Evolution vs.Creation End of discussion

Seeing as how my comment has been completely ignored by everyone around here, I'll try again:

I have yet to meet a Western evolutionist who has any appreciation whatsoever for the Eastern esoteric traditions; which do not in any way assert the existence of any God; but focus, instead, upon the issue of reality vs. illusion or maya. In other words, the evolutionists are being disingenuous when they insist that what they are complaining about is the purported existence of a God. Rather, what they are really concerned about is any assertion that the consciousness of the 'thinker', based upon sensations and perceptions of an external world, is not the sole repository of Absolute Truth (and, of course, the religionists assert precisely the same thing from their perspective); something which both Eastern and Western esotericists, not religionists, refer to as "drunkards" or as being "asleep" with regards to reality.

It seems one of the primary concerns of Western religionists and scientists-evolutionists is to convince everyone how much better they are than their opposites. It almost seems as though they thrive on this kind of conflict. At least they make a lot of money selling their books detailing their particular side of the conflict.

But, from an Eastern perspective, such conflicts are looked upon as more or less silly rather than serious; focusing exclusively on the most trivial, ephemeral and illusory aspects of reality.

And crucial to this understanding is, of course, the experience of a consciousness which is capable of remembering experiences of previous lives and deaths, in which the experiences and thoughts of any one life are understood as not being nearly as important as they are generally assumed to be...

Inasmuch as a person's nationality, religion, race, and sex may very well change completely in one's next life; and may very well be, in this life, completely different than it was in their previous life or lives.

Michael

Originally posted by randyvs
There is a wide range of evidence that science can't begin to grasp. What is one persons evidence may be anothers lunacy.

Evidence isn't solid state in every form. I have my own evidence of God that others may think is silly.Science has it's empirical evidence. What about other evidences. Do people have visions?

Then science will say it's something todo with a chemical imbalance in your brain. Maybe a hallucination caused by exhaustion. What ever the reason, science can explain it and show results. Essentially what you're implying when you say 'other evidence' and ' I have my own evidence of God' - is science can say this and that but a persons personal account is just as evidential as the last one-hundred years of collective scientific understanding of how the universe works.

Got a bit of an ego there i think

Evolution is a theory right? Creation is a fact! God said, I believe, that settles it! The Bible is enough proof for me to believe in a God. Which he is Jesus.

Fact, Not theory...

2 things Involved...

a. That which is being experienced.... i.e. the Species and its Environment it interacts with Physically.

and....
b. That which is experiencing these 2.... i.e. Awareness.

reply to post by Michael Cecil

Got a bit of an ego there i think

Then I wouldn't call that thinking. As that would depend completely on the evidence you wouldn't have a clue about. I know very well how science attempts to explain everything. Explaining the mechanics of Gods universe.
Dosn't make science God. Although Some egotistical people would hope so.


Micheal
Not real familiar with eastern evolutionists. So I can't really retort. I will ask you if you think easterners are more receptive to the concept of duality? Are they more or less likely to believe in a creator?
I do apologise for ignoring you partner. I offer no excuse for my bad. Only this acknowledgement in it's stead.


[

Originally posted by ImAnAlienOnMyOwnPlanet
Evolution is a theory right?

Not really. There is so much data on evolution that it is considered a fact. It is just called that, due to scientific ethics.