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.
I think this could be more co-related to politics and government in a some cases.
Following a religion is a pvt matter - you can follow or not, is your choice and there are no drastic consequences in life, but you MUST pay your taxes.
That's ok. What we are working for is not o eradicate religion so much as ensure people can make fair choices about which religion to follow, without finding that life becomes difficult if those around them choose differently.
.... Why would humans be the ONLY species out of thousands and thousands to have such individuality and uniqueness instead of the evolution factory just grinding out the same looking human being over and over like it does with other animals? ....
You should try looking up chimpanzees. See if you can find any two that look alike.
And cats - what about cats? Or dogs? Or horses? Or cows?
Last edited by mensaguy; 05-24-2017 at 09:21 AM..
Reason: fixed quote tag
Jeff actually has a point, or so it seems to me. It is, like abiogenesis; one of the 'Gaps for God'. But it isn't a very big one.
We do have a level of reasoning that is beyond all other animals. Sure, the higher animals such as dogs, primates, dolphins and elephants have something that is similar enough that our reasoning brain can be seen as something that is not unique. Uniquely evolved, yes, but not unique.
Similarly, Abiogenesis is a rather small Gap for God. While it can't be proven to have happened, there are some workable mechanisms about. The Creationist argument fails because abiogenesis has to be shown to be impossible, and Goddunnit is made the only possible answer. Similarly human reasoning through evolution is remarkable, bu not impossible. The Theist argument that Life is only possible if a god dunnit fails.
We also have other examples of animals - primates -with a similarly evolved brain and mind: several species of hominids, all displaying gradually evolving levels of reasoning ability, and of course, the last, the Neanderthals, who were not that different in smarts from the humans of that time. the reasoning primate almost went extinct in the last ice age. our species seem to have survived because we were just that bit more inventive in adapting our surroundings. Neanderthals were ok at using their surroundings to survive, but it wasn't enough. Just as the last pygmy mammoths died out on some North pacific islands, the last Neanderhals vanished somewhere in the Mediterranean region. We are no unique, but we are the last.
That at least is what the fossil record seems to tell us, and it makes the Gap for God argument Jeff is making a very small one. "Perhaps God has something to do with our level of reasoning".
Perhaps, but it isn't really necessary. It's the old back to front reasoning of theism. They seem to think that the Goddunnit -claim has to be taken as true until alternative explanations, like Abiogenesis and Human evolution, are proved to be the only possible explanation. They are - as usual - projecting their illogical thinking onto us.
The way it really works is that you don't assume a god to start with. You look at the problems, and you look at the data, and you ask what explanation the data indicates. The difference is encapsulated in the old quip
Science: "These are the facts; what conclusions can we derive from them?"
Creationism "This (waving Genesis about) in the conclusion. What facts can we find to support it"
Finding those facts or data or problems, rather, to support Genesis -based Creationism are the gaps for God - problems or questions that seem to argue that a God must have been necessary to explain Life, the universe and everything.
That is why Cosmic origins is the best Gap for God - perhaps honours even on that one . Life - we have only circumstantial support for Abiogenesis, but a perfectly good explanation.
Human reasoning is a rather small gap for God. The "Facts" actually indicate an evolutionary process rather than he fingers and thumbs of God.
Especially because of the thread topic Because even if one could make a case for a god behind consciousness, behind life, behind the origins of the universe, is is just a god, and we don't know which god or what religion it represents, or even if it represents any religion at all.
That is why, Jeff old son, the gap for god arguments don't realy help the Biblegod claim or Christianity at all. Even if one can conjure up a plausible god out of origins problems, The Bible has to stand up on its own credibility, not on the gap for God arguments.
So nice try Jeff, but it isn't worth your effort. Your argument is Creationism, but Creationism, despite the Creationists conflating it with Christianity, requires a leap of faith to get to the Bible and then to Christianity. Muslims have their Creationists, too.
Some people can't deal with the world. So they need a god to "fill in" the gaps and the difficult things they don't know how to deal with. So that kind of belief will never go away.
It's a very understandable human trait to want any answer rather than none. I've been there myself. It's common human thinking (and very often is called 'Common sense' - as though that was somehing reliable.
But I now know it is terribly unreliable, satisfying guesswork rather than irritating gaps in our knowledge is not helpful and can be harmful and it is always better admitting we don't know and then trying to find out, rather than pretending we do know and then refusing to accept the actual (and different) facts when they are discovered.
Jeff actually has a point, or so it seems to me. It is, like abiogenesis; one of the 'Gaps for God'. But it isn't a very big one.
We do have a level of reasoning that is beyond all other animals. Sure, the higher animals such as dogs, primates, dolphins and elephants have something that is similar enough that our reasoning brain can be seen as something that is not unique. Uniquely evolved, yes, but not unique.
