How many branches of science must a creationists reject... (Adam and Eve, Jesus Christ, Scientology)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,922,771 times
Reputation: 4561
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Age-enduring
Well, thank you for the complement Trout. I have a Pentecostal background, and still would like to think that is my experience, but I'm much less constrained by doctrine and orthodoxy these days, because 'being told how something is' is not how God works - he uses something more sophisticated, which is understood to be the technical basis of hypnosis - a choice of options (free to choose) with a simultaneous command (not free) - "I set before you life and death - choose life". The technique induces trance states. I don't think of myself as a fundie anymore, but I err to choosing to listen to the still small voice of the Holy Spirit, than to man, or literal interpretation of words - doing so may put me on dangerous ground, but if following God conforms to "forgive them, for they know not what they do" then I am in the right place.
As to spiritual law, in Christian terms it would be the law of love, primarily of 'others before self'. That law fights against our nature, which is selfish - our nature is another law - the law of sin and death. Christ overcame death, and He can do that in us - not physical death, but spiritual death, which is the I, and me pleasing. It's an inner thing, that no science can measure.
I'm sorry for the experiences of all those who've tasted of church and had bad experiences. I've known a few people who were believers and are not know, but it's facile to turn from God because of experiences with mere people. life is bigger than that.
As to where I am up to with my reading there were 3 things one had to accept on the Wikipedia page of Evolution fact and theory - I'm not going to cite them, am only on a phone here. Two of them were fairly palatable - the one that is still awkward is common descent, because it doesn't have any comment about the vast difference between mankind and bonobo - which is for me, is the made in the image of God part. At least the first 3 or 4 days, if not all the days of creation have to be billions of years, which bares a ridiculous contrast to the 7000 years that the Bible subject matter covers (we are between the 6th and 7th days / thousand years, now). BUT, ..and here's the BUT, God may have just done it that way!, to show how ridiculous and small we all are compared with his greatness, and His perfect timing.
Thanks for a well thought out post.
You and I may not end up agreeing on theology, and in fact, may even debate issues therein, however, it is a pleasure to have one more person who debates honestly on board. There are others of faith who fit in that mold also, and I won't name any in case I miss some.
Suffice it to say, I, and most other atheists and agnostics on here, support anyone to have their own faith. Most of us get concerned when that faith is attempted to be used as a basis of imposing it's tenets on the greater society. Religions belong in the places of worship and the home.
The whole of what you highlighted is the truth, regarding non physical spiritual components of our make-up, the extra things that mark us out from old bonobo.
I just received the following from my wife this morning - she copied and pasted it from her FB feed:
"It's impossible, " said pride. "It's risky, " said experience. "It's pointless, " said reason. "Give it a try," whispered the HEART. -unkown
Your spiritual law is not like a natural law in that I cannot choose to violate a natural law where I can pick and choose if or when I would or could violate the spiritual law. Also as has been pointed out, other groups have lived with being generally unselfish as have groups of other animals. In fact the love for humans unconditionally I would agrue is more of a trait of a dog than it is of any Christians or non Christians. I would even agrue that some selfishness is essential for the survival of a group, too much selfishness leads to the destruction of the group. The old cartoon Chip and Dale comes to mind.
Also many, myself included do not believe that religion or the belief in a god is required for spiritual thoughts, feelings or actions.
It seems like you have already followed your wife's email in your willingness to expore something that may be the opposite of your belief system and for that I can only say bravo for you. And I do appreciate your explainations of your thoughts and beliefs, it is pleasant change.
It's a Scientific Theory. That's about as scientific as it gets.
But sure go ahead and enlighten us as to how the Theory of Evolution is not science.
Prove to me humans evolved from a single cell and we can go from there. Of course you can't because humans evolving from a former species of who knows what? is not scientific. It is the height of stupidity.
Prove to me humans evolved from a single cell and we can go from there. Of course you can't because humans evolving from a former species of who knows what? is not scientific. It is the height of stupidity.
Is there anyone out there still paying attention to this goofball?
Prove to me humans evolved from a single cell and we can go from there. Of course you can't because humans evolving from a former species of who knows what? is not scientific. It is the height of stupidity.
It's the height of your stupidity that you don't understand science.
We evolved from a common ancestor. Google the evidence supporting this for yourself.
Now back to my original question. Explain how Evolution is not science?
the one that is still awkward is common descent, because it doesn't have any comment about the vast difference between mankind and bonobo - which is for me, is the made in the image of God part.
You are going to have to leave the bible speak "made in the image of god" part out. It has nothing to do with us or our common ancestor.
It's good to examine the similarities we share with our common ancestor.
Bonobo How can you not look at their behavior and photos and not see the similarities they share with humans?
Bonobos are capable of passing the mirror-recognition test for self-awareness, as are all great apes.
They communicate primarily through vocal means, although the meanings of their vocalizations are not currently known. However, most humans do understand their facial expressions and some of their natural hand gestures, such as their invitation to play. The communication system of wild bonobos includes a characteristic that was earlier only known in humans: bonobos use the same call to mean different things in different situations, and the other bonobos have to take the context into account when determining the meaning.
Now onto the Genetic Mappings:
Initial genetic studies characterised the DNA of chimpanzees and bonobos as being 98% to 99.4% identical to that of Homo sapiens.
Later studies showed that chimpanzees and bonobos are more closely related to humans than to gorillas.
In the crucial Nature paper reporting on initial genome comparisons, researchers identified 35 million single-nucleotide changes, five million insertion or deletion events, and a number of chromosomal rearrangements which constituted the genetic differences between the two Pan species and humans, covering 98% of the same genes.
While many of these analyses have been performed on the common chimpanzee rather than the bonobo, the differences between the two Pan species are unlikely to be substantial enough to affect the Pan-Homo comparison significantly.
These are scientifically technical papers and it helps to understand them if you have some knowledge in genetics, population genetics and what the numerous terms in genomic comparison studies mean.
This site attempts to explain it at a much less technical level and so this might help you.
Keep in mind that Evolutionary Genetics is very complex and there is no way to teach it on a forum such as this. If you are truly interested I suggest you take a course in genetics and a few courses in biology. It would greatly improve your ability to understand the information.
Well that's true . I suppose he is also useful as an example of a totally wasted mind for those on the fence to look at .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
