Jump to content


Why Is Evolution Singled Out?


  • Please log in to reply
95 replies to this topic

#21 jason78

jason78

    Veteran Member

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,349 posts
  • Age: 30
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Birmingham, UK

Posted 04 November 2009 - 02:30 PM

Well Ron, I have heard the moldy canard that the ToE is a religion.

View Post


Creationists use a very wide definition of the term religion. From their point of view, men have to worship something and if they don't worship a god then whatever takes first place in their life has to be their religion.

Making the theory of evolution out to be a religion has certain advantages. If it were a religion, then creationists could argue that it could not be taught in state schools (for example).

#22 Guest_Taikoo_*

Guest_Taikoo_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 November 2009 - 05:25 PM

Creationists use a very wide definition of the term religion.  From their point of view, men have to worship something and if they don't worship a god then whatever takes first place in their life has to be their religion.

Making the theory of evolution out to be a religion has certain advantages.  If it were a religion, then creationists could argue that it could not be taught in state schools (for example).

View Post


Its a mighty wide definition that scoops up philosophy, science and religion all into one word.

There are a lot of reasons for calling ToE a religion. None related to whether it really is a religion.

As my Dad says, if you dont have a good reason then you will have a lot of reasons.

#23 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 04 November 2009 - 06:24 PM

Well Ron, I have heard the moldy canard that the ToE is a religion.  I understand need that some people have to say it and believe it. Needing it to be a religion doesnt make it one.

View Post


Well Taikoo, I've seen plenty of the faithful evolutheists and bigbangtheist attempt to wish it away in their need to pretend that they were "rational" thinkers. But, needing it not to be a religion doesn't keep it from being one.

#24 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 04 November 2009 - 06:28 PM

Creationists use a very wide definition of the term religion.  From their point of view, men have to worship something and if they don't worship a god then whatever takes first place in their life has to be their religion.

Making the theory of evolution out to be a religion has certain advantages.  If it were a religion, then creationists could argue that it could not be taught in state schools (for example).

View Post


Atheists use a vary narrow definition of the term religion in order to hide their own theology from themselves. From their point of view, worshiping themselves is enough. All the while hiding that fact from themselves by ignoring the broader view of religion.

And make no mistake, the religion of evolution is being taught in our public schools.

#25 Guest_Taikoo_*

Guest_Taikoo_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 November 2009 - 06:45 PM

Atheists use a vary narrow definition of the term religion in order to hide their own theology from themselves. From their point of view, worshiping themselves is enough. All the while hiding that fact from themselves by ignoring the broader view of religion.

And make no mistake, the religion of evolution is being taught in our public schools.

View Post



Too narrow to sweep up philosophy science and religion with one word. i like words to have specific meaning.*

As for 'worshipping themselves"????? eeeewwwwhhhh, nasty, Ron.

Now 'worship" has also lost all trace of meaning?


yuck. Where on earth do you get such an idea?

* not like...When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.' ...

#26 Loungehead

Loungehead

    Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 04 November 2009 - 07:02 PM

Atheists use a vary narrow definition of the term religion in order to hide their own theology from themselves. From their point of view, worshiping themselves is enough. All the while hiding that fact from themselves by ignoring the broader view of religion.

And make no mistake, the religion of evolution is being taught in our public schools.

View Post

As an atheist I can tell you your assessment is wrong.

I'm quite aware of my "atheology" thank you very much. It is based in scientific methodology and postmodern analysis. Where you use "faith", I use methodological practices relating to epistemology. The only thing I "worship" is the tools of the trade.

Christians, on the other hand think they worship Christ, but they actually worship faith. The apply faith to everying, including Christ, and have faith that faith is all they need.

#27 Yorzhik

Yorzhik

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 233 posts
  • Age: 42
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Michigan

Posted 05 November 2009 - 10:03 AM

One point, I did not single out Christians.  There are other faiths and beliefs that attack science as well.

Let's not muddy things up with other religions.

Astronomy:  Along with Astrophysics show an ancient Universe about 13.5 Billion Years old.

I admit that there is a starlight problem with creationists. However, it's just as big a problem for materialists, so this isn't a rejection of science on a Christian's part, but adherence to another interpretation.

But that's the difference between me and you. I realize evolutionists have some good points, while you show a weakness in your view by not admitting any strong point what-so-ever in the creationist view even though we have some.

Medicine:  As we have seen with people who refuse to take their children to doctors because "pray will cure them", that still occurs.

