Evolution Vs. God

Can you please tell your God, to create another planet, for us atheists to live in? If He is all loving and stuff, he must understand the frustration and harassment we get everyday from His followers.

reply to post by tachyonmind

well.. no.. Hell is taught correctly, it just is not understood by the students..

Nope study a bit of Greek and Hebrew as to what those word pertain to, and you will learn something.
You might even discover the ultimate price for sin is not living forever in Hell, but non-existence.
Satan told the first lie that humans would have an immortal soul and that myth has been promoted by him ever since. I believe God when he says we will die and we go back the ground, and he wasn't just talking about our physical bodies. It's only since Jesus came along that anybody can even get a resurrection back to life.

Read John 5: 28&29
Those aren't people coming back from Heaven and Hell, those are people that are long dead, as in non-existent, the difference being God has a copy of them in his infinite memory and he can recreate them as they were minus major flaws.

Anyways back on topic...the point about kinds not changing to other kinds is well made.
It's interesting that most people that believe in evolution believe it on the faith of people they perceive as smarter than them. That Albert Einstein quote is awesome, but the other points from the touted atheistic flagship poster of famous people was interesting, now that is a prime example of a straw man maybe even in reverse.

And how did things end for the only real atheist on there ?

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

well.. no.. Hell is taught correctly, it just is not understood by the students..

Nope study a bit of Greek and Hebrew as to what those word pertain to, and you will learn something.
You might even discover the ultimate price for sin is not living forever in Hell, but non-existence.
Satan told the first lie that humans would have an immortal soul and that myth has been promoted by him ever since. I believe God when he says we will die and we go back the ground, and he wasn't just talking about our physical bodies. It's only since Jesus came along that anybody can even get a resurrection back to life.

Read John 5: 28&29
Those aren't people coming back from Heaven and Hell, those are people that are long dead, as in non-existent, the difference being God has a copy of them in his infinite memory and he can recreate them as they were minus major flaws.

Anyways back on topic...the point about kinds not changing to other kinds is well made.
It's interesting that most people that believe in evolution believe it on the faith of people they perceive as smarter than them. That Albert Einstein quote is awesome, but the other points from the touted atheistic flagship poster of famous people was interesting, now that is a prime example of a straw man maybe even in reverse.

And how did things end for the only real atheist on there ?

Its not well made at all as you clearly don't understand it.

And its got nothing to do with faith. I don't blindly believe what i'm told, the literature is out there to be studied and tested.

heres the thing about "evolution vs. god" or whatever.

science and evolution doesnt deny that a god could exist. it simply doesnt care. evolution doesnt attack any religion, or say that any religion is wrong. it just takes all the facts and compiles them into a theory. an atheist uses the theory to say their is no god. a believer says that god set up the natural laws to allow evolution to take place.

its the christians that attack evolution.

which is easier to believe? all the creatures and plants just popped into existence out of nowhere, or that life started (as yet unknown how) and built up and changed over millions of years?

the doc asked for observable evidence, as in right now this instance. i want the same of your god. i have yet to see anything proving your god even exists, much less effects the world.

the doc asks for an observable "change in kind", which shows a profound lack of understanding of evolution. they want to see a dog turn into a cat, which isnt how it works. i want to see a new animal pop into existence out of thin air.

lets look at the fish to land reptile. a certain fish in a certain area developed protolungs. when that happened it changed species. this species started to spend more time on land and developed better lungs, becoming another species. there could be quite a number of species between the lungfish and the reptile it becomes, over millions of years. btw, the lungfish, that eventually became the reptile, still exists today.

the christian religion says that rainbows didnt exist until after the flood, as a sign that god wouldnt flood the world again. does that mean that there was no water in the air until after the flood? did god design a whole new system of physics to allow light to be broken into its wavelengths to make the rainbow? did the water cycle not exist before the flood, which means no rain, ever? why do christians not attack the science of the rainbow, since it is supposed to be nothing but a promise of god, yet now we can make them with a water hose.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by tachyonmind

 

well.. no.. Hell is taught correctly, it just is not understood by the students..

Nope study a bit of Greek and Hebrew as to what those word pertain to, and you will learn something.
You might even discover the ultimate price for sin is not living forever in Hell, but non-existence.

there is no such thing as "non-existence".. it is non-existent..

