Deniars of Evolution:

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

A have a couple brothers who are theists. In the past, they have baited and engaged me in Evolution v. Creation debates. They have finally given up. With one of my brothers, I provided evidence so compelling that the next time we had contact, he seemed upset.

I advised him: "You are a Christian. Your faith is supposed to be based on the forgiveness of sins by the sacrifice of Christ. If you are basing your entire spiritual faith on Genesis, then you are placing your faith in the wrong place; don't you think?"

Why do you work so hard at attacking this science?

 

[outhouse]

Fighting wilful ignorance is not easy.


It can be attacked on two sides, science and their own religious interpretation errors regarding creation.


Neither works against YEC and those who choose to remain wilfuly ignorant.


Remember, these people often did not use reason and education nor kowledge to gain their faith.

Thus, you cannot use those to change faith. Sometimes no matter how well you explain 2=2, the answer will never be 4 to some of faith.

 

[fantome profane]

A have a couple brothers who are theists. In the past, they have baited and engaged me in Evolution v. Creation debates. They have finally given up. With one of my brothers, I provided evidence so compelling that the next time we had contact, he seemed upset.

I advised him: "You are a Christian. Your faith is supposed to be based on the forgiveness of sins by the sacrifice of Christ. If you are basing your entire spiritual faith on Genesis, then you are placing your faith in the wrong place; don't you think?"

Why do you work so hard at attacking this science?

I think you gave your brother good advice. Someone who bases their faith on denying evolution is "like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand".

 

[Windwalker]

I advised him: "You are a Christian. Your faith is supposed to be based on the forgiveness of sins by the sacrifice of Christ. If you are basing your entire spiritual faith on Genesis, then you are placing your faith in the wrong place; don't you think?"

You do realize that attacking Genesis as non-scientific is like going after the story of Romeo and Juliet as a "bunch of made up ********", to say love is just a fiction? If anything, you should encourage him to understand the stories in Genesis as metaphorical. In which case, there is validity to what they teach, just like Romeo and Juliet.

 

[Riverwolf]

The story of Adam and Eve is one of the deepest stories from ancient times, with many different ways to interpret and apply it. Even I, a Pagan, can appreciate that about it. Taking it as literal history (or regarding any one of those many interpretations as "the only right one") highly devalues it IMO.

 

[Call_of_the_Wild]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Lets just continue the fables, shall we?

 

[Iti oj]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Lets just continue the fables, shall we?

Well You sure are continuing the strawmen.

 

[Windwalker]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Lets just continue the fables, shall we?

I hope not! That would conflict with the theory of evolution! That sounds like something a Creationist might teach, being completly ignorant of the scientific theory.

 

[Willamena]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Lets just continue the fables, shall we?

No dogs have ever produced non-dogs. Also, no wolves have produced non-wolves, although wolves evolved into dogs.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The story of Adam and Eve is one of the deepest stories from ancient times, with many different ways to interpret and apply it. Even I, a Pagan, can appreciate that about it. Taking it as literal history (or regarding any one of those many interpretations as "the only right one") highly devalues it IMO.

There was a book of lilith that was just as engrossing and fascinating along those lines. I have to admit all ancient stories do have their charms.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Lets just continue the fables, shall we?

Yes indeed. Incidently, No cell ever produced a non cell......
Oh wait...... Something went wrong.

God screwed up something, but I can't place a finger on it. ;0)

 

[Riverwolf]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

Nobody discusses that.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I guess we will continue to discuss the idea of dogs producing non-dogs millions of years ago when no one was around to see it.

First, no one has ever (ever) made the claim that dogs produced non-dogs. That is apologist misrepresenting the ToE. It exudes extreme ignorance of ToE or decietfully misrepresents it for a personal agenda.

