Skip navigation
Community: Exchange advice in the forums and read running commentary Resources: Personal running log, calculators, links and other tools for runners News: Running news from around the world Training: Articles and advice about fitness, race training and injury prevention Races/Results: Find upcoming races and past results Home: The Cool Running homepage
Cool Running homepage  Search Cool Running Community

16475 Views 77 Replies Latest reply: Jan 29, 2008 1:18 PM by cclaydog RSS Go to original post 1 2 3 4 5 6 Previous Next
  • Iontach Rookie 1,340 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    30. Jan 17, 2008 9:43 AM (in response to cclaydog)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    cclaydog wrote:

    You might not agree with it, but you should at least examine it with an open mind.  When people belittle the scientific status of creationism, they usually attack its believers, not its claims.

    How is that more egregious than wilfully ignoring what the theory of evolution actually is?

     

     

     

     

     

    Creationism is a story about how the universe came into being.  Evolution is a theory about how species develop.  They're not even about the same thing.  Proponents of creationism make this basic error over and over again, even when it's corrected.  

     

     

    Do you think you could bring yourself to stop?  You see, it really doesn't help your case when you don't even know what you're arguing against.

     

     

  • rlemert Pro 250 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    31. Jan 17, 2008 1:56 PM (in response to cclaydog)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

      I'll agree with you on one thing - before we can really have a valid debate over the relative "merits" of evolution vs. creationism/ID/whatever, we first must reach an agreement on what consitutes science. Traditional scientists, for example, consider "supernatural" explanations to be outside the scope of science and therefore irrelevent. If we can't explain something we accept the fact and hope that as our knowledge increases we'll learn things that will allow us to explain it. These people will never reach an agreement with those (I believe it was certain legislators in Kansas) that would redefine science to include the acceptance of supernatural explanations - not because the disagree about the subject of the debate, but because they disagree about the very foundation of science.

     

     

     

     

     

    I personally prefer the scientist's definition of science. It's worked pretty darn well for several centuries, now, and as a practical person I find it much more useful. For one thing, you know right off the bat if the question you're asking is one that we can answer or not, and if there is an answer you know how you might go about finding it. Since the alternative, by definition, relies on factors that we can never understand or measure, I don't see where it allows us to do much.

     

     

     

     

     

      By the way, there are apparently quite a few papers that address the argument that they eye is "irreducibly complex" and explain why the argument is fatally flawed. I don't have the book I read last summer with me or I'd give the citation. I'll have to see if I can find where I left it.

     

     

  • Pukehater Rookie 4 posts since
    Jan 18, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    32. Jan 18, 2008 10:51 AM (in response to rlemert)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    Wow, didn't expect to get this kind of discussion here.  I have to admit, I've always assumed evolution was the way it happened.  Never really knew why I thought that way.  Maybe it's because the consequences of creation just scare the mess out of me.  I do know that in general, creationists seem to win debates on the subject.  This thread is no exception.  c-dog seems to at least know why he believes what he does. 

     

     

     

     

     

    I will ponder how a God could use evolution as I trudge my long run this weekend..or even if there is a God...

     

     

  • rolling1977 Amateur 183 posts since
    May 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    33. Jan 18, 2008 11:22 AM (in response to Jim Sullivan032)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    My two cents:  I have been theorizing about this for myself.  I'm not quite as well read as many of the posters.  I like to think that God created evolution (small e) and that when we read "God created man" it was on God's terms.  I don't know HOW he did it.  And I don't think that one of God's days is necessarily 24 hours, maybe it's 24 million years.....the bible is said to be divinely inspired when written,  but this may be a human's opinion (not devinely inspired).

     

     

    All in all, I do the best I can, I believe in God and I hope that is enough..............

     

     

  • broadbill Rookie 124 posts since
    Sep 27, 2004
    Currently Being Moderated
    35. Jan 18, 2008 1:10 PM (in response to Pukehater)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    Pukehater wrote:

    I do know that in general, creationists seem to win debates on the subject.

    I'm not sure I would call this "a win", I would call these debates more of a "draw"...

     

     

    this debate rages, it is only a matter of time before the Creationists argument is reduced to the statement "I don't know how it happened, so that is why I believe God that did it"  No one can refute that answer because no one knows if God really exists.  

     

     

    The creationist is basically calling "time-out", that is why the debate is inherently un-winable. 

     

     

    The rational folks just have to shrug their shoulders and move on content in the fact they can simply say "I don't know how it happened"...

