Creationism Vs Evolution

[MrWinchell]

Very well said Tony. Its good to see I am not the only person who feels this way about religion.

[MrWinchell]

I myself believe that everything exists for “nothing” can not exist. Thus everything came from nothing at all. Of course this is very hard for some people to comprehend. How could something come from nothing? There must be a creator who designed everything right? And so the majority of people agree that there must be a designer. So then I ask these people what designed the designer. The most common answer I receive is: God has always been and always will be. And there it is, Blind faith to provide a comforting answer to the unanswered questions. The contradiction in this belief is the person is still accepting that something can come from nothing at all (GOD) while refusing to accept that the universe and life could not have come from nothing. If everything in the universe is to complex to not have a designer how could the designer exist without a creator? After all, the designer would be far more complex than it own design. In the end whether you have faith in a creator or believe in nothing you are still accepting that something can come from nothing.

[Doug]

Okay, my internet has been out otherwise I would have responded further.   I observe that this discussion is getting very philosophical.  We are moving more from the realm of science to philosophical speculation.   I really was hoping that someone would have also noticed there is some interesting diet stuff on the website I linked.  Namely, that Neanderthals were hunting porpoise and dolphins. Mahi Mahi anyone? The article contrasts this with the fact modern man was hunting more ambitiously - to be specific, Rhinoceroses.   It took more skill to kill such a large animal.  The article then goes on to state Neanderthal man has died out and there is no evidence they were related to modern man.  One can accept this information regardless of whether you are a creationist or an evolutionist.  The interesting question is what is the implication of such a finding. 

Additionally, the site I linked to was dismissed simply because those who sponsor the site are professing Christians. 

This really is unjustified.  The authors of the article have advanced science degrees and therefore have a credible background to discuss the subject matter at issue.  The idea that all religion is the same is simply hogwash. 
To claim societies ills are to blame on religion per say is false.  The golden rule, love your neighbor as yourself " is not the cause of unjustified killing. 

[Tony Bondioli]

We are moving more from the realm of science to philosophical speculation... Additionally, the site I linked to was dismissed simply because those who sponsor the site are professing Christians... This really is unjustified.  The authors of the article have advanced science degrees and therefore have a credible background to discuss the subject matter at issue.

The authors of the website you addressed moved from the realm of science to the realm of superstitious (not "philosophical") speculation when they incorporated religious mythology into their pseudo-scientific "research."  I repeat, in their own words:

"We believe the Bible (the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments) is the Word of God, written. As a "God-breathed" revelation, it is thus verbally inspired and completely without error (historically, scientifically, morally, and spiritually) in its original writings."

As for their advanced science degrees, I can only say that the world is full of otherwise rational, intelligent people who have been indocrinated with superstitious lore from the moment of birth, and have proven unable to escape its brainwashing.  This tends to result in their desperately inventing evidence to support their scientifically unfounded beliefs.

[Darthash]

We are moving more from the realm of science to philosophical speculation... Additionally, the site I linked to was dismissed simply because those who sponsor the site are professing Christians... This really is unjustified.  The authors of the article have advanced science degrees and therefore have a credible background to discuss the subject matter at issue.

The authors of the website you addressed moved from the realm of science to the realm of superstitious (not "philosophical") speculation when they incorporated religious mythology into their pseudo-scientific "research."  I repeat, in their own words:

"We believe the Bible (the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments) is the Word of God, written. As a "God-breathed" revelation, it is thus verbally inspired and completely without error (historically, scientifically, morally, and spiritually) in its original writings."

As for their advanced science degrees, I can only say that the world is full of otherwise rational, intelligent people who have been indocrinated with superstitious lore from the moment of birth, and have proven unable to escape its brainwashing.  This tends to result in their desperately inventing evidence to support their scientifically unfounded beliefs.