Satan told the first lie that humans would have an immortal soul and that myth has been promoted by him ever since. I believe God when he says we will die and we go back the ground, and he wasn't just talking about our physical bodies. It's only since Jesus came along that anybody can even get a resurrection back to life.

satan is a creative metaphor for man's inherent self-destructive instinct, born out of his curiosity and fear.

Read John 5: 28&29
Those aren't people coming back from Heaven and Hell, those are people that are long dead, as in non-existent, the difference being God has a copy of them in his infinite memory and he can recreate them as they were minus major flaws.

well if you are going to take every word of the bible literally then these kinds of misconceptions are inevitable..

Anyways back on topic...the point about kinds not changing to other kinds is well made.

ummmm.... what's a bipolar person? or a blind person? or a left or right handed person, if not a point about a kind of thing becoming other kinds of thing?

It's interesting that most people that believe in evolution believe it on the faith of people they perceive as smarter than them.

no, they believe on the scientific proof which has been hammered out methodically and precisely for decades.. the people who study it are not smarter than those who don't, just more informed about the subject..

if the bible is correct about creationism, then the following must also be true.

bats are birds.
insects have 4 legs.
rabbits chew their cud (like a cow)

now we know all these things are false, so if this is wrong, then what else is wrong?

I would like to talk to the creator of this video in person. He is so wrong on many occasions.
This reminds me of - 100 Reasons Why Evolution Is STUPID!

Originally posted by Dr1Akula
Can you please tell your God, to create another planet, for us atheists to live in? If He is all loving and stuff, he must understand the frustration and harassment we get everyday from His followers.

edit on 2-9-2013 by Dr1Akula because: (no reason given)

i told him, He said He's beached as right now bro.. xD

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by stormson


To say that science does not attack religion is sort of naive. Just read the responses on this thread and imagine these evolutionist believing members are teachers. There are plenty of accounts where peoples belief systems are openly ridiculed in their educational environment by those they are told to respect.

It's not that science is attacking anything, but rather those who believe certain things and teach science love to drive a wedge in the minds of those who do have faith. It's really quite evident from the video in the OP that this is so. Imagine how a teacher would really react if a student presented some of the things that the ID crowd points out. Of course that won't happen because the teachers are pretty much all supporting the evolution theory, and don't allow a whole lot of questioning of what they are teaching.

To say that science does not attack religion is sort of naive..

irony alert! science is science. religion is religion. they do not attack each other. they are not weapons. people use them as weapons against each other and the things they don't understand. this is bad. it is not their intended purpose..

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by stormson

 

To say that science does not attack religion is sort of naive. Just read the responses on this thread and imagine these evolutionist believing members are teachers. There are plenty of accounts where peoples belief systems are openly ridiculed in their educational environment by those they are told to respect.

It's not that science is attacking anything, but rather those who believe certain things and teach science love to drive a wedge in the minds of those who do have faith. It's really quite evident from the video in the OP that this is so. Imagine how a teacher would really react if a student presented some of the things that the ID crowd points out. Of course that won't happen because the teachers are pretty much all supporting the evolution theory, and don't allow a whole lot of questioning of what they are teaching.

Now we get to the heart of the issue. First off, Science class is to teach science, not theology. Evolution is science, creationism is theology.

Science does not attempt to drive a wedge into faith. That perception comes strictly from those who feel their faith is compromised by science. Those people define themselves by their faith, meaning if they feel it is compromised, they are compromised. That is the underlying theme with most social issues that enter American Politics.

As for the student, look at how this debate plays out every time on this board. The same ID points are brought up time and again. They are refuted the same way every time. The creationism crowd takes those points and twists them into science being the same as religion. Now can counter science on a theology level to prove science and creationism are equal. Which is false science =/= theology.

In the education system, your average middle school/high school science teacher is not going to be equipped to handle the evolution questions. They are not scientists, they should not be expected to know everything about everything going on in science; however, that doesn't make what they teach wrong or incorrect. They teach what is the scientific consensus at the time.

To reiterate, science =/= theology so ID has no place in the class in the first place. Doesn't mean the student shouldn't be able to ask the question, it just needs to be addressed as it is, theology vs science.

Now on the flip side, we are raised that belief and faith are not wrong, or to be more specific, the beliefs and faiths we are raised with are not wrong; therefore, it does not matter what the teacher tells the student, they will never be satisfied. Just look at the creationism vs evolution threads on here.

reply to post by Cypress


If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion. Evolution that takes millions of years to happen, that cannot provide the proof needed to show slow incremental change over those millions of years is a belief system and thus a religion.