Second. No one was around to see a murder, so therefore, we suppose that it didn't happen? Or, what, we suppose that we can't solve the case and not bother? The correct answer is neither: Even though no one was around to see the crime, the crime scene leaves evidence. By following the trail of evidence, we can conclude that a given incident happened in a given manner by a certain individual. ToE works the same way. The next step in the processing of the crime, we place that defendant on trial; but the forensic evidence against him is also on trial. Twelve jurors weigh this evidence to see if it has merit. The same happens in ToE where a given find is analyzed, reanalyzed and subjected to peer review.

It is not a fable, a fad, or a speculation.

Evolution is a fact.

 

[outhouse]

Why is it some people hate education and knowledge so much, yet go to school to learn.

Why did they think they had a correct answers over that of a professor, when they are totally ignorant?

 

[LuisDantas]

(...) Taking it (the history of Adam and Eve) as literal history (or regarding any one of those many interpretations as "the only right one") highly devalues it IMO.

I so agree!

 

[Riverwolf]

I so agree!

"History" of Adam and Eve? I was just talking about the story, not whatever history it may have had as it developed over time.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Ugh!
I misspelled "Deniers!"
How embarrassing!

 

[LuisDantas]

A have a couple brothers who are theists. In the past, they have baited and engaged me in Evolution v. Creation debates. They have finally given up. With one of my brothers, I provided evidence so compelling that the next time we had contact, he seemed upset.

I advised him: "You are a Christian. Your faith is supposed to be based on the forgiveness of sins by the sacrifice of Christ. If you are basing your entire spiritual faith on Genesis, then you are placing your faith in the wrong place; don't you think?"

Why do you work so hard at attacking this science?

Good approach, congratulations!

Far as I can figure it out, some people have concluded or perhaps even taught as if it were legitimate religious doctrine that the existence of Human Beings was "meant to be" by God and that there is some sort of assurance of privilege involved in it.

To question that certainty is seem as highly inappropriate by some, apparently out of principle even.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Part of the reason I try and work towards a bit of gentleness is the fact that my own deconversion was long, painful and traumatic. When your faith fails you, it leaves you confused, bitter, angry, empty, vulnerable, and wrestling with very basic questions; as in:

Who am I?
Why am I here?
What does it mean to live?
What does it mean to die?
Who's going to watch over me now that I'm alone?
If reality is not what I thought it was, then what is reality?

I got my brother thinking and questioning, which I value; but I didn't want to push him (or anyone else) into a "traumatic deconversion". He was vulnerable at that point, and I probably could have. But at what cost?

I do not agree with some atheist's mode of trying to force someone to abandon their faith overnight or trying to traumatize them out of it. It's a bad move and can do much more harm than good.

Everyone has their own journey. It's not up to me to force my journey onto another.

Anywho, thanks for letting me babble ...

 

[Riverwolf]

Part of the reason I try and work towards a bit of gentleness is the fact that my own deconversion was long, painful and traumatic. When your faith fails you, it leaves you confused, bitter, angry, empty, vulnerable, and wrestling with very basic questions; as in:

Who am I?
Why am I here?
What does it mean to live?
What does it mean to die?
Who's going to watch over me now that I'm alone?
If reality is not what I thought it was, then what is reality?

I got my brother thinking and questioning, which I value; but I didn't want to push him (or anyone else) into a "traumatic deconversion". He was vulnerable at that point, and I probably could have. But at what cost?

I do not agree with some atheist's mode of trying to force someone to abandon their faith overnight or trying to traumatize them out of it. It's a bad move and can do much more harm than good.

Everyone has their own journey. It's not up to me to force my journey onto another.

Anywho, thanks for letting me babble ...

Honestly, I don't even think "deconversion" is necessary at all. If people believe, let them believe. For the vast majority of people, there is no inherent harm whatsoever in theistic beliefs, or practicing a religion. There could be harm in specific organizations, but that's a different can of worms. Leaving one group doesn't necessarily have to mean giving up on all religions.

Those basic questions of yours? In my religion, the answer to all of them is basically this: doesn't matter, we all die, including the Gods, so just live as best you can. Except for the question of who's going to watch over me now that I'm alone. The answer to that is this: I'm not alone unless I make myself alone; otherwise I have my "Tribe".