A Question For My Evolutionist Friends

[Dodgem250]

Originally Posted by Marie

He died as a payment for all mankinds sin or at least those that chose to accept that notion. Being a perfect scarifice no one else could do that God need to pay the fine himself.
When you get born again your sins are covered under his blood past present and future

I understand what you're trying to say, but... that just ain't working for me in "our" current world, that's still not an answer, that's another "way around", I hear that a lot in religious discussions.




I used to study world religions and even praticed Tao. I seen them all as having a similar thread of humanaterian aspects to them. After a while it was if I am going to practice a faith, I am going back to Christianity. Its a better deal and not as silly as virtue is the essence and breathing excersises to reach an altered state of concious. Other faiths dont have a payment for our sin or offer eternal security.

I am going back to Christianity

Are you saying that because you find that Christianity makes more sense in regards to your beliefs? I am really curious as to why you made this decision. I hear people constantly converting their religion, and I don't understand the mentality that goes into such a decision.

As a believer I know he exsist.

ExistED.

I see his hand at work in my life making changes I never could, nor never would. I see sinfull desires that I loved be taken away that now I hate. Sometimes I just wish he would work a little faster, as I see all the time how badly I blow it. I see the complexity of the human eye and the fine balance our planet hangs in, our the machanical way DNA chains work. Primmortal soup could never evolve to that level of complexity even if you believe in millions of years.

You dont have to believe in hell, Just like the man sentanced to the electric chair, he can tell the judge he dont believe in it but it changes nothing.
What if your wrong are you really that confident you would bet the most important thing you have. Its like playing russian roulett for 10K is it worth it? Really?



The persumption is we are by default, all childern to the god of this world Satan. He already has us in his head count. We love our sin, we want to be our own boss and not submitt to anyone and be self sufficent. He wants us to believe there is no God or if we need a higher power thats ok, or that we can be like God

much like this Erkert Toll junk Opraha is pushing trying to fine the devine within.

Oprah just knows, like any good salesman knows, Religion and Patriotism SELLS! You know, like people holding cardboard signs and yelling "Bless you, God be with you", they know that if they "hook" the right persons, they'll get a bigger hand out.

And what really saddens me about this world is how so many businesses all of a sudden went red, white, and blue, after 9/11, guess they found the perfect marketing niche. I mean, look at the dude who started the ribbon campaign, the dude is probably not even an American!

But he figured, man I can now "sale des much box of mag-a-nets to de amerikas I just paint them red, blue, white, den dey sale much".

[Tonio]

Originally Posted by This_person

This is a very personal, intimate thing. It's not something I can or will address on an internet forum. Doesn't make it less true, but I just can't discuss it here.

I understand. I don't contest the fact that you had the experience itself. My point is about the cause of such experiences and how people use them. Claims that such experiences have supernatural causes do not stand up under the scientific principles of repeatability and falsifiability.

But the issue is not with the experiences themselves. The issue is that many religions use such experiences as a basis for insisting that none of their claims can be challenged because they allegedly come from transcendent authorities that can never be challenged. Scientific hypotheses are always open to challenge based on available evidence, and it's not unusual for fields such as abiogenesis to have several hypotheses. Supernaturalistic religions do not allow for that type of disagreement - to disagree with the religion is to disagree with God.

Any hypothesis about the physical universe must rest on more than a personal conviction one has heard the voice of a supernatural being and must impose that being's sanction upon the rest of the world. I'm not assuming that you seek to impose such a sanction, but that is the thread that runs through the creationist literature I've seen.

[Marie]

Are you saying that because you find that Christianity makes more sense in regards to your beliefs? I am really curious as to why you made this decision. I hear people constantly converting their religion, and I don't understand the mentality that goes into such a decision.".