Similarly, Abiogenesis is a rather small Gap for God. While it can't be proven to have happened, there are some workable mechanisms about. The Creationist argument fails because abiogenesis has to be shown to be impossible, and Goddunnit is made the only possible answer. Similarly human reasoning through evolution is remarkable, bu not impossible. The Theist argument that Life is only possible if a god dunnit fails.
We also have other examples of animals - primates -with a similarly evolved brain and mind: several species of hominids, all displaying gradually evolving levels of reasoning ability, and of course, the last, the Neanderthals, who were not that different in smarts from the humans of that time. the reasoning primate almost went extinct in the last ice age. our species seem to have survived because we were just that bit more inventive in adapting our surroundings. Neanderthals were ok at using their surroundings to survive, but it wasn't enough. Just as the last pygmy mammoths died out on some North pacific islands, the last Neanderhals vanished somewhere in the Mediterranean region. We are no unique, but we are the last.
That at least is what the fossil record seems to tell us, and it makes the Gap for God argument Jeff is making a very small one. "Perhaps God has something to do with our level of reasoning".
Perhaps, but it isn't really necessary. It's the old back to front reasoning of theism. They seem to think that the Goddunnit -claim has to be taken as true until alternative explanations, like Abiogenesis and Human evolution, are proved to be the only possible explanation. They are - as usual - projecting their illogical thinking onto us.
The way it really works is that you don't assume a god to start with. You look at the problems, and you look at the data, and you ask what explanation the data indicates. The difference is encapsulated in the old quip
Science: "These are the facts; what conclusions can we derive from them?"
Creationism "This (waving Genesis about) in the conclusion. What facts can we find to support it"
Finding those facts or data or problems, rather, to support Genesis -based Creationism are the gaps for God - problems or questions that seem to argue that a God must have been necessary to explain Life, the universe and everything.
That is why Cosmic origins is the best Gap for God - perhaps honours even on that one . Life - we have only circumstantial support for Abiogenesis, but a perfectly good explanation.
Human reasoning is a rather small gap for God. The "Facts" actually indicate an evolutionary process rather than he fingers and thumbs of God.
Especially because of the thread topic Because even if one could make a case for a god behind consciousness, behind life, behind the origins of the universe, is is just a god, and we don't know which god or what religion it represents, or even if it represents any religion at all.
That is why, Jeff old son, the gap for god arguments don't realy help the Biblegod claim or Christianity at all. Even if one can conjure up a plausible god out of origins problems, The Bible has to stand up on its own credibility, not on the gap for God arguments.
So nice try Jeff, but it isn't worth your effort. Your argument is Creationism, but Creationism, despite the Creationists conflating it with Christianity, requires a leap of faith to get to the Bible and then to Christianity. Muslims have their Creationists, too.
We also have something else that God said I gave to humans - the use of Pen, the ability to communicate through text. Yet we blabber about "evolution".
The use of writing also evolved. We can see the 'fossil' evidence of this in early pictorial representations of information. a sheaf of corn and three dots. water, an open mouth: 'To speak". Humans invented writing. No god 'Gave" it o us.
The use of writing also evolved. We can see the 'fossil' evidence of this in early pictorial representations of information. a sheaf of corn and three dots. water, an open mouth: 'To speak". Humans invented writing. No god 'Gave" it o us.
Hard to argue with that, Arq, unless you believe as I do that our consciousness is capable of being influenced by its ultimate connection to God.
No, I'm arguing against the atheist claim that humans are nothing more than animals. That makes no sense. Why would humans be the ONLY species out of thousands and thousands to have such individuality and uniqueness instead of the evolution factory just grinding out the same looking human being over and over like it does with other animals? It's like only our line evolved and all the other lines just stayed pretty much in neutral. The fact that we are the only form of life superior to all other life forms only supports the biblical narrative that man was given dominance over all other animals.
And you haven't defined what kind of physical proof would satisfy you and could never be denied on any level.
Which Atheist said that humans are nothing more than animals? Since an Atheist is, by definition, a person who believes in no God(s), it would be impossible for that attribution to be definitive for Atheists in general.
BTW, many species exhibit amazing variety in their appearance. The spots and stripes and marks on animals such as tigers, zebras, giraffes, etc., are all so unique as to be identifiable to the individual animal. I've known quite a few dogs in my lifetime that were all the same breed, yet they all looked different and had their own distinct personalities. According to your post, the dogs should all be completely interchangeable. How did mine manage to break your rules?
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.
Because even if one could make a case for a god behind consciousness, behind life, behind the origins of the universe, is is just a god, and we don't know which god or what religion it represents, or even if it represents any religion at all.