Mate, you have put down in words that i could not, but i don't say god does not exsist, more that i do not know if he does, or if there are more intelligent being out in the universe who are looking over us. who really knows, though evolution we do know, and i thought i read somewhere ages ago the Neanderthals didn't actually die out fully but cross bread with out species, though i don't know if there was any scitenfic evidence behind the theory.

Ash

[MrWinchell]

Very well said Tony.

The fact that these men have degrees does not mean they are not being influenced by there faith.  It encourages them to search for science that supports there faith not science that supports the truth.

The truth requires an open mind looking for an answer. Not a mind made up looking to prove the answer it has accepted is the truth.

A religious scientist trying to find the truth is a conflict of interest.

 

[SidheDraoi]

I'm taking off the gloves and stepping into this battle bare fisted...

I am not religious, though my SN is religious/spiritual and I have several tattoos of religious implications. REASON for this though is that I am fasinated with polytheist cultures. I study their literature and even take time to reflect upon their ideas and how they may have percieved their world.

The way I see it Gods are created by the human mind in order to give some logical explianation as to why things are the way they are. Myths/Folklore is also for the same reason.  Every myth has its reason for being told, the Little mermaid originated as a way to describe how Sea Foam was created (the death of mermaids). and the Black Forest in Germany was feard by many because of the stories that originated about it. They are a means of control, and for good reason. They instilled fear in the people and kept them from rebelling against their lords and also to offer some false sense of security, such as garlic repelling vampires ( Do NOT get me started on twilight...  UGH!)

I don't condone worship of anything, I feel that in doing so you are saying that you surrender yourself to something and that to me is a sign of lack of self esteem. Rather if you are a Godly type person or believe in a parthenon of gods then your focus should be on working WITH them rather than them being the ruler over your life. You are in control of your fate, no one else can make your decisions for you (isnt that what our parents teach us?) why then would our parents turn around and not heed their own advice? why are their so many exceptions for this absent father figure (God).

I believe in Gods in a Literature sort of way. They are Archetypes to give people an idea of the aspects of Earth, to explain the origins of certian things that ancient humans could not explain. It had its place in time, but now its really not necessary. We have science to guide us.

my SN "Sidhe Draoi" is gaelic for "Druid of the Earth Spirits"   I connect with the Druids because they incorporated their faith with science, much like the aztecs did. They as a people have made some incredible scientific breakthroughs and instead of labeling it as "blasphemous" they accepted their findings. They never let their faith blind them from their scientific findings... that to me is worthy of respect.

just my 2 cents... I hate debates on religion and such... people never seem to find common ground.

[MrWinchell]

I would say that the druids faith was a little more open ended than that of the Old and new Testament. Allowing them the room to grow with there discovery's. But when faith is based on a book that has explained the past, present and future science becomes the enemy of that faith. In the past religious groups would just destroy information that contradicted the faith but in today's world information is much harder to control. With no way of controlling this information and no room to grow the only option left is reinterpretation. You can only reinterpret something so many times before it becomes obvious that there was no credible information to begin with. (IE: The word day)

[Doug]

The difficulty with this position is that many are coming in with pre-suppositions which color their world view. rl
The Judeo Christian world view has influenced western culture in ways most people do not even conceive.  The idea that the world and the universe has order comes from that tradition.  But beyond that there seems to be a general belief that somehow science and faith are opposed to one another.  I have never subscribed to such a theory. 
Let me give you some examples of how faith and science are not in conflict.

1. The big bang is consistent with the idea of creation.
2. There is historical evidence for Biblical accounts in the Bible.
3. The authors of the New Testament gospels were eye witnesses to the events they described.
4. Scientific advances though the centuries have come through men of faith through he centuries.

