Utopia Temple
Main Forum Page Register an Account for Free! Calendar Frequently Asked Questions about this Board View New Posts Advanced Search Login
  Utopia Temple Forums > General Discussions > Respectable General Discussions > Religious Discussions

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Post New Thread Reply
Author Thread
Posts: 88/189
(28-Nov-2004 at 08:06)
Quote:
(Originally posted by Turbonyx)
Evolution says we are the result of the greates series of lucky breaks ever. Every step in evolution is a extremely unlikely chance that actually happened. The bang happened just right to send out chunks of matter in a way that they could react with each other and grow. Then at a certain point, that matter was able to form a planet, in just the right orbit around just the right star. Somehow, on that planet, just the right three elements were present in just the right amounts at just the right time during a discharge of just the right amount of electricity to form amino acids. Those acids of course were created in just the right conditions that they survived long enough to somehow merge together and form the first cell. It goes on and on for millions of year. Always beating the odds, naturally.
Well, if you put it that way, no wonder you have trouble believing it.
Okay, what you said were indeed how the original theories were worded. But we've revised those and now have far better explanations that we can actually prove. Try reading through some more recent works than Darwin...

-------------------------
To do aught good never will be our task, but ever to do ill our sole delight, as being the contrary to his high will whom we resist. If then his Providence out of our evil seek to bring forth good, our labor must be to pervert that end, and out of good still find means of evil.
#21  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Headless cook Add Headless cook to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as Illuminate)
(User is Banned)
Posts: 47/89
(28-Nov-2004 at 08:10)


Quote:
(Originally posted by jond)

the fact that chimps DON'T attend church is another one of the innumeral things that convince me that mankind's religious practises are seriously misguided.

Why would 'God' create this ENTIRE universe, which for all we know is infinite, for a bunch of comparably insignificant specks on one planet? Did he not create the earth for the other animals too? and if he did, why does he not insist that THEY plonk their butts on church pews on Sundays?

And Turbonyx, the fossil record shows that other animals were around a HELL of a long time before we were. Whether you have complete faith in carbon dating or not, you can tell their fossils have been around a lot longer than the human remains by how deep they were buried, what they were buried in, how much they have weathered and what other fossils are found in the same area. And carbon dating may not be accurate to the year, but at least it gives us an idea of the proportions of time involved. And why didnt god create all the animals at the same time? There certainly werent any mammals around at the time of creation. They wouldnt have survived back then.. the world hasnt always been such a comfy cushie place to live, what with the complete lack of oxygen at some points, extreme temperatures etc. Therefore it is pretty much impossible that all creatures, including humans, were suddenly created in one, or even the full seven 24 hour days.

There is physical proof as well as a little thing called logic to support the evolution theory. What proof is there for the Genesis story of creation apart from taking the word of whoever it was that wrote it centuries years ago?

Unless God planted those fossils and other clues for evolution to confuse us..?
Very amusing. The matter within the big bang was arranged in such a way that it caused all that we know to exist to this present day, at least that's what science tells us. I would assume this was Gods doing. However it can only be assumed, as Turbonyx indicated, a Christian would need not pursue such knowlegde as he/she doesn't doubt the will of God. The Bible is His word and therefore, according to Christianity, is already covered within its pages. Possibly within Genesis.

In real and physical terms though, what's the problem? No one is ruling out anybody else.

"While we may believe our world - our reality to be that is - is but one manifestation of the essence. Other planes lie beyond the reach of normal sense and common roads. But they are no less real than what we see or touch or feel. Denied by the blind church 'cause these are not the words of God - the same God that burnt the knowing."
#22  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Convict Add Convict to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 241/699
(28-Nov-2004 at 08:42)


Quote:
(Originally posted by Illuminate)

Very amusing. The matter within the big bang was arranged in such a way that it caused all that we know to exist to this present day, at least that's what science tells us. I would assume this was Gods doing. However it can only be assumed, as Turbonyx indicated, a Christian would need not pursue such knowlegde as he/she doesn't doubt the will of God. The Bible is His word and therefore, according to Christianity, is already covered within its pages. Possibly within Genesis.

