Thread: God

Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
3. Fosail evidence supports that evevolation was in Jumps.

Just because we haven't found every single skeleton of creatures that died millions of years before us does not mean that evolution jumped. This is like saying because almost all of our archaelogical digs have unearthed big cities and no transition cities, cities must have spawned out of nowhere in jumps! Nobody believes that, instead we know that they were gradually created from smaller cities.

Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
I'm in a good mood, list 10 facts and I'll see what I can do

Okay, here goes:
1. Just as no scientist doubts the existence of gravity, so very few scientists doubt that evolution has occurred. Thus, they acknowledge the fact of evolution. The theory of evolution, on the other hand, details the attempts of science to find out exactly how evolution works. It is here that the dynamics of science come into play. Although the broad outlines of the theory are well understood, and well supported by evidence, the details, such as the tempo and mechanism of evolution are still the subject of debate. Thus your argument that its called a theory is skewed.
2. We actually do have many fossils that show fish as fish, then fish with fins that loosely resemble feet, then fish with almost feet, then fish/frog combinations that still have fish tails, then gradually getting smaller tails, then the combination with teeth, then etc etc to full fledged frogs and other amphibians. Many fossils have been found for other animals/plants that do similar thinkgs over a period of years, including primitive man to modern man.
3. We can watch bacteria evolve due to the extremely quick reproductive rate. The fact that strands across the world can quickly become immune to antibiotics, AND genetics can simulate this effect in a lab, shows evolution right in front our eyes.
4. Humans and primates have a shared genetical mutation that no other animals have, a gene that makes it impossible for our bodies to synthesize Vitamin C. No other explanation except that we have a common ancestor.
5. Not directly related to evolution, but the concept of time stemming from radioactive dating show that not only is the world much older than the bible says, BUT also dating of human fossils take human existance MUCH farther back than if you add up the lifespans from everone from Adam and Eve to Jesus.

I'd go on, but stop here for time and space sake and wait to see what your proof of creationism is. BTW, a LOT more information and proof can be found at www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc as well as www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-research.html

Originally posted by Sentaku senshi
What makes people become a Christitians in these contries even though it means they risk death? Because normaly people tend to advoid things that are going to kill them.

EVERY religion has people willing to die for what they believe. The people a couple of years who were in that cult in San Diego were willing to die because they believed a spaceship would take them to the star Sirius. Does this mean their religion is true?

Besides, you are still missing my point. My point is that people in these countries have no realistic chance of being christian and I think it VERY unfair if god judges them on this. Answer this question, if you were born in Thailand where 99% of the people around you are Buddhist, your family is Buddhist, and it is greatly looked down upon for anyone to offend anyone, ESPECIALLY your family, and you hear very little about christianity, do you honestly think you'd be a christian right now instead of Buddhist?? Answer that question! If god sends you to hell for this, its kinda like him saying after you die "Well, I'm sorry, but remember those people who commited suicide out in San Diego? Well they were correct. Geez, I know you had a great life and all, and were truly sorry for your sins, but you had your fair chance to believe exactly what they believed! Well, off to hell with ya!"

And you avoided my last question, do you or do you not believe that God will send people of other religions to hell for their beliefs irregardless of what type of people they were?

Hah, just in time.

Since PJYelton has made an excellent post regarding some evolutionary theory i thought i would address morality, which is continually brought up as some kind of defense to religion...................morality and religion have very little in common not from a historical point of view (don't make me laugh) nor from an origins point of view. Atheists are no less moral than religious people.

As for "where" morality came from, well the answer lies with evolutionary theory and the nature of social interaction:

It benefits us to cooperate; to live as a society, i did not build the house i'm living in nor forage for the food i eat at night.

As such is it is beneficial for us to impose social rules on each other to protect society (which benefits us): the law. Morality is evolutionary law, it evovled to increase cooperation, probably in tandem with mans increase in brain size/spinal cord.

There have been many many religions during the past 10,000 years, there will probably be a few to come, all have easy to see social and anthropic (is that a word?) roots. All share a common ingredient: IRRATIONAL belief, (that is the belief in something WITHOUT evidence, nor reasoning aka "faith") that is handed to generation to generation.

I cannot 'prove' an irrational belief wrong; i can't prove that a giant bull is not about to materialise three inches above my head and gore me to death on the other hand, i can prove its so unlikely that it isn't even worth considering........ God isn't worth considering.

Good point, you got me there! That was the first idea that popped into my head and I went with it! Still, my point still stands. People against evolution will never be satisfied unless EVERY single skeleton is found, and even then still say we are missing something.

If evolution says animal A became animal B, they'll say, wheres the in between animal? So animal C is found in the middle, then it becomes, wheres the animal betwen A and C? Animal D found, now what about between A and D, etc etc never ending.

Whats annoying is that this argument would be considered wrong in every other setting, yet creationists find that its valid here. We have proof that the oceans were higher and covered more of the earth in the ancient past, and we know that they don't now, but have no proof of inbetween. Isn't it dumb to make the claim that they possibly jumped? When we find a new achaelogical dig where the only two weapons remaining are a crude spear and a sophisticated crossbow, isn't it dumb to say that possibly they suddenly figured out the crossbow instead of gradually working up to it? Thousands of years from now if when they are digging our remains up they come across 3 computers, one from the 70's, one from the 80's, and one from today, how dumb would the scientist who claims that it's possible our knowledge of computers jumped as opposed to us gradually learning new technology sound??

But yet to say that species JUMPED from one type to another is supposed to be sane?? It defies all common sense! Is finding EVERY single fossil ever created the only way to proove this?

I thought I wouldn't get into this again...