     

     

    I guess the only consolation I have this that I don't to invoke God, Allah, Flying Spagetti Monster, etc. to make my point.

     

     

  • Pukehater Rookie 4 posts since
    Jan 18, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    36. Jan 18, 2008 2:26 PM (in response to broadbill)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    Dude, he's kickin arse. 

     

     

     

     

     

    He gave specific points on why he believes a creation must have happened.  You can keep belittling him if it makes you feel better, but right now you're taking it on the chin.

     

     

  • broadbill Rookie 124 posts since
    Sep 27, 2004
    Currently Being Moderated
    37. Jan 18, 2008 2:51 PM (in response to Pukehater)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    Pukehater wrote:

    Dude, he's kickin arse. 

     

     

     

     

     

    He gave specific points on why he believes a creation must have happened.  You can keep belittling him if it makes you feel better, but right now you're taking it on the chin.

     

     

    He can believe all he wants....there isn't any law against that...but if you want to call rationale thinking "belittling" then what can I tell ya...

     

     

    My only point was that at best this debate is a draw....I don't see him winning just because he gives specific points on why he believes why he believes.    You may perceive that he is winning because you share a similar belief system than he does so the rationale makes sense to you.  I do not see it as winning since I don't assume the same things you do.

     

     

     

     

     

    IThe problem still remains that he must go back to his faith in God for his arguments to hold true and that is where we part ways.  Everything else is just an exercise in logic.

     

     

  • culinarydoctor Expert 77 posts since
    Oct 31, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    38. Jan 18, 2008 9:43 PM (in response to Jim Sullivan032)
    Re: Does believing in God...

    funny how the topic of this debate evolved.  love evolves.  change is constant.

     

    now Jim, the subject of the original post was a factual premise. if

    this..., implying then that. you answered your own question with a no

    and I respect that. I hope that you have evolved to a level of

    certainty greater than before. but the implications of whether the last

    word of the premise even is something real, is deeply related toevolvution.  

     

    for instance, the mathematical evolution for identity properties. if

    1=1 and 1+1=2, then 2 is not equal to 1. this is true if there are no

    unitsassigned to each integer.  however 1 mile

    = 5280 ft. this statement of fact is the truth, based on the agreed

    identity of a mile and a foot. therefore... other things can be

    extrapolated from these factual statements about distances using

    dimensional analysis, also known as conversion factors.

     

     

     

    this is how someone can logically deduce conclusions about 'GOD'.  but the word 'logic' in English comes to us from the Greek logos,

    a word that Jesus Christ of Nazareth used to describe 'GOD'. I am the way, the

    truth, and the light. these words deserve further etymology before any atheist

    skeptic can honestly conclude that the word 'God'

    represents something that is not real, or experiential. can I prove to

    you that there was light today? only if you agree with me on the

    definition of light, and the space / time dimensions of the location of this so called "light" that alledgedly existed.  at this level all scientific conclusions are dependant on faith, usually an appeal to credibility; ad hominem.  this study done on for x period of time at the University or "independent" research corporation of where ever proves that y.  doctor suchandsuch who did thisandthat suggests a course of action based on his experience with testing.  what is really happening is that doctor whathisface believes.  credere in latin.  the scientist must also believe that their sensory functions are experiencing reality, something that can be quantified (space) and qualified (time) as empirical evidence.  this is however a classic trap of Gaism and Solepism, that nothing is real and everything experiential is an illusion.  believe what you want, but light and gravity is happening to me right now regardless of your belief in such a statement of fact.  true story. haha.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Bob Marley sang "I and I no expect to be justified by the laws of men" in the song So much things to say.  I like to think he wasn't just talking about shooting the sheriff, but also that you can say what you want about the state of affairs regardless of the truth of the situation.  this however does not imply that the laws of science in any way disprove the reality of capitol G to the OD.  the homie JC.  <alpha omega>  yod ve ho vah.  "ghee-suhs".

     

     

     

    the truth shall set you free. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    some scientists would have you believe that adopting the philosophical paradigm 'evolution' is not only in opposition to God the father of all creation, but that this belief of prehistoric facts is in itself an evolution of the human species; i.e. the Christian or any Theologian is for whatever reason not mentally evolved enough to conclude that God is not real and evolution is the truth.  my theory is as simple as this. 

     

     

     

     

     

    love

     

     

     

     

     

    p.s.  it is the most important ingredient in any real food.  love, that is.  don't have to believe me, believe the food.  proof is in the pudding.