[Tony Bondioli]

1. The Big Bang Theory does not support the story of creation as told in the book of Genesis, nor is there any scientific evidence for the existence of an original man named Adam who was made from dirt, a woman named Eve who was made from his rib, or a talking snake who tricked them into leaving paradise.  Sorry if this sounds condescending, but I can't help but poke a little fun at people who really believe this stuff.
2. There is some historical evidence for some of the particular events mentioned in the bible.  This is neither surprising, nor unique to Christianity.  There is also historical evidence for events mentioned in the Koran, the Torah, the Bhagavad Gita, Homer's "The Iliad" and "The Odessey," Beowulf, etc.  Many of the great mythologies are based on a grain of truth; the one you subscribe to is no exception.  There are far more historical falsehoods in these writings, however, than truths... just like in the Christian bible.
3. The facts concerning the true authorship of the New Testament are not known, although there is a great deal of evidence indicating that its books were written up to a few hundred years after the crucifixion (and therefore, obviously, not by eyewitnesses).  Following its original composition, the bible has been repeatedly edited, added to, and subtracted from by a great many people in positions of power and influence, to suit their own agendas.
4. Yes, religious men have made important scientific discoveries, though this has largely been despite their religious beliefs, rather than because of them.

I'm stepping out of this conversation now, as it is clearly becoming circular.  As I stated previously, I have my own understanding of and relationship with "divinity," and am quite comfortable accepting the word of science over the word of humans who have claimed to speak in limited (and limiting) terms, on divinity's behalf.

[SidheDraoi]

I would say that the druids faith was a little more open ended than that of the Old and new Testament. Allowing them the room to grow with there discovery's. But when faith is based on a book that has explained the past, present and future science becomes the enemy of that faith. In the past religious groups would just destroy information that contradicted the faith but in today's world information is much harder to control. With no way of controlling this information and no room to grow the only option left is reinterpretation. You can only reinterpret something so many times before it becomes obvious that there was no credible information to begin with. (IE: The word day)

Agreed.

I remember in Middle School we had a conversation about religion in my English class, when the teacher asked my thoughts I said roughly the same thing and I ended up being sent to the principals office and had all the heavy duty "believers" slamming bibles infront of my every chance they got... Thier favorite time to do it was at lunch where they'd throw my lunch off the table and slam their "all knowing book" infront of me and called me a satanist.... now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists? the ignorance in some of these people is astounding!

[MrWinchell]

Their favorite time to do it was at lunch where they'd throw my lunch off the table and slam their "all knowing book" in front of me and called me a satanist.... now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists? the ignorance in some of these people is astounding!

LOL! You may be surprised to find that you may be more Satanic than you think.   

Check out this link and let me know what you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism

I read Anton Lavey's Satanic Bible in highschool and it has had a lasting effect.

[Doug]

People can tell the truth in a very offensive way sometimes.  The presentation sometimes does get in the way.  I don't know how many times I have heard a lecture from some human resource person about stealing from the company and how it will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  I had not done anything and I feel as if I was being accused of a crime.  That didn't change the fact stealing is wrong.  I knew it was wrong before I heard their lecture.  I had no intention of stealing,  but I felt like I was a suspect in a crime that had not yet happened. 

People here come with many presuppositions.   It is very difficult to unravel those presuppositions and have genuine dialogue.  Let me just say there is a a big jump from a creator to the Christian God as creator.  If you look at the lawsuits in this country about teaching creation the courts have struck down this distinction.   I think the reason for this is that there are really no independent groups who promote creation that are not tied to a religious group.  But the distinction is a valid one and an important one.   If an idea is only argued from the basis of a scientific basis and not a religious one then the discussion has a level playing field.  I  recognize mine is a minority position.  But truth is not established by popular vote.  I believe what I believe because the evidence presented has not persuaded me that evolution adequately explains our origins.

[SidheDraoi]

Their favorite time to do it was at lunch where they'd throw my lunch off the table and slam their "all knowing book" in front of me and called me a satanist.... now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists? the ignorance in some of these people is astounding!

LOL! You may be surprised to find that you may be more Satanic than you think.   

Check out this link and let me know what you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism

I read Anton Lavey's Satanic Bible in highschool and it has had a lasting effect.