In real and physical terms though, what's the problem? No one is ruling out anybody else.
But who says Genesis has to be taken literally?? If people want to believe that God created the universe, fine.. I can see how some might believe that there has to be some higher power controlling everything. but I see no wisdom in believing unfalteringly in the LITERAL translation of the bible, which was written in a time when they often DID use metaphors to explain things to people who hadnt ever heard of science, over hard scientific evidence.
#23  
View Public Profile Find more posts by jond Add jond to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4141/8194
(28-Nov-2004 at 09:37)
Quote:
(Originally posted by Turbonyx)
Evolution says we are the result of the greates series of lucky breaks ever. Every step in evolution is a extremely unlikely chance that actually happened.
It may be unlikely at a given time and place, but given enough tries even unlikely events happen.
Quote:
The bang happened just right to send out chunks of matter in a way that they could react with each other and grow.
That Big Bang created a universe where life could flourish is something of a mystery, which some cosmologists suggest may be due to our universe just being one of an infinite number. In that case it's not surprising that we find ourselves in one where life can exist while no one find themselves in universes where no life can exist.
Quote:
Then at a certain point, that matter was able to form a planet, in just the right orbit around just the right star.
That among all the trillion of stars some happened to have planets in an orbit where life could evolve, is given what we know about formation of stars quite likely. No one had selected the place and star in advance.
Quote:
Somehow, on that planet, just the right three elements were present in just the right amounts at just the right time during a discharge of just the right amount of electricity to form amino acids.
Do you think God is needed to create amino acids? In that case what is he up to in the rest of the universe since they are found in so many places:
http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclo...minospace.html
Amino acids are not hard to form.
Quote:
Those acids of course were created in just the right conditions that they survived long enough to somehow merge together and form the first cell.
This is a more tricky step which we can't yet explain. Still, not too long ago we didn't know amino acids were common in space either. Unlike religion science progresses and is able to explain more and more of nature.
Quote:
It goes on and on for millions of year. Always beating the odds, naturally.
The key here is the "millions of years". In the long run unlikely events become likely.
Quote:
The bible says there was no chance happening. God looked down and said, "wouldn't it be nice to have some company."
What the Bible doesn't say is how God came to be. If you are to compare the likelyhood of the scientific and Christian versions of creations you can't ignore that step. Nor does the Bible explain why life on Earth appears to have been created through evolution.
Quote:
Thats just the basics. Faith's only requirement, faith in evolution or faith in God, is that it is felt whole heartedly. If you don't, you don't trully believe, for if you did, there would be no division.
Had it been only for faith there would be no theory of evolution. It has taken lots of hard work to derive and to show how it all fits together. "God made it" is a lot more convenient, an answer perfect for the intellectually lazy.
#24  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Bernel Add Bernel to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 585/1095
(28-Nov-2004 at 09:46)


Quote:
(Originally posted by Turbonyx)
...Remember, evolution is a theory, there is not a single item of proof that confirms it's accuracy. Everything, from why there are leg bones in snakes to the exact age derived from carbon dating, is theory. Belief in evolution requires the same amount of faith as belief in the bible.
...
This "belief in evolution" makes today's medicine possible, puts food on our tables and provides load of items what life would be very hard without. No single proof that confirmes it's accuracy? Ever heard about genome?

Do we "believe" in genetics and biochemistry or do we know for a fact that they are right? Do I require faith for insuline to work?
You must be kidding me...

good judgement mostly comes from experience and a lot of that comes from bad judgement...
#25  
View Public Profile Find more posts by VonBooB Add VonBooB to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Global Moderator
Research Group
Posts: 1558/4241
Donated $0.60
(28-Nov-2004 at 10:50)


Reason is a shoe as a faith. Human has two loegs, so he needs two shoes. If he uses only one shoe, he can't go as far as he could with two shoes.

Now this is basic question that brings both side extremist here to bash each others and rest. I find this amusing.

Evolution as well creation are theories, even we've found fossils etc.. doesn't proove that evolution was 100% correct and there was no such thing as Garden of Eden.

Many cultures distant from one and another do have folklores about paradise, Garden of Eden, Shangrila, what ever you want to call that. I think they are for a reason. They are not invented but they have some truth in those stories.

