Some thoughts about evolution vs creation debates

[sooda]

Why do yo consider miracles imagined... Is that because you presume that there is nothing possible beyond man's knowledge, or understanding?
Doesn't that suggest that Atheists are not interested in evidence? They always start with a foregone conclusion, and without evidence, clam that their presumption is right.
Isn't that what is meant by Psalms 10:4?
Even though that's the way of Atheists, some don't always stay that way. Have you met Jim Warner Wallace.

Really? Really? So all the other Atheists - including Anthony Flew, were deluded, and jumped on the unpopular band wagon...
Don't worry, I understand that we each have to choose our path.

The example you used there is not a good one. If you had used the Quran, that would be appropriate, I think.
One has to read the Qur'an and get the spirit of what Muhammad wrote, before they can say they can critique it. It's not about Muslims, or Christians. It's about the writings.


You started with a wrong idea.
I say I have God's spirit, so therefore I must have God's spirit...
No. Everyone claiming to be a Christian is not following Christ, therefore they don't have God's spirit... no matter how much they quote scripture. (Matthew 7:21-23)
Those with God's spirit speak with one voice - in agreement.

Most of the Psalms were borrowed from the North Coast Canaanites and are a thousand years older than the Bible.

 

[sooda]

Clearly, you cannot follow his lines of reason, because as I said before... No need for me to repeat.

You have interpreted the scriptures the way you think is right, and I doubt anyone can convince you, otherwise. If a score of Biblical scholars suggested you were wrong, I'm sure you would still be right... in your mind.

So first...
You said...The bible say a lot of things, also that you should slap babies against the rocks.
Do you admit that you are wrong and the Bible did not say that.

Second...
Do you think this is the thread for this exercise, since I assume you have a barrage of scriptures you picked out to have a go are proving your objections valid?
Or would it not be better to create a new thread appropriate for that?
You can let me know.

Third...
While you are considering another thread, consider answering the question... who are the children of Edom?

The Hebrews were a Canaanite tribe and they trashed their neighbors. We have learned a great deal about the Canaanites in the last 100 years.. Would you believe the bible stories if you took out the exaggerations, supernatural and miracles???? Would you still believe in God and worship him?

You know the Jerusalemites hated the Samaritan and those from Galilee? They considered them Hellenized half breeds and bad Jews.

 

[nPeace]

Lol....Oh no, someone told me I'm not that important to them! Whatever shall I do?

Get a grip bud.

... all because you are hurt that I won't continue to discuss that belief with you.
That reads, "You are not important to me"?
I really must have an English problem.

 

[nPeace]

@sooda I can't take anything you say seriously, becase you state things like you are a fact sheet, and never provide any source that would confirm what you claim, even when asked to do so.
On forums, when someone does that, posters are to consider those statements as nothing more than baseless claims, unworthy of giving any thought to.
Do you understand that?
We want to see facts, not unsubstantiated claims.

 

[Jose Fly]

... all because you are hurt that I won't continue to discuss that belief with you.

Hurt? LOL....no. It's more that I'm a bit baffled as to why you seem so ashamed of your Jehovah's Witness faith.

That reads, "You are not important to me"?
I really must have an English problem.

I guess so.

 

[Jim]

I agree with teaching evolution theories in biology classes, and not any theories that are part of any campaign to discredit them, but my reasons have nothing to do with believing or not believing in the literal truth of any of them.

It might be true that sometimes evolution theories are used in public schools to try to discredit belief in the literal truth of some Bible stories, but even if that’s true, I don’t agree with trying to use public education to discredit those theories. If there is corruption in public education, I don’t think that adding to the corruption would help reduce it.

 

[Jim]

I see some corruption in all the institutions of society, including public education. Maybe part of that corruption is people trying to use it sometimes to discredit some people’s beliefs. If so, trying to use it to discredit evolution theories would only add to the corruption. My response to corruption in institutions has been to find out what is being done about it on all levels from local to international, and what I can do that might help.

 

[Audie]

To clarify, I said in practice. They’re still being careful not to say that openly and explicitly in their reports of their research.

To further clarify, you might specify that this statement
is simply b.s. that you made up yourself.

 

[Jim]

The arguments that I’ve seen here for thinking that all life on earth has a common ancestor look very weak to me, and it looks to me like many researchers, possibly most of them, have abandoned that idea in practice.

To clarify, I said in practice. They’re still being careful not to say that openly and explicitly in their reports of their research.

The idea that many researchers have abandoned the idea of a universal common ancestor was simply b.s. that I made up myself.

 

[Jim]

To further clarify, you might specify that this statement
is simply b.s. that you made up yourself.

Good idea. Thanks!

 

[Audie]

Good idea. Thanks!

So?

 

[Milton Platt]

The only part of evolution theory that I was questioning was the idea that all life on earth has a common ancestor in a single species, and I think that some researchers, possibly most of them, are not currently thinking that way. Some of them are thinking that the most recent common ancestor of all species might have been a pool of cells that no one would call a “species.”

