Faith is wrong wrong wrong

[KingDavid8]

I never saw evolution as being something Christianity was compatible with. For starters - is tossing the book of Genesis acceptable? Are you really going to tell me that figurative writing can stretch to that huge extreme?

Many Christians, myself included, see Genesis as allegory and not history, and I've always believed in evolution, personally. I did consider the possibility of evolution being not true when I first turned to Christianity, but never found any significant reason for doubt. Basically, I try to go where the evidence points, and I feel that God's existence, Jesus' resurrection, and the theory of evolution are all more valid theories than the alternatives.

David

[lilpixieofterror]

Evolution or not? You want both. As far as statistics go... well... did you study the art of poll-taking in psychology? Same problem here... you can make the numbers say whatever you want to say...

So reject the conclusions that you don't like out of hand eh? Doesn't sound like a scientific approach to me.

I've only heard anti-evolution from Christian-influenced sources.

Funny, atheist scientist have arrived at the same conclusion too. It's a road block that must be overcome for chemical evolution to be a likely theory for the origins of life upon our planet.

I never saw evolution as being something Christianity was compatible with. For starters - is tossing the book of Genesis acceptable? Are you really going to tell me that figurative writing can stretch to that huge extreme?

Ever year of theistic evolution? I'm not one myself, but you might want to look into it.

It comes from logic. I'm using the word "evil" by your definition...

Oh yes... now you're going to prove that someday, right? By all means, show us how God is 'evil' by 'my definition'.

...and I say your God is evil because he tries to avoid our suspicions that he might exist.

Translation: "I have a personal standard that God is evil, I know that my personal standard isn't going to work here, so I'll attempt a bait and switch tactic and hope you fall for it." Sorry, not going to work... you must explain how you are using 'my' definition of 'evil' to arrive at your conclusion.

We again arrive at the question you refuse to answer... which is... if you knew God existed, would you worship him out of love or fear?

Crystal

[lilpixieofterror]

Quick - another newbie question!

Whats the deal with this avatar thing? I go to "edit avatar"... and i see a radio button "do not use an avatar"... but there is basically nothing else.

How do I create one (or just set a pic)?

You need to have 25 post before you can have an avatar.

[the_light]

So reject the conclusions that you don't like out of hand eh? Doesn't sound like a scientific approach to me.

Funny, atheist scientist have arrived at the same conclusion too. It's a road block that must be overcome for chemical evolution to be a likely theory for the origins of life upon our planet.

I'm not simply dismissing numbers I don't like - I'm pointing out that statistics, like poll taking is a tricky thing - and its easy to fabricate your result, using real numbers.

I'll explain my understanding of the evolution situation, and how I think anti-evolutionists are distorting the situation... I once argued strongly against evolution. The best analogy I once used was this.... get a bucket of 1/3 salt, 1/3 pepper, 1/3 sugar... now begin to stir.

Keep stirring until you finally get the salt, pepper, and sugar perfectly divided into 3 sections. That is exactly how Christians approach evolution. They take a complex situation and say it must have spontaneously and randomly mutated into that state. Evolution could have (and most likely) started from the simplest of simple replicators. Once you can accept that these replicators could indeed spontaneously form, half of the argument is over. The process of buiding increasingly complex systems on top of the previous is what is causing some of the confusion.

Ever year of theistic evolution? I'm not one myself, but you might want to look into it.

Of course I've heard of Catholicism ;)

Oh yes... now you're going to prove that someday, right? By all means, show us how God is 'evil' by 'my definition'.

How can it be any more clear? Tricking people into hell is not a "holy" thing

We again arrive at the question you refuse to answer... which is... if you knew God existed, would you worship him out of love or fear?

I already answered this. If I claim your god is evil, why would I worship him out of love?

[lilpixieofterror]

I'm not simply dismissing numbers I don't like - I'm pointing out that statistics, like poll taking is a tricky thing - and its easy to fabricate your result, using real numbers.

That's nice and can you show me a reason that

I'll explain my understanding of the evolution situation, and how I think anti-evolutionists are distorting the situation... I once argued strongly against evolution. The best analogy I once used was this.... get a bucket of 1/3 salt, 1/3 pepper, 1/3 sugar... now begin to stir.

That's nice, but I don't disagree with much of evolution, just with chemical evolution, there is evidence for biological evolution (skin and eye colors prove that) there isn't any for chemical evolution.