This is poor form on your part to bring up a fringe movement that is roundly criticized by the mainstream.

Geology:  Ever hear of the "Flat Earth Society'?

No. And if there is, it would be the same poor form you showed in the immediately preceding quote.

Actually it is one of the most documented and supported sciences we have.I think Evolution is the best way we can understand how all life is linked and interacts with each other.  Without Evolution science, we would be completely clueless how bacteria develop anti-biotic resistances.

View Post

First, there is no documentation on the mechanism used by evolution. As has been discussed before on this forum, there would be no evolution without mutations.

Secondly, it has been the creationist view of degrading information that has given us better science concerning anti-biotic resistance than the evolutionary view that bacteria are evolving into a new body type.

#28 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 05 November 2009 - 10:39 AM

Too narrow to sweep up philosophy science and religion with one word.  i like words to have specific meaning.*

View Post


No, too narrow a view to accept the fact that you can rule out nothing, or you rule out everything. Too narrow a view to understand that philosophy and logic were the harbinger of science... The foundations of all science. You cannot have science without philosophy and logic.

Yes, a narrow view indeed.

#29 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 05 November 2009 - 10:42 AM

As an atheist I can tell you your assessment is wrong.

View Post


As a former atheist, I can tell you that my assessment is spot on. And, I'm also quite sure you have a great faith in your religion of false methodology and spotty scientific method.

#30 Guest_FrankH_*

Guest_FrankH_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 November 2009 - 10:54 AM

Let's not muddy things up with other religions.
I admit that there is a starlight problem with creationists. However, it's just as big a problem for materialists, so this isn't a rejection of science on a Christian's part, but adherence to another interpretation.

I'm making sure that everyone knows it is not just some Christian sects that attack science in general and Evolution for most in particular.

But that's the difference between me and you. I realize evolutionists have some good points, while you show a weakness in your view by not admitting any strong point what-so-ever in the creationist view even though we have some.

Such as what from the Creationist POV?

That the world, the universe is but a dream in a god's eye?

Or from any of these: http://www.magictail...ationlinks.html creation tales? You see that I just don't accept the YEC account, I don't accept any of those accounts of creation.

This is poor form on your part to bring up a fringe movement that is roundly criticized by the mainstream.

But is exists and there are many Christians in the "mainstream", such as the Roman Catholic Church, The Anglicans, Methodists, Presbyterians and more who do accept Evolution and the god. To them, Christians who try to read a literal Bible are out of the "mainstream" as well.

No. And if there is, it would be the same poor form you showed in the immediately preceding quote.

Yet they exist and I point them out as to show that there are a lot of different versions out there.

First, there is no documentation on the mechanism used by evolution. As has been discussed before on this forum, there would be no evolution without mutations.

Actually there are: http://evolution.ber...echanisms.shtml

http://www.pbs.org/w...2/l_052_01.html

Now are these exhaustive? No. Do they cover everything that we see? No. Does that mean we stop and call it a failure because we couldn't do it when we wanted to? No.

Secondly, it has been the creationist view of degrading information that has given us better science concerning anti-biotic resistance than the evolutionary view that bacteria are evolving into a new body type.

View Post

Really. Can I see the research papers that hae been done on that?

Also, how does one specify information in the genome? How can one tell which has more information, an organism with 39 pairs or another with 23 pairs?

#31 Loungehead

Loungehead

    Troll

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 260 posts
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Creationist
  • New Zealand

Posted 05 November 2009 - 11:58 AM

As a former atheist, I can tell you that my assessment is spot on.  And, I'm also quite sure you have a great faith in your religion of false methodology and spotty scientific method.

View Post

As former Christian, I can tell you that I did not think for myself, I was an ignorant wishful thinker. The only methodology I had was, "I believe, I believe, I believe... O' thank you Lord, I believe."

It was very emotionally satisfying. But it didn't tell me anything.

#32 Guest_Taikoo_*

Guest_Taikoo_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 November 2009 - 06:36 PM

No, too narrow a view to accept the fact that you can rule out nothing, or you rule out everything. Too narrow a view to understand that philosophy and logic were the harbinger of science... The foundations of all science. You cannot have science without philosophy and logic.

Yes, a narrow view indeed.

View Post



i read words but i dont find sense in it. Sorry.

#33 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 05 November 2009 - 06:56 PM

As former Christian, I can tell you that I did not think for myself, I was an ignorant wishful thinker.  The only methodology I had was, "I believe, I believe, I believe... O' thank you Lord, I believe."