I was a false Christian convert when I was 14, I thought I was a Christian, but I was was decieved. There was no fruit of the Holy Spirit in my life, some would say I back slide for years. I now realize, I never slid forward in the first place. After turning my back on God to do my own thing for well over 20 years.
I found myself in a place practicing a religion by deception, you see we signed up for a course in Qigong, which wasnt supose to interfer with anyone religious beliefs. After a while though, Buddism and Taoism were being mixed in. Our Chinese friends that were teaching us got very upset if we werent there every Saturday, it took away from the groups energy so we were told. Buttom line after 3 years or 2 1/2 which ever it was, basicly we were practicing a mix of middle eastern religions. There culture was interesting, but I had a religion I was rebelling from, I didnt need a new one, based on the power within, and the external energy of the universe.
I realized that this power within, wasnt from within, and had a pretty good idea what it truely was. I need to start working my way back to a religion that made sense, and sense of everything. I didnt need, virtue is the essence, if I was going to be virtous why not have it be a product of my faith, instead of trying to do it own my own. If I was going to give authority of my life over, why not give it to God the God that could save me from my sin, if Id been the knee and submitt to his will.
If something is promising you extradionary abilities, its not of God its demonic.
I am just glad God brought me to my senses before it was to late. It was still a slow road, but it was progressive in the right direction.

[nhboy]

Originally Posted by Marie

Ok I need some help with this.
We get the first animal that evolved that has the capability of reproduction. What did it reproduce with?

"First Sex" Found in Australian Fossils?

"Sex is part of the "oldest profession" and is often called the subject of the "world's oldest joke." Now scientists think they've found evidence of the oldest known creatures to engage in sexual reproduction."

"First Sex" Found in Australian Fossils?

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Tonio

My point is that the existence of the "why" for natural events is a question for science because it involves the physical universe. A being behind the "why" would be like any other natural object or natural phenomenon, and thus subject to scientific inquiry.

Then we ARE saying the same thing - it's fair to presume that if God is behind all that has happened, science will root that out. Science will continue to figure out how God did what He did.

Not quite. A possibility is conjecture unless there is evidence, which turns the possibility into a probability. Proof would turn the probability into a fact.

How is that different from what I said?

Because any claim about "why" inevitably leads to the question of the intelligence's motive. This is where religion enters the whole distatesful realm of natural events being punishments from angry entities. That goes against the idea of looking at the natural world empirically and skeptically. It implies that humans should not be curious about how the universe works.

How God made things happen is important to know. Why He made them happen is equally important to know. Humans probably should be curious as to the hows - perhaps we can make our lives that much better. Humans should probably also know the whys - perhaps we can make our lives that much better!

I'm not sure of your point. Based on our current knowledge of our planet and of the universe, it is probable that life exists somewhere. While this is not proven or disproven, it simply means that the evidence favors the existence.

Statistically, you're right - it's likely. That, of course, is based upon the assumption that life can be created from the proper mix of chemicals and atmospheric conditions. If it can't (and, so far, we have not a single clue of a workable idea how that could happen), then the statistical probability drops drastically. My point - it's so likely, yet we can't see nor prove it, therefore it's pure conjecture, and there's nothing but FAITH to say it's likely.

How is it innate when many religions do not believe in single gods?

What people believe to be true is immaterial to what is actually true. The people in those religions, and the people without religion, still statistically are likely to have certain moral codes - regardless of belief system. Seems built into us.

It's possible that we evolved that way, as Dean Hamer as hypothesized.

Yes, it is. It's equally possible we were designed that way.

I wasn't talking about Christianity specifically. I was talking about the entire realm of mystical explanations for natural events.

Okay, for this portion of the discussion, I'm talking Christianity specifically.

Pointing out that a suggested possibility is an assumption doesn't dismiss the possibility.

Just not one for serious contemplation?

And Jesus' ideas about the human experience can be evaluated for value for one's own life experience.

I agree!

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Lugnut

Tonio and TP, I'd like to buy both of you the beverage of your choice some lazy afternoon and just it back and BS with you two..

This has been one of the better threads in the religion forum.

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Dodgem250

Yeah me too, I'd love to set, listen, learn and then offer up my 2 cents worth of reality.

The more the merrier!