I’m not sure I know what you mean by “creationism.” If you mean thinking of a Bible creation story as an actual physical description if some things that happened less than 10,000 years ago, I’m not leaning towards that at all. I do have a religious reason for my interest in this topic, but it has nothing to do with any Bible creation story.

I seriously misunderstood your post then. Sorry about that. There certainly could have been more than one instance of abiogenesis.

The only part of evolution theory that I was questioning was the idea that all life on earth has a common ancestor in a single species, and I think that some researchers, possibly most of them, are not currently thinking that way. Some of them are thinking that the most recent common ancestor of all species might have been a pool of cells that no one would call a “species.”

I’m not sure I know what you mean by “creationism.” If you mean thinking of a Bible creation story as an actual physical description if some things that happened less than 10,000 years ago, I’m not leaning towards that at all. I do have a religious reason for my interest in this topic, but it has nothing to do with any Bible creation story.

Well, perhaps I seriously misunderstood your post. It has happened before...so sorry about that. So are you saying simply that there may have been more than a single instance of abiogenesis, then? It is a possible hypothesis among several.

 

[Jim]

So are you saying simply that there may have been more than a single instance of abiogenesis, then? It is a possible hypothesis among several.

See this thread:
My idea of how there could be more than one tree of life

 

[Jim]

Some random thoughts:

I’m thinking of evolution vs creation debates as part of a larger problem of animosities and hostilities across a line between science and religion, people on one side trying to discredit what some people think some scriptures are saying, and people on the other side trying to discredit what some people think that some research is saying. Curiously, both sides try to use reports of research as reasons for believing what they say.

I’m not sure that I know all the reasons for people trying to discredit what some people think some scriptures are saying, or what some people think some research is saying. Maybe, one way or another, they see some way of thinking as a reason for some harmful kinds of attitudes and behavior, and they think that discrediting that way of thinking might help improve those attitudes and behavior.

What I’ve been doing to try to help promote better attitudes and behavior has been to practice and promote spiritual growth and community service as ways of helping to improve the lives of all people everywhere and helping to improve the world for future generations; learning to be a better friend to more people; and learning to use storytelling to promote all that.

I’ve been trying to learn more about evolution theories, and I’ve been posting about what I’ve been learning.

 

[Jim]

Like I said, I’m not sure that I know all the reasons for people debating about evolution vs creationism. Part of it might be about what to teach in public schools. I agree with teaching evolution theories and not creation theories, because evolution theories are widely used in the sciences and creation theories are not. Also, it looks to me like creationism revolves around trying to discredit evolution theories. I might want to learn more about creationism now.

 

[Jose Fly]

Like I said, I’m not sure that I know all the reasons for people debating about evolution vs creationism. Part of it might be about what to teach in public schools. I agree with teaching evolution theories and not creation theories, because evolution theories are widely used in the sciences and creation theories are not. Also, it looks to me like creationism revolves around trying to discredit evolution theories. I might want to learn more about creationism now.

Dude, religious conservatives have been opposing science since.....well, since there's been science. They locked Galileo up for daring to state that the earth moved and orbited the sun. They objected to lightning rods because they supposedly thwarted God's will. The Amish still believe electricity is "worldly". The main difference now is how in most of the developed world, they don't have enough political power to suppress science they don't like.

Specific to evolution, people have actually looked into what's behind the debates, and unsurprisingly they found that in the US it's rooted in 1) fundamentalist religion, 2) conservative politics, and 3) lack of education (particularly in genetics). CLICK HERE for more.

 

[Jim]

Trying to use research in the sciences to discredit or defend some beliefs about what the Bible says looks to me like misunderstanding, misusing and defaming the research and the people who do it.

 

[Jim]

The title of this thread is about how to avoid being fooled and intimidated, but it also includes ideas about how to help keep misinformation from spreading: Ways to avoid being fooled or intimidated in Internet discussions?

 

[Jim]

I’m thinking that maybe sometimes people in these debates are picturing themselves as trying to help stop the spread of harmful and dangerous ideas. Some people see some beliefs about what the Bible says as harmful and dangerous, and some see evolution theories as harmful and dangerous. Part of my response to that has been to have discussions about how to avoid being fooled and about how to help stop the spread of all kinds of misinformation. Another part has been to learn more about a topic that I think is being misrepresented, and posting about what I’ve been learning.

 

[Jim]

I feel like I have some disagreement with people on all sides of the evolution vs creation debates, but I’m having trouble spelling out what I’m disagreeing about. Some things are clear. I’m disagreeing with vilifying people, and disparaging their character and capacities. I’m disagreeing with using science theories to try to discredit or defend beliefs about what the Bible says. I’m disagreeing with thinking that there can only be one tree of life, or even that one tree is more likely than many. I’m disagreeing with measuring the value of science theories by how much they agree with what the Bible says. I disagree with measuring the value of religious scriptures by how much they agree with what science says.