It was very emotionally satisfying.  But it didn't tell me anything.

View Post


Well, then that would mean that you were never a Christian. Atheist always like to puff up, and say... I'm mister cool guy, I don't have faith, I'm potty trained, and I know God doesn't exist because I know everything because I believe believe in science, and all the unproven factless points of evolution.

Yes, it's hard to believe that you were a Christian. You never even thought for yourself. That's exactly why you don't think for yourself now, you just chucked one belief for TOE, because science knows best... better not argue with science, because it's all hardcore reality.

#34 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 05 November 2009 - 06:57 PM

i read words but i dont find sense in it.  Sorry.

View Post


Hopefully you'll understand one day that words are used because they are supposed to mean something. You know without having to speak, therefore we write... it's kinda the point.

#35 Guest_Taikoo_*

Guest_Taikoo_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 November 2009 - 08:22 PM

Hopefully you'll understand one day that words are used because they are supposed to mean something.  You know without having to speak, therefore we write... it's kinda the point.

View Post



Maybe some day you will recognize your limitations a little better and not try to talk down to people who are vastly better educated than you are.

Meanwhile stick to issues and cut out the personal derogatory remarks, you've d one more than enough of that for today.

#36 Javabean

Javabean

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 950 posts
  • Location:Harrisburg Pa
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Harrisburg

Posted 05 November 2009 - 11:42 PM

Well, then that would mean that you were never a Christian.


Sorry I cut out the attack on Loungehead to respond to this.

Unfortunately you cannot make this claim because you lack any evidence to support this view. To say that an Atheist who was once a Christian was "never a Christian" removes free will from Christians. Which is what God wanted us to have in the first place.

#37 Ron

Ron

    Advanced Member

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,530 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 50
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Johnstown, PA

Posted 06 November 2009 - 03:28 AM

As former Christian, I can tell you that I did not think for myself, I was an ignorant wishful thinker.  The only methodology I had was, "I believe, I believe, I believe... O' thank you Lord, I believe."

It was very emotionally satisfying.  But it didn't tell me anything.

View Post


Ahhh, the old one-up'smanship "Oh yeah, if you claim to have been an atheist then..." Which is all fine and dandy if you wish to promulgate the lie that a Christian is only to believe and nothing else. If that were the case, then its no wonder you couldn't understand the truth of Christ.

As Christians we are told scripturally to study, reason and think. So its no wonder you had some problems. But, do you think trading your faith in one religion for faith in another is the answer?

Somehow, I get the feeling that you still have some "ignorant wishful thinking" going on.

#38 Guest_Taikoo_*

Guest_Taikoo_*
  • Guests

Posted 06 November 2009 - 06:09 AM

Ahhh, the old one-up'smanship "Oh yeah, if you claim to have been an atheist then..." Which is all fine and dandy if you wish to promulgate the lie that a Christian is only to believe and nothing else. If that were the case, then its no wonder you couldn't understand the truth of Christ.

As Christians we are told scripturally to study, reason and think. So its no wonder you had some problems. But, do you think trading your faith in one religion for faith in another is the answer?

Somehow, I get the feeling that you still have some "ignorant wishful thinking" going on.

View Post



I am curious, since I was not aware that the bible calls for people to study, reason and think. Could you tell me what lines deal with that?

Im sure you can guess that I might think that creationists dont seem to apply that to science. This isnt wishful thinking or anything... i wish that people would study reason etc. more. its just what I think that i see, based on the uninformed kind of things that I constantly see from creationists.

#39 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 06 November 2009 - 08:43 AM

Maybe some day you will recognize your limitations a little better and not try to talk down to people who are vastly better educated than you are.

Meanwhile stick to issues and cut out the personal derogatory remarks, you've d one more than enough of that for today.

View Post


Your not vastly more educated than I am, and you'd be delusional if you think so.

#40 scott

scott

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,749 posts
  • Age: 21
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • mississippi

Posted 06 November 2009 - 08:46 AM

Sorry I cut out the attack on Loungehead to respond to this.

Unfortunately you cannot make this claim because you lack any evidence to support this view.  To say that an Atheist who was once a Christian was "never a Christian" removes free will from Christians.  Which is what God wanted us to have in the first place.

View Post



Yes, but Jesus said He will not let any of His children slip from His finger. It was his free will to believe or not believe, but once Jesus has taken hold then He will not let go.

So was Jesus incorrect, or am I misquoting Jesus. I apologize if I am.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users