[This_person]

Originally Posted by Tonio

I understand. I don't contest the fact that you had the experience itself. My point is about the cause of such experiences and how people use them. Claims that such experiences have supernatural causes do not stand up under the scientific principles of repeatability and falsifiability.

But the issue is not with the experiences themselves. The issue is that many religions use such experiences as a basis for insisting that none of their claims can be challenged because they allegedly come from transcendent authorities that can never be challenged. Scientific hypotheses are always open to challenge based on available evidence, and it's not unusual for fields such as abiogenesis to have several hypotheses. Supernaturalistic religions do not allow for that type of disagreement - to disagree with the religion is to disagree with God.

This is one point I disagree with "the church". Determining the hows of things I think is okay, important, and not in any way sacreligious. I don't think God gave us curiousity and intelligence and then didn't want us to use those abilities.

The experiences (and, no, it wasn't voices in my head or something like that) proved to me that life is NOT just happenstance - there's a plan, a reason, a motive behind how things flow. That doesn't stop me from wanting to know how that's done, or how things work.

Any hypothesis about the physical universe must rest on more than a personal conviction one has heard the voice of a supernatural being and must impose that being's sanction upon the rest of the world. I'm not assuming that you seek to impose such a sanction, but that is the thread that runs through the creationist literature I've seen.

If I read you correctly, you're saying that we have to do our research as to how things happened without giving serious consideration to why things happened. Because, if we give serious consideration as to why things happened, we might have to subordinate ourselves to a supreme being's will.

I, personally, think that's a dangerous way to approach things. I think it dismisses a possibility. It relieves science of any moral foundation. That's scary to me.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Tonio

No, I was saying that the catalyst is a natural force. The concept is known as causal determinism.

No you said these are questions of science not philosophy.

Originally Posted by Tonio

But that possibility is a scientific matter and not a philosophical one. The origins of life and the universe are questions for science and not for religion or philosophy.

Causal determinism is a philosophical theory not a scientific theory.

Originally Posted by Tonio

I'm taking about the claim that purpose and reason were consciously created by a supernatural entity. Again, there is no evidence for that claim. You would have a point if you are referring to purpose or reason as the same as a natural cause.

But you’ve admitted you don’t know yet you argue against it. You seem to want things both ways. The evidence in this claim is history. There is plenty of archeological proof as well as written accounts. I don’t need scientific proof to know that the Fall of Rome happened or that the Xia Dynasty existed, but we have history to tell us so. We have thousands of years and billions of people as believers in this God as historical proof.

Originally Posted by Tonio

When I acknowledge the possibility of gods, I emphasize that the gods may have any sort of natures, and that some people's beliefs about the gods may be wrong. Some people believe in a single god and others believe in many. What evidence would show that one group is wrong and the other one right?

Why can’t God be part of the very nature He created? Here is the problem with wanting to prove God through science… What if God doesn’t want to be? But right or wrong (as I pointed out with Hawking and global warming, etc…) it comes down to having faith…

“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen… Hebrews 11:1.

Originally Posted by Tonio

No, science's answers can be tested in some cases and analyzed in others to see if they continue to match data from observations. Scientists don't simply accept their colleagues' conclusions without question.

What I meant by “you’re relying on science to answer everything” is that you seem to want a scientific explanation for God in order to believe. I think simple observations of our surroundings answers that.

Originally Posted by Tonio

That implies that science simply replaces one set of knowledge with another. It's more accurate to say that science adds to its storehouse of knowledge with new discoveries. While there have sometimes been wrong turns, the overall collection of knowledge continues to grow.

No, it replaces one answer with another. When Hawking admitted he was wrong that bit of “knowledge” became dead. It added to nothing. But don’t interpret what I’m saying as we shouldn’t seek out this knowledge. Absolutely not! I believe God gave us brains with the capacity to do this sort of thinking. I believe He encourages it. I believe He wants to ask questions. Not in the context of doubt, but in the same context that scientists seek out answers. They seek it out with the belief of the possibility not with doubt. They don’t research to prove something doesn’t exist, they seek to prove it does.