HAHAHA I cant stop laughing at that guys "evil" face as he's holding a Boa... As if owning a snake makes you so bad-ass... I have 16... does that me more badasser than him? hahaha woo.. ok theres my laugh for the day.. That kind of thing is funny to me, snakes arent evil.. if anyone wishes to combat me on this, come visit my collection... they are sweethearts!

I do remember reading about this when I was in highschool, how satanists dont exactly "worship" satan and that they are egoists... I love Ayn Rand, I have read all of her books... she is extremely inspirational, but her views on individualism doesnt make her a satanist, just as it doesnt make me one. We may have similar ideals... I do have a "blood can only be paid for in blood" type of morality, yet I have never exercised that ideal. Its just an ideal, and I know that with certian ideals (just as with socialism and communism) it sounds good on paper but in effect it causes nothing but bitterness and violence.

furthermore... it is my strong belief that   Theres your side, theres my side and then theres the truth  no one knows what the truth is because just as Blue Oyster Cult said "No mortal was made to know such wonder".  Somethings are better left alone, to me thats what our origin story is... its like a shark, just leave it alone and it wont come around later and bite you in the butt.

so I guess I am a little apathetic about this discussion.. 

[SidheDraoi]

or maybe its because every other forum I am apart o is having this same discussion and I'm tired of reading the same arguments and no one having any credible information.

hahah yea, I think thats it... I just need to hear fresh material!! 

[SidheDraoi]

Their favorite time to do it was at lunch where they'd throw my lunch off the table and slam their "all knowing book" in front of me and called me a satanist.... now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists? the ignorance in some of these people is astounding!

LOL! You may be surprised to find that you may be more Satanic than you think.   

Check out this link and let me know what you think.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaVeyan_Satanism

I read Anton Lavey's Satanic Bible in highschool and it has had a lasting effect.

This is my favorite satanic "law" of the earth... This is entertaining me far too much..

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask them to stop. If they do not stop, destroy them.

I like the word useage... "destroy" hahaha why do I find humor in such morbid things? ah well, to each their own i suppose...

[MrWinchell]

If I had to compare or label Laveyen Satanism I would say it is Humanism not Egoism.  

As far as the picture with the snake goes I do not think he is using the the snake to make him look bad ass. I think it is being used as a symbol of the devil. The snake in the garden of Eden.
You not being Christian found the photo comical as did I when I first saw it but allot of people did not see the photo the same way. I myself grew to love the photo for being so silly yet effective in creating fear and controversy in weak minded people.

Anyway.... I was just replying to your comment.

now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists?

I am not suggesting anybody become a Laveyen Satanist. I am actually opposed to the idea of organized religion in all forms. A person is smart but people are stupid.

[SidheDraoi]

If I had to compare or label Laveyen Satanism I would say it is Humanism not Egoism.  

As far as the picture with the snake goes I do not think he is using the the snake to make him look bad ass. I think it is being used as a symbol of the devil. The snake in the garden of Eden.
You not being Christian found the photo comical as did I when I first saw it but allot of people did not see the photo the same way. I myself grew to love the photo for being so silly yet effective in creating fear and controversy in weak minded people.

Anyway.... I was just replying to your comment.

now tell me, how can you be a satanist if you do not believe that such an entity exists?

I am not suggesting anybody become a Laveyen Satanist. I am actually opposed to the idea of organized religion in all forms. A person is smart but people are stupid.

exactly, reading through the "laws" of satanism I found that many of them were similar to my beliefs, but this does not make me satanist in the least... perhaps that was a kind of ploy to get people to join the religion... some people are weak minded enough to do so.

I too don't like organized religion, I feel that it a means of control and that people lose sense of their independence when they adhere to  strict religious law.

[MrWinchell]

I admire the outright rebellious nature of the religion. There needed to be an opposing voice to Christianity and Lavey offered one and even though I do not claim it as my religion I respect its message of individuality and defiance.

Of course one might argue it is not a religion by definition.