Call it whatever you want, but it is most definitely a competing belief system and it's being taught by smug intellectually dishonest people who often have an axe to grind against mommy and daddy for sending them to church.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Cypress

 

If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion. Evolution that takes millions of years to happen, that cannot provide the proof needed to show slow incremental change over those millions of years is a belief system and thus a religion.

Call it whatever you want, but it is most definitely a competing belief system and it's being taught by smug intellectually dishonest people who often have an axe to grind against mommy and daddy for sending them to church.

Absolute drivel! There is no supernatural aspect to science and findings are peer reviewed, published and open to be tested....thus not a religion.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Cypress

 

If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion...

Call it whatever you want, but it is most definitely a competing belief system...

Oversimplification just to make it fit your opinion.

Here's a word of advice. It seems that no matter what argument anyone makes you are not going to change that opinion. It works the other way so, you've stated your opinion, made your arguments so now just let it go.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Cypress

 

If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion. Evolution that takes millions of years to happen, that cannot provide the proof needed to show slow incremental change over those millions of years is a belief system and thus a religion.

Call it whatever you want, but it is most definitely a competing belief system and it's being taught by smug intellectually dishonest people who often have an axe to grind against mommy and daddy for sending them to church.

so mountains rising due to tectonic shift is religion because we cant see it happen?

the formation of stars is religion because we cant see the actual star being born, yet we can see every single stage of that stars development thru deep space telescopes?

Originally posted by helldiver

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Cypress

 

If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion. Evolution that takes millions of years to happen, that cannot provide the proof needed to show slow incremental change over those millions of years is a belief system and thus a religion.

Call it whatever you want, but it is most definitely a competing belief system and it's being taught by smug intellectually dishonest people who often have an axe to grind against mommy and daddy for sending them to church.

Absolute drivel! There is no supernatural aspect to science and findings are peer reviewed, published and open to be tested....thus not a religion.

not only that, but debunked as well!

another thread brought up the hoaxes in evolution, yet overlooks the fact that every one of the hoaxes was brought to light by other scientists. thats how science works.

you may perpetrate a fraud for a bit, and you may even have a bunch of people believe it, yet another scientist will come along and blow your ship out the water, using evidence, and all the ones that believed you will feel a little silly but quickly correct themselves.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity



ive taken anatomy class in college, where they discuss evolution, and god was never mentioned until someone brought it up.

my teacher actually said at the start of the evolution section that no mention of a god was to be used. wanna try the "irreducible complexity" angle, since its based in science (pseudo as it is), go ahead, just be warned that its already been debunked. as have every i.d. argument.

science is science and theology is theology and never the two shall meet.

unless bats are birds, insects have 4 legs, and rabbits chew cud.

If there is a God / Universal Force / Ultimate Creator / Infinite Superior Energy then that being / energy / force also created / creates and leads evolution.

The argument the thread refers to, should more accurately be called:

'a notion of deity as compiled by various flawed humans' v's 'a notion of evolution as compiled by various flawed humans'.

Basically human opinion versus human opinion, there are flaws in written, organised religions just as there are errors in evolutionary theories.

Ironically, evolution, which is happening constantly, is providing proof, with revelation after revelation, that humanity doesn't know that much about a lot of the things it has tried selling to it's members as writ over thousands of years or tens of years, or however long it has taken for the truth to emerge.

Both religion and evolution were sold to people as 'truth', though they aren't the same, nor are they flip sides of a coin.

Religion = humanities attempt at a way of explaining the purpose of life. (obviously variable with each religion dependent on era, knowledge etc)

Evolution = humanities attempt at explaining how life came to be and evolved into it's current state and potential future state (obviously dependent on particular science beliefs, era, knowledge etc)

Neither are mutually exclusive. For example life has evolved since the creation of Genesis as per the Christian bible.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


I'm gonna ask a question that probably should have been asked at the beginning. You keep acting like evolution is antireligion. Yet evolution makes no claims about God, religion, or the origins of life. So why do you believe that belief in a deity can not coexist with evolution? There are plenty of religious scientists out there that support both. If I remember correctly even the Papacy supports evolution. So what part of your belief system makes evolution and God two mutually exclusive ideas?

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by Cypress

 

If you cannot observe something but believe it, then it is a religion.

But if you can observe it historically, test it, do the math, look at the data, compare it to alternatives, and it always comes out on top... We call that a fact, A.K.A scientific theory.