Keep stirring until you finally get the salt, pepper, and sugar perfectly divided into 3 sections. That is exactly how Christians approach evolution. They take a complex situation and say it must have spontaneously and randomly mutated into that state. Evolution could have (and most likely) started from the simplest of simple replicators. Once you can accept that these replicators could indeed spontaneously form, half of the argument is over.

In other words, I must accept the primary assumption that life can develop on it's own (with nothing more then blind faith to back it up) in order to believe that chemical evolution is true! Isn't that blind faith and circular reasoning that atheist are oh so found of accusing Christians of using?

The process of buiding increasingly complex systems on top of the previous is what is causing some of the confusion.

We're not asking that question. We are asking how life got here. I have heard some atheist say, "We have created amino acids in the lab!" That is a long way from creating a functioning cell. Even the simplest lifeforms we know of today have far more amino acids then have been created by experiments in the lab. Simply stating, there isn't enough evidence to make a conclusive result that life could develop, under natural conditions, on earth.

Of course I've heard of Catholicism ;)

You do know that evolution isn't the official position of the church, right?

How can it be any more clear? Tricking people into hell is not a "holy" thing

How is he 'tricking' people into hell? Other people became believers from the evidence you rejected. Why should we blame God for our own choices?

I already answered this. If I claim your god is evil, why would I worship him out of love?

I can throw around claims with no evidence too. I can claim that you're wrong and have not a clue what you are talking about. Now I ask again, back up your assertion that God is evil using 'my definition of evil.' Simply stating it doesn't work. I don't accept your assumption that God is evil and as such, I find your 'answer' as circular and thus wrong. Do try again.

[MooseOnTheLoose]

Been following this thread and would just like to say NICK, for a rabid atheist you make a heck of a good Christian.

Now he's probably gonna say I've insulted him.

[the_light]

That's nice, but I don't disagree with much of evolution, just with chemical evolution, there is evidence for biological evolution (skin and eye colors prove that) there isn't any for chemical evolution.

Chemical, biological... you cannot separate them like this. Just because biology is taking the chemical realm to a higher level of complexity doesn't mean its inherently different. Maybe you mean the spontaneous creation of replicators, and the subsequent increase in complexity. I'll get there...

In other words, I must accept the primary assumption that life can develop on it's own (with nothing more then blind faith to back it up) in order to believe that chemical evolution is true! Isn't that blind faith and circular reasoning that atheist are oh so found of accusing Christians of using?

John Conway's game of life... it beautifully illustrates how complexity can come from such a few simple pieces... the trick here is that we have the laws of physics... the laws of physics allow for an amazing array of things... I agree, with your current knowledge, a non-god worldview would be quite a huge leap of faith.

We're not asking that question. We are asking how life got here. I have heard some atheist say, "We have created amino acids in the lab!" That is a long way from creating a functioning cell. Even the simplest lifeforms we know of today have far more amino acids then have been created by experiments in the lab. Simply stating, there isn't enough evidence to make a conclusive result that life could develop, under natural conditions, on earth.

Don't play God of the Gaps. Theoretically, we have it down. Accomplishing this life-creation that you're demanding is on its way, have patience. Did you know that someone recently tried to patent a "minimal genome"... Yeah, they were actually trying to patent some synthetic life. Now, they are still quite a ways off from the demonstrations you're wanting to see, but we are taking large steps.

You do know that evolution isn't the official position of the church, right?

MAN, no sense of humor... I wasn't implying that. Catholicism, since 1950 (with Pope Pius XII) has been the religion of choice for "theistic evolutionists". Pope Pius didn't say it was true - but unlike many fundamentalists today, he said evolution was no problem as far as God is concerned.

How is he 'tricking' people into hell? Other people became believers from the evidence you rejected. Why should we blame God for our own choices?

You said it best - the evidence is "compelling but not convincing"... if God wanted us to follow him, serve him, why is it so bad to let the un-compelled know that he indeed exists. Those in Bible times had that much... why did he stop the favor anyways?

Examining the evidence and making a decision - once again, why do people go to hell for drawing the wrong conclusions? My life is no different than 90% of the Christians alive today. That last 10% do something I don't - spread the gospel and talk about their faith.

Also - how many people do you know actually took an objective look at the big picture, and with all of the available information in hand chose Christianity...? That rarely happens. People fall into it (exposed to heavily biased resources), or they're born into it.

PS... I'll be out for about a week or so... I'll be back though...