World is a lot more complicated than it seems and truth is not always that simple is it might appear. I ask everyone to keep their mind as open as they can and think other possibilities as well...

Generalization is rhetorics of simpletons.
"Sages learn from history... idiots learn from experience" -Fairy Tail manga
#26  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Lord Menchalior Add Lord Menchalior to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 89/189
(28-Nov-2004 at 11:09)
Quote:
(Originally posted by Lord Menchalior)

Reason is a shoe as a faith. Human has two loegs, so he needs two shoes. If he uses only one shoe, he can't go as far as he could with two shoes.

Now this is basic question that brings both side extremist here to bash each others and rest. I find this amusing.

Evolution as well creation are theories, even we've found fossils etc.. doesn't proove that evolution was 100% correct and there was no such thing as Garden of Eden.

Many cultures distant from one and another do have folklores about paradise, Garden of Eden, Shangrila, what ever you want to call that. I think they are for a reason. They are not invented but they have some truth in those stories.

World is a lot more complicated than it seems and truth is not always that simple is it might appear. I ask everyone to keep their mind as open as they can and think other possibilities as well...
Ever heard of Occam's Razor? 'All things remaining equal, the simplest explanation is true.'
Anyway, the fact that a bunch of primitive tribes made up ridiculous stories about the 'Beginning' doesn't mean there is some truth to any of them. As you yourself pointed out, Evolution can be backed by evidence. How about Creation?

-------------------------
To do aught good never will be our task, but ever to do ill our sole delight, as being the contrary to his high will whom we resist. If then his Providence out of our evil seek to bring forth good, our labor must be to pervert that end, and out of good still find means of evil.
#27  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Headless cook Add Headless cook to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Global Moderator
Research Group
Posts: 1571/4241
Donated $0.60
(28-Nov-2004 at 15:37)


I know Occam's razor but its not fool proof as we all know... Using Occam's razor like: I don't see God nor I hear him = God doesn't exist style... Well, let's just say its not that reasonable, since world has quite a lot things that are hard to explain...

Generalization is rhetorics of simpletons.
"Sages learn from history... idiots learn from experience" -Fairy Tail manga
#28  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Lord Menchalior Add Lord Menchalior to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as goalberg FoJ)
Posts: 284/564
(28-Nov-2004 at 19:14)


firstly for all you people who are saying that genisis' creation story happened in 7 days (well 6 actually) it was a bad translation and day comes from the word "yorn" which means an unspecified time period.

Secondly Darwin never once said humans evolved from apes.

And a scietific theory is a theory not a law so it is different. A theory is most likely to explain something but has no empirical evidence to support it. Hence it's the theory of evolution not the law of evolution, and the law of gravity not the theory of gravity.

Headless i'm sure in a couple of thousand years will be looked at as primitive and the theory of evolution will be laughed at.

If life gets rough beat it with a stick.
Join #bar, commies aren't welcome.
Join #mafiagame, for the greatest mafia experience on IRC!
#29  
View Public Profile Find more posts by VantagePoint Add VantagePoint to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4148/8194
(28-Nov-2004 at 19:47)
Quote:
(Originally posted by goalberg FoJ)
Secondly Darwin never once said humans evolved from apes.
Well, Darwin didn't know exactly when we split from the current apes, and seems to have overestimated the gap, but he did recognize our relationship to the apes:
http://www.infidels.org/library/hist...an/index.shtml
Darwin can also be amusing when presnting his evidence for our ancestry:
"He who rejects with scorn the belief that the shape of his own canines, and their occasional great development in other men, are due to our early forefathers having been provided with these formidable weapons, will probably reveal, by sneering, the line of his descent. For though he
no longer intends, nor has the power, to use these teeth as weapons, he will unconsciously retract his "snarling muscles" (thus named by Sir C. Bell),* so as to expose them ready for action, like a dog prepared to fight."
Quote:
And a scietific theory is a theory not a law so it is different. A theory is most likely to explain something but has no empirical evidence to support it. Hence it's the theory of evolution not the law of evolution, and the law of gravity not the theory of gravity.
The old misunderstaing strikes again. A scientific theory does have evidence supporting it, otherwise it is called a hypothesis: http://wilstar.com/theories.htm
There is lots of evidence supporting evolution for anyone bothering to look.
Quote:
Headless i'm sure in a couple of thousand years will be looked at as primitive and the theory of evolution will be laughed at.
Nonsense! They may laugh at some of the details just as we find some of Darwin's misunderstandings amusing, but the fundamental framework is far too well proven to be found wrong. We don't laugh at Newton's theory of gravity even if general relativity has shown that it isn't exactly correct.
#30  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Bernel Add Bernel to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 680/1288
(28-Nov-2004 at 22:43)


