else for that fact) concede that God didn't create the Universe or that it is billions of years old or that we as humans have evolved then we are embracing essentially that the bible has errors, that being the case, the bible is no longer the Perfect Word of God... it undermines our whole faith.

Your belief system itself is subject to evolutionary pressures and changes. Your belief system will persist for as long as it is useful to help you understand the world. Occasionally your belief system will come into conflict with a real world phenomenon which it cannot account for. Either your belief system will evolve to account for the phenomenon, or it will be superceded by other belief systems which can account for it. This has already happened; it will continue to happen.

If the Good Book was literally true in all passages, then the Earth would be fixed in space and every other celestial body would move around it. This was indeed believed by the early church, until Copernicus, Galileo and others were able to demonstrate that the solar system was heliocentric. Even then the church took its time coming around; the powers within the church refused to believe that the Bible could have it wrong. Heck, the catholic church only pardoned Galileo for his heresies in recent years!

Suffice to say that the Bible is demonstrably NOT the perfect word of God - with the key word being perfect. Is it not possible that, being transcribed by human hands, a little noise might have crept into the signal? Is it not possible that parts of the text are metaphorical, not literal - including the story of Genesis?

The church adapted to Galileo's revelations. Either the church will adapt to Darwin's, or it will cease to be relevant. If your faith is undermined then let it evolve.

the difference being the bible never states that the Earth is the centre of the universe, that 'belief' wasn't just the church but the whole world had subscribed to it. those revelations did not conflict what the bible says therefore the belief's had no need to evolve, just personal understanding...