[Vigilante]

If I might interject...

How can it be any more clear? Tricking people into hell is not a "holy" thing

Your assumption is backwards. ALL mankind is ALREADY going to hell. God doesn't need to "trick" anybody to go there, as if we were all somehow first destined for heaven. God isn't tricking people, he is doing what is in his nature to do to CONVINCE people of a way to get OUT of going there. If anything, it is the devil and the world and your own sinful nature, that is "tricking" you into doubting God's plan for salvation. Not the other way around.


Peace

[jimbo]

L: You'll have to explain your other evidence...

C: Look at our planet and all the conditions that is required for life to live upon it. Shoot, I was watching a show on the history channel that was talking about our planet and even the scientist on that show seem to express wonder about it. Look at our Iron core, it produces a magnetic field that protects us from the harmful effects of the sun. Take away the Iron core... and life becomes impossible to exist. Shoot, that's just one of many things. I still find it amazing myself.

This doesn't necessarily indicate that a "god" exists. It may only mean that this particular planet in this particular solar system in this particular galaxy was conducive to the development of reproducing molecules and molecules did reproduce themsleves here and then the process of evolution subsequently led to the creation of a variety of life forms which now fills the entire world.

No god required.

If you want to give credit to a god for life, are you going to credit this god with creating predators and disease and parasites which produce so much pain and suffering in the world? Did your god create childhood leukemia, malaria and the ebola virus? Frankly I feel much better attributing these things to evolution than to a supposedly loving, all knowing, all good, all powerful god which, of course, no one can see, touch, taste, hear, smell or experience in any testable, verifiable way.

Cheers,

Jimbo

[MooseOnTheLoose]

which, of course, no one can see, touch, taste, hear, smell or experience in any testable, verifiable way.

Give it time, Jimbo. In due course I guarantee you'll be able to see , touch, hear, smell and experience God in any testable, verifiable way you choose.

Don't know about 'taste' though...

[jimbo]

Moose,

JIMBO: which, of course, no one can see, touch, taste, hear, smell or experience in any testable, verifiable way.

MOOSE: Give it time, Jimbo. In due course I guarantee you'll be able to see , touch, hear, smell and experience God in any testable, verifiable way you choose.

Don't know about 'taste' though...

Really? When, exactly, will that be? When I die?

Cheers,

Jimbo

[MooseOnTheLoose]

Really? When, exactly, will that be? When I die?

Maybe before if our luck's in (and yours isn't).

[salvationfound]

The faith game seems twisted to me. Some get a chance to turn to Christ, but because of their knowledge base or experiences, choose not to.... It seems to me that making that decision should not merit eternal damnation...

Well first off I don't think it really is all that much about believing God exists. Remember what
is considered the greatest commandment, "Love the Lord your God with all your heart soul and
mind". That has nothing to do with believe in his existence. If something about your statement
has a complaint against Hell then I have suspicion about the real reason a person doesn't
follow the Lord.

Let me ask you something light are there actually atheists out there who say, "I find Hell
justifiable, I agree sin needs to be punished, I agree with the actions of the God of the Bible
and don't really have an issue with the problem of evil. All I need now is just a little more
evidence of God's existence?"

Do atheists actually feel this way? Because if the answer is no then your thread really doesn't
have much point to it.

[lilpixieofterror]

Chemical, biological... you cannot separate them like this.

Then you might want to talk to your atheist friends about that one. As well as the writers of the dictionary.

Just because biology is taking the chemical realm to a higher level of complexity doesn't mean its inherently different. Maybe you mean the spontaneous creation of replicators, and the subsequent increase in complexity. I'll get there...

I'm sorry, but no experiments that have been done have yet to prove that. Sure, we've been able to create some biological compounds, but even the simplest life forms contain far more then that.

John Conway's game of life... it beautifully illustrates how complexity can come from such a few simple pieces... the trick here is that we have the laws of physics... the laws of physics allow for an amazing array of things... I agree, with your current knowledge, a non-god worldview would be quite a huge leap of faith.

And that's the whole issue. There is no reason to reject that a God could of existed and created life. You just like the view that tells you what you want to hear...

Don't play God of the Gaps.

<Sarcasm>

How dare I say that the evidence points that way! We all know that only unknown and unexplainable natural forces that we have yet to discover could create life!

This is a fair warning to those sarcastically impaired the preceding text was written in jest.

Theoretically, we have it down.