Quote:
(Originally posted by Bernel)
As for the Biblical creation myths. The fact that the first chapters of the Bible contains two contradictory myths should be enough to prove that the Bible is unreliable. (In Gen 1 man is created last after all the animals, in Gen 2 he is created first)
They don't contradict if you believe one is spiritual creation and the other physical.
#31  
View Public Profile Find more posts by MAPS Add MAPS to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 21/76
(29-Nov-2004 at 04:27)
The main point of my post was not to prove, disprove, promote, or denounce either field of thought.

My intent was to point out that each idea precludes the other. You can't believe in God and accept evolution and you can't beleive in evolution and believe there is a god.

To believe in God, as taught in the bible, is to beleive everything that it teaches. That the bible is God's word and therefor absolute truth. Anything else is your own creation or invention, a new religion if you will.

To beleive in evolution is to dismiss devine intervention. The very foundation of evoulution is small, insignificant changes occuring over unimaginably large periods of time, brought about by nothing more than which genes survive. Physical laws deny that such a being as a god could exist. (Yes, someone could argue that we don't know everything yet. The point is that the whole of evolution relys on there not being a god, that things happen on thier own.)
#32  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Turbonyx Add Turbonyx to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 26/76
(29-Nov-2004 at 05:24)
Quote:
(Originally posted by VonBooB)

This "belief in evolution" makes today's medicine possible, puts food on our tables and provides load of items what life would be very hard without. No single proof that confirmes it's accuracy? Ever heard about genome?

Do we "believe" in genetics and biochemistry or do we know for a fact that they are right? Do I require faith for insuline to work?
You must be kidding me...
You are confusing scientific achievement with scientific speculation.

Yep, I have four fingers and an opposable thumb that allows me to pick things up. I can prove it, either a picture or a physical test, whatever. Can I prove my Grandfather, 6 thousand generations, back had more in common with an ape or other animal than me? Nope, can't be done. That was the whole point.

Yeah, we have internal combustion engines, medications, brocliflower, all kinds of neat things achieved through science. None of that is proof that fish started growing legs and became frogs. You still have to belive in evolution by faith alone. That is what I mean by there is absolutely no proof of evolution, lots of interesting hypothesiss that sound like they could work, but no proof.
#33  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Turbonyx Add Turbonyx to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 681/1288
(29-Nov-2004 at 05:35)


Quote:
(Originally posted by Turbonyx) My intent was to point out that each idea precludes the other. You can't believe in God and accept evolution and you can't beleive in evolution and believe there is a god.
By its definition, evolution simply means "change with respect to time." It is a theologically neutral term in that it assumes nothing about what causes the change. The changes may be caused by God and by our own intelligent choices. Evolution does not specify how changes occur, only that they do occur.
#34  
View Public Profile Find more posts by MAPS Add MAPS to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4151/8194
(29-Nov-2004 at 08:48)
Quote:
(Originally posted by Turbonyx)
Yep, I have four fingers and an opposable thumb that allows me to pick things up. I can prove it, either a picture or a physical test, whatever. Can I prove my Grandfather, 6 thousand generations, back had more in common with an ape or other animal than me? Nope, can't be done. That was the whole point.
Scientific theories (or laws) can *never* be proven. All you can do is conclude that they match a large number of observations and that no other theory has been able to do so. Do you have a reasonable alternative to evolution that matches alll observations as well? (A literal interpretation of the Bible is not a reasonable theory since it is contradicted in so many ways)
#35  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Bernel Add Bernel to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Global Moderator
Research Group
Posts: 1577/4241
Donated $0.60
(29-Nov-2004 at 10:59)


Bingo: "Scientific theories (or laws) can *never* be proven" Same goes with faith on God. So what I think: Is peoples relying on science blindly... well... They just changed one one proved thing for another. And they dare call others hypocrite...