Originally Posted by Tonio

That wasn't a case where Pluto was never a planet and we simply didn't discover this until recently. It was a case where the discovery of small planets beyond Pluto caused a firestorm of controversy among astronomers as to how they should define a planet. (That's why the first one discovered was named Eris, for the goddess of discord.) So Pluto, Eris, Ceres and others were put into the new classification of "dwarf planet." The issue was about humans revising their own classifications for observable objects, based on new tools for making observations. I sometimes joke that Pluto was demoted.

Has anyone thought about the Plutonians in this demotion? What about their rights? What about their feelings

You mean sort of like eggs are bad for us, no they are good for us, no they are bad for us, no now they are good for us again. Can we expect astronomers to come back on a later date and tell us they were wrong that Pluto is indeed a planet? So now, us lay-people do what? Believe whatever they tell us.

Originally Posted by Tonio

Scientific hypotheses are not "truth" and they are not branded as such by science. They are attempts to explain observed phenomena. Obviously some hypotheses cannot be conclusively proven because we don't have the ability to make certain observations. But that caveat is inherent in the concept of the scientific hypothesis.

Which gets to my central point… these things will never be proven except through theory; unless deep space travel becomes a reality. You simply believe it or not. Just as with God these things come with faith.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Tonio

Would you explain the basis for your beliefs?

Not a short answer.

I’m not one of those that had this blinding moment in my life that transformed me. I can remember since I was very young looking around and wondering how all this life got here. My dad is avid about science and has no interest in a belief in God. So we spent a lot of time in my house reading and talking about people like Newton, Weinberg, Sagan, Einstein and Hawking. Here’s something you may find hard to believe, but the Nobel winner in physics in 2006 (John Mather) was our neighbor back in the late 70s early 80s. He would come over to our house and discuss what he was doing at NASA and his study of the Big Bang. Very interesting person and very interesting subjects. My dad was in… errrr… heaven. Strange bit of trivia about Mather and Hawking and the rest of that scientific community… many of them got involved in (what became a bit of a cult) a practice called EST (Erhard Seminar Training). Read about it. Strange stuff.

Anyway, I got to ask Mather some basic questions about the Big Bang… “What came before it?” “How did it all get there?” “Can matter have appeared out of nothing?” Of course he admitted science can only go so far then the rest is left to some sort of belief. He said even Einstein had a certain belief in a God. I already felt there was a higher being that created everything.

I had a couple of pivotal moments in my life. I was praying to God to help me get my spiritual life in order before I joined the military. I wasn’t completely sure about who God was, or which it was. I was working at a clothing store and this customer came in to buy a suit and we started talking about playing the guitar (I play). Then he asked me if I knew who Phil Keaggy (a Christian guitar player) was. Through my brother I knew who he was and thought “could this be how God answers prayers?” Anyway I got involved in their church up until I joined the AF. Then I prayed again that once I got stationed somewhere (after all my training was over) that God would help me find a Christian organization called The Navigators. When I got to my first base I moved into the dorms on base and after about 3 or 4 days I ran into this guy, while doing laundry, and we started talking about playing guitar. And, you guessed it, he asked me if I knew Phil Keaggy. All I could think was how God answers prayers in ways you never expect and He has a sense of humor. Then I asked this guy if he knew of any Navigator groups in the area and he told me he was a member. So I didn’t have to go looking for it, God handed it to me.

I know these sound pretty incredible and typical for Christians to talk about such “miracles” and such. These are absolutely true. And they changed my whole outlook on who God is. So the basis for my belief is 1) After all my studies in science, he explains that unanswered question about how everything got here. Answers that even the greatest scientific minds know they can’t answer and 2) This God does answer prayers. They may not always be the answer you’re looking for; sometime the answer is “no”, but He does answer. This is what God means to me more than the mysterious questions we have about our universe. God (despite what Einstein believed) IS a personal God that wants good for us. But this comes in a spiritual sense and not always in a physical sense. Things that cannot be explained through science. God defies science. All things that we know through science came from him, including the science He blessed our brains to strive to understand.

Sorry for such a long explanation.