(n) religion, faith, religious belief (a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny) "he lost his faith but not his morality"

[SidheDraoi]

I admire the outright rebellious nature of the religion. There needed to be an opposing voice to Christianity and Lavey offered one and even though I do not claim it as my religion I respect its message of individuality and defiance.

Of course one might argue it is not a religion by definition.

(n) religion, faith, religious belief (a strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny) "he lost his faith but not his morality"

I will have to sit back and reflect on your words... It deserves a moment for thought.

[Rob-The-Spartan]

I believe God creating man and man (homo-erectus) evolved into modern man. I do believe in God and am full of faith and spirituality but i feel religion has no pace in this world. Everyone has the right to have their own beliefs and do what they feel is right for them but by "belonging" to a specific religion, you are only branding yourself and essesntially painting a target on your face; not to mention that you are adopting the ideals of the person/s who created that religion and not necesarely of a higher power or your own.

[MrWinchell]

One could argue that the ideals one may claim are there own are in fact the ideals of there parents and the society they were raised in if by nothing more than the power of fear and suggestion. I am not saying all of ones ideals stem from these roots but they influence one at such a young age that it is almost impossible to deny they have deeply effected there current ideology. I wonder how many people would believe in God if they had been given a solid scientific education but were separated from any concept of God throughout there childhood.

[Doug]

I am curious what people mean when they say, "a good scientific education", in contrast to a religious one.  I fail to see the value of science from a moral point of view.  Science may used for either good or evil purposes.  I have always been intrigued by the Manhattan Project, where perhaps the greatest assembly of human minds developed the atomic bomb.
Oppenheimer when finished with the project quoted the Bhagavad-Gita, saying, "I am become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds." 

[Rob-The-Spartan]

On the contrary, i wasn't brought up in a religious household. And perhaps that's the reason why i am anti-religion. It's strange but some of the most dishonest people i know claim to be religious and have grown up in religious (mostly Christian) households. I feel that faith is something everybody has to discover for themseves and not be force-fed when they are young. Your child may not believe in Christ but if you constantly scare them with the consequences of not believing in Christ, they will trick themselves into believing in Christ. Ultimately, religion and faith are choices. At the same time, it isthe responsibility of the parents to bring their children on trips and fill their lives with all kinds of experiences so that they can make a logical choice when they're older and not just believe blindly in something for some silly reason (usually fear of going to hell). I honestly Do believe in God but i dont deny science and i don't understand why one can't co-exist with the other. Albert Einstein was an avid in that both science and religion actually need each other. I can't recall the exact quote but it was something like this: Without science, religion is blind and without religion, science is lame.... that may have been it actually. To deny science is to deny a crucial part of the world. Science is nothing more than man's discoveries of the universe.

[MrWinchell]

You are assuming that there is good and evil. I do not believe in good or evil only right and wrong. Religion just like science has been used  to commit terrible acts and both are always claimed to be in the name of whats right or so called good by the person  or people committing the act. Religion is not needed to instill morals nor is science needed for humans to commit heinous acts. Both of these things are human nature. I fail to see the value of religion from any point of view as history has proven religion does not instill morals. There are plenty of religious criminals and plenty of Atheistic good men.

Here is a quick question - How many men have gone to battle and killed innocent people in the name of God? How many men have gone into battle and killed in the name of science?

I think using the Atomic Bomb to support the "evil" of science is a very thin argument. I could just as easily use the Atomic bomb to argue the religious beliefs of the man who ordered the bomb be dropped did not provide enough moral ideals to prevent him from ordering the strike. The man responsible for the order to drop the bomb was a christian man named Harry S Truman. I will use his own address in Spokane Washington as evidence to support my argument.

"Men can build a good society, if they follow the will of the Lord.
Our great Nation was founded on this faith.
Our Constitution, and all our finest traditions, rest on a moral basis."

And yet his faith did not provide the moral guidance needed to prevent him from dropping an Atomic Bomb on innocent civilians. (Women and Children) This one act killing over 140,000 people in Hiroshima alone.