We do? Funny, all the experiments I've read about have been total failures. Many things are theoretically possible, it's theoretically possible that the moon was created when the earth was molten and it was spinning so fast that a piece of it broke off. Sounds great, at the start, until you start trying to imply it to reality and find out that it is unlikely. Same works with chemical evolution, sounds great on paper... until you start to look at the details and find flaws that either must be explained or the theory has to be dropped.

Accomplishing this life-creation that you're demanding is on its way, have patience.

Well, it's been over a century and we're still waiting. How long shall we wait until we start to explore the possibility that something put life upon this planet?

Did you know that someone recently tried to patent a "minimal genome"... Yeah, they were actually trying to patent some synthetic life. Now, they are still quite a ways off from the demonstrations you're wanting to see, but we are taking large steps.

May I ask how that minimal genome was created? Human intelligence or random chemicals mixing together? If the answer is, 'human intelligence' then doesn't that mean that it takes an intelligent force to make life? How would that prove that random chemicals created life?

MAN, no sense of humor... I wasn't implying that.

Oh look who talks...

Catholicism, since 1950 (with Pope Pius XII) has been the religion of choice for "theistic evolutionists". Pope Pius didn't say it was true - but unlike many fundamentalists today, he said evolution was no problem as far as God is concerned.

You might want to go talk to some Catholics about that one. I met quite a few that are YEC's, OEC's and IDer's in their ranks. Perhaps you can go tell them about that. BTW, there's many parts of evolution that I believe are true and proven; however; there has yet to be any major discovery that life came to be though random chemicals mixing over millions of years.

You said it best - the evidence is "compelling but not convincing"... if God wanted us to follow him, serve him, why is it so bad to let the un-compelled know that he indeed exists. Those in Bible times had that much... why did he stop the favor anyways?

And again... answer my question:

If you know that God existed, would you follow him out of love or fear?

Care to answer this time or will you keep stalling and avoid seeing the logical conclusion to my argument?

Examining the evidence and making a decision - once again, why do people go to hell for drawing the wrong conclusions?

You made your decision right? Like my mother used to say, "You made your bed, now sleep in it." You have had plenty of opportunities to repent, why do you cry about getting the consequences of your actions?

My life is no different than 90% of the Christians alive today. That last 10% do something I don't - spread the gospel and talk about their faith.

All of us have sinned and all have fallen short of the glory of God. Myself included. I didn't do anything special, but accept His gift that he laid out before all of us. Then again, the beauty of grace is that it makes life not fair.

Also - how many people do you know actually took an objective look at the big picture, and with all of the available information in hand chose Christianity...? That rarely happens. People fall into it (exposed to heavily biased resources), or they're born into it.

That's nice, and some people became atheist because their friends or parents too. Does that mean atheism is false too? Will you stop bringing up red herrings and just answer the questions I keep asking you and you keep avoiding?

PS... I'll be out for about a week or so... I'll be back though...

Very well, see you then.

Crystal

[lilpixieofterror]

Dear Dimbo,

This doesn't necessarily indicate that a "god" exists. It may only mean that this particular planet in this particular solar system in this particular galaxy was conducive to the development of reproducing molecules and molecules did reproduce themsleves here and then the process of evolution subsequently led to the creation of a variety of life forms which now fills the entire world.

Your evidence is?

No god required.

In other words, dimbo wants to close his mind off to any possibilities that tell him what he doesn't want to hear! Keep those fingers in your ears.

If you want to give credit to a god for life, are you going to credit this god with creating predators and disease and parasites which produce so much pain and suffering in the world?

The Bible already says what caused those. Do you really want to go there?

Did your god create childhood leukemia, malaria and the ebola virus?

Apparently somebody has never heard of evolution. Those diseases evolved after the fall, try again.

Frankly I feel much better attributing these things to evolution than to a supposedly loving, all knowing, all good, all powerful god which, of course, no one can see, touch, taste, hear, smell or experience in any testable, verifiable way.

It seems you do not understand my views nor my position. I'm arguing against life developing from random chemicals, not against evolution itself. Do try to keep up (I know it's very hard for you to pay attention). BTW, have I ever seen your brain? How about touched, tasted, heard or smelled it? Therefore I can conclude your brain does not exist. We've been though this before, I do not need to cut open your skull and look inside to see if a brain is indeed in there, likewise, I do not need to see a God to see his effects in my life and the world around me.

Crystal