The bible is not oblivious to the theory of evolution. There
are a couple of places where commoness of father to son
is mentioned. But in the bible how god creates is
never discussed.
Neither are how heredity traits are passed (the ancients of course observed this). About the closest it gets I can see is when god curses a family line. Job also sort of questions about nature.
creation of the soul, physical creation, family, and societies creation are all sort of blured together in genisis.

Also Genesis is one of the most metaphorical chapters of the bible. Usually if you read it closely you will notice stuft. For
example, when God makes women out of the rib of man that is
supposed to mean that women are supposed to guard the heart
man. It's really important to believe god created
everything but when you try to explain how god actually creates, it's left a mystery in the bible. I don't view evolution as against the bible but the study of one way of how god creates.

Occam's Razor approach: Consider the choices and select the one that is the simplest, because simple explanation is almost always the best.

I don't write code using bubble sort

BUT if you can truly tell me that you believe God holds no grudges against other religions and that people elsewhere in the world who have no realistic shot of being christian have an equal chance of being looked upon favorably in the afterlife, then I have no problems here.

I thought I already explained this before.

morality and religion have very little in common not from a historical point of view (don't make me laugh) nor from an origins point of view. Atheists are no less moral than religious people.

You are a free thinker. If what makes you moral is what
your parents say and your genes; what's
stopping you from taking advantage of personal gain. I don't
see any reason not to. I mean most people try everything there
parents don't want them to anyways. And for genes, I don't
want to be a slave to them anyways. Mutual repect doesn't
seem much of problem anyways since everyone's life
is meaningless.

We should close this thread. But I think it would be unfair
to close it without letting anyone else respond

The bible is not oblivious to the theory of evolution

We are arguing evolution vs creationism, not evolution vs the bible. I have no problems with people who say evolution is gods way of things -- I don't personally believe it, but thats my belief.

I don't write code using bubble sort

Occam's Razor isn't a theory that says if you have two choices, choose the easier one. Instead it means if you have two explanations for why something happened, and everything else being equal, chances are the simpler explanation is the correct one.

I thought I already explained this before

No, you said people who follow Jesus message would be saved, and this included admitting that he was the mesiah. So in other words you believe that Buddhists among other religions will not be saved and instead will go to hell. And I'm stating how unfair this is considering what small chance they have of actually finding out about christianity.

We are arguing evolution vs creationism, not evolution vs the bible

Nether theory is complete. We've seen that god does not
create with some magical wand. It seems like you are
using evidence of evolution to in someway support there not being a god.

No, you said people who follow Jesus message would be saved, and this included admitting that he was the mesiah. So in other words you believe that Buddhists among other religions will not be saved and instead will go to hell.

You tell me what I believe now (: I said
that when you believe in Jesus, you believe among
other things that jesus is the mesiah.
Just knowing some tidbit fact that jesus is the mesiah
is not going to save you. For example,
in the bible we hear how devels know Jesus is the mesiah.

Buddhists among other religions will not be saved and instead will go to hell.

I certainly don't think they will all go to hell but I don't pass judgement.

Occam's Razor isn't a theory that says if you have two choices, choose the easier one.

It was a joke. In any case bubble sort is simple.

The bible is completely and utterly oblivious to the theory of evolution, there is no mention of it nor its principles

Nearly oblivious not utterly oblivious, in several places god says like father like son. It's like you want the whole human
genome in bible or something.

pray did the church go balastic when Origin of Species was published hmmmm?

Because they made a mistake of viewing god as someone
who creates with a magical wand.

"Mutual repect doesn't
seem much of problem anyways since everyone's life
is meaningless."

If you believe that the only principle of your existance
is evolution. Your only here to die and so is everyone else.

The very things you have just mentioned, genes and conditioned responses.

I'm not a robot, your not a robot and god didn't create us
to be robots.

Like mass murder? =)

Point I'm trying to make is that it's heresay.

While I don't personally believe in god, we aren't arguing whether or not god exists. We were arguing whether or not evolution is only theory and which has equal proof as creationism. I believe that there is very little evidence to show that evolution is NOT true. If somebody argues that evolution is all gods plan, I won't argue since I feel people are free to believe what they want to believe and theres certainly no way I could prove that there ISN'T some supreme being hovering over all.

And I do agree that someone just saying that Jesus is messiah will do no good. You said that a person had to follow Jesus' message, a message which you state includes believing Jesus to be your messiah. This implies to me that if you don't believe he is the messiah, you aren't following his message, thus can't get to heaven. This is what I meant by my statement.

If you believe that the only principle of your existance
is evolution. Your only here to die and so is everyone else.

Life without afterlife is NOT meaningless. Is an animals life meaningless because they don't have an afterlife? Is it meaningless for me to program for fun when the programs I make now will be gone in five years time? The meaning of our existence is to enjoy the fact that we exist and to bring others into this existence to share this phenomenon. I'm not saying my view point is the true meaning of life, but I certainly wouldn't say that other peoples beliefs make their lives meaningless.

>>The very things you have just mentioned, genes and conditioned responses<<

I'm not a robot, your not a robot and god didn't create us
to be robots

Sorry, had to point out one more thing. You seem to be contradicting yourself here - you think god implanted morals in us that help us decide what is right and wrong, and we are free beings. But if instead its genes and conditioned responses, we suddenly become robots. Both cases theres something within us deciding whats right and wrong so don't both make us robots with your reasoning?

Sorry, had to point out one more thing. You seem to be contradicting yourself here - you think god implanted morals in us that help us decide what is right and wrong, and we are free beings. But if instead its genes and conditioned responses, we suddenly become robots. Both cases theres something within us deciding whats right and wrong so don't both make us robots with your reasoning?

We believe god orginally gave us freewill. But then
adam disobeyed god and ate the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil. We don't absoultly have to do all that is good.