  • Iontach Rookie 1,340 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    40. Jan 19, 2008 8:42 AM (in response to culinarydoctor)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    culinarydoctor wrote:

     

    the Greek logos, a word that Jesus Christ of Nazareth used to describe 'GOD'. I am the way, the

    truth, and the light.

     

    Jesus Christ of Nazareth did not speak Greek.

     

     

    Facts are horrid things.

     

     

  • culinarydoctor Expert 77 posts since
    Oct 31, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    41. Jan 19, 2008 9:29 AM (in response to Iontach)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    did he not?

     

     

    my bad dude, I wasn't there when it all went down.  if I had to guess though, he just might have.   some of his people definetely were familiar with Greek at the time of the Roman occupation of Jerusalem.  language is however, another beautiful example of "evolution".

     

     

     

     

     

    Jim.  I am not down with belittling people either.  put off foul language and pick up words of encouragement.  I feel that any honest human being much reconsile with science, or what is the percieved facts.  many scientist have only strengthed their faith through pursuit of developing a more accurate understanding as to nature of the universe.  As Albert Einstein said "to know the mind of God". 

     

     

     

     

     

    seek and yee shall find.

     

     

     

     

     

  • homeskoolyZ Rookie 62 posts since
    Jan 11, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    42. Jan 19, 2008 12:26 PM (in response to culinarydoctor)
    Re: Does believing in God...
    culinarydoctor wrote:

    did he not?

     

    my bad dude, I wasn't there when it all went down.  if I had to guess though, he just might have.   some of his people definetely were familiar with Greek at the time of the Roman occupation of Jerusalem.  language is however, another beautiful example of "evolution".

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Jim.  I am not down with belittling people either.  put off foul language and pick up words of encouragement.  I feel that any honest human being much reconsile with science, or what is the percieved facts.  many scientist have only strengthed their faith through pursuit of developing a more accurate understanding as to nature of the universe.  As Albert Einstein said "to know the mind of God". 

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    seek and yee shall find.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Dude, ever think about checking out the shift key?

  • Iontach Rookie 1,340 posts since
    Dec 14, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    43. Jan 19, 2008 2:43 PM (in response to culinarydoctor)
    Re: Does believing in God...

     

    culinarydoctor wrote:

    did he not?

     

    my bad dude, I wasn't there when it all went down.  if I had to guess though, he just might have.   some of his people definetely were familiar with Greek at the time of the Roman occupation of Jerusalem.  language is however, another beautiful example of "evolution".

     

     

     

     

     

    No, he spoke a Semitic language called Aramaic.  If you're going to

    base some sort of gnostic argument on a linguistic correspondence, then

    make sure your correspondence actually works.  "In the beginning was

    the Word", which is what you're referring to, are not the (reported) words of Christ in any case.

     

     

    I don't know what you meant about language being a beautiful example of

    "evolution".  It's not.  Linguistic change is not evolution - it doesn't happen by natural selection.

     

     

     

    many scientist have only strengthed their faith through pursuit of developing a more accurate understanding as to nature of the universe.  As Albert Einstein said "to know the mind of God".

     

     

    Please don't use Einstein as an example of a theist or deist scientist.  He was a self-professed atheist and he was baffled by attempts to make him an apologist of the existence of God.  In this he may have been right or wrong, but please do him the courtesy of respecting what he actually believed.

     

     

  • kfkolonel Rookie 4 posts since
    May 30, 2007
    Currently Being Moderated
    44. Jan 20, 2008 12:06 PM (in response to Iontach)
    Re: Does believing in God...

    This entire question seems to me to boil down to whether you think that there is only one valid way of knowingapplying reason to evidence, or whether there are two equally valid methods of knowingevidence based knowledge, and faith-based knowledge.  Believers hold that there is more to knowledge than what is provided by application of our abilities to observe and to reason.

     

    I would point out, though, that "when the rubber meets the road", when we make decisions that will result in taking away a person's money, his/her liberty, and even his/her life, we use evidence and reason, not faith.  Judges instruct jurors to base their decision on EVIDENCE, not on what they may believe about the defendant and not on what their faith tells them about the defendant.  I wonder why. 

     

    What is a juror to do if his/her faith in the innocence of a defendant conflicts with what the evidence says?  What does a person do when her faith in the fidelity of her loved one conflicts with incontrovertible evidence of his infidelity?  A person who retains their faith in instances like this is said to be deluded.  Crazy!

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...