Generalization is rhetorics of simpletons.
"Sages learn from history... idiots learn from experience" -Fairy Tail manga
#36  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Lord Menchalior Add Lord Menchalior to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4153/8194
(29-Nov-2004 at 11:45)
Quote:
(Originally posted by Lord Menchalior)
Bingo: "Scientific theories (or laws) can *never* be proven" Same goes with faith on God.
No, it's not the same. While you can't formally prove anything outside mathematics you can find evidence that supports one theory and contradicts another. You can't prove there is no God, but you can prove that the story as described in the Bible is wrong.

You may believe in a God if you wish, but you'll will have to admit that this faith is not based on any facts.
#37  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Bernel Add Bernel to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 247/333
(29-Nov-2004 at 18:20)


It is a logical impossibility to disprove the existance of something (from our current limits). It is therefore impossible to prove that a theory is 100% true in all circumstances (because we cannot test it in all circumstances). Thus, we must assume that something does not exist, and then prove it exists (if we started the other way, we would accomplish nothing because it is impossible to disprove something's existance).

A theory explains the why of our observations. A law is a group of observations.

"In the end, all that is left is Change."
"That which does not embrace change will be destroyed by it"
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
"Nothing can be derived from nothing."
""There are no atheists in foxholes" isn't an argument against atheism, it's an argument against foxholes." ~ James Morrow
#38  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Angels of Death Add Angels of Death to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1024/1184
(30-Nov-2004 at 01:52)
Quote:
(Originally posted by afterhourz)
This comments strictly on the Garden story but notice ALL the other creation myths *e.g. belief that humans orinally walked//climbed out of a huge vagina in the ground, etc).
1. Who determines what the punishment should be? If God did indeed make the world, shouldn't he have the right to determine any punishment for disobedience. He could have decided to kill Adam and Eve then and there and start all over again.

2. Later on in Genesis it talks about Adam knowing Eve and bearing a son. Do you think in the whole time they were together before that point Adam didn't know Eve? Adam and Eve didn't know evil in the sense that they hadn't sinned. That doesn't mean they didn't know right from wrong.

3. Yes I believe that the garden of Eden was destroyed in the global flood. Could God have destroyed Eden before that? I'm sure he could have, but it would be a constant reminder to everyone about what happened. Anyway, you really don't have the right to second guess God's motives in not destroying the garden then and there.

You say there is no evidence? There is an eyewitness account recorded in the Bible. Sounds like evidence to me.

4. Why? Adam was given the responsibility to rule God's creation. Why should there be any problem with him getting to name the animals?

5. The serpent was cursed for the part it played. I don't see how that can have any affect on whether or not it is a myth.

6. It would make perfect sense that seeing there are numerous creation myths they all descended from the same one. The difference is the one in Genesis was written down, the other ones were passed along by word of mouth. The ones passed along by word of mouth are likely to be corrupted.

It is actually evidence that the Creation account is not a myth. For instance a tribe in Papua New Guinea has a creation account with a number of striking similarities to the Genesis account. It has been part of their culture for a long time and was only discovered when 'white man' came with the Bible.

Prove me wrong and get a million dollars - It can't get much better than that can it?
#39  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Aussie Dravid Add Aussie Dravid to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 35/57
(30-Nov-2004 at 06:11)


Quote:
(Originally posted by Aussie Dravid)
You say there is no evidence? There is an eyewitness account recorded in the Bible. Sounds like evidence to me.
While I really do not want to get into this, I simply had to point this little beauty out. It is one of the most hilarous things I have seen on any forum.

The same blood runs through all of us... the blood of a beast who hungers for the lives of others. -Vicious

Bah! They will never hit us from all the way over th... -The Unknown Soldier
#40  
View Public Profile Find more posts by ArAdunakhor Add ArAdunakhor to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump:


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 04:44.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.