Discussion in 'Religion' started by Jan Ardena, Jul 24, 2013.
What did this ''Creator'' create?
Was this ''Creator'' created?
If not, why not?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
So you believe God is the spirit of evolution like you believe Santa is the spirit of Christmas? That's a strange idea. Like God is a figurative representation of the survival of the fittest? Why not just go with Mother Nature? That seems to work for most people.
Just glancing at a few surveys, that appears to be false.
More than likely they took enough science to understand that it's a matter of science, not religion.
I have no idea since the surveys I've seen don't explore that hypothesis.
It merely explains what is happening in Nature.
The degree to which you perceive any defense is proportional to the extent of the attacks.
It's the law. Children must receive an education. There really is no alternative.
That appears to the represent the Fundamentalist view, which is a minority view.
As far as I knew every survey ever done always shows a large population who accept science and religion.
Every idea of God fits within the believer's personal world view.
I suspect most of the folks you are calling theists do not call themselves theists and would not submit to the characterizations of what they do or should believe.
Yet so many people say they believe in God and they accept evolution. I think you're probably wrong.
I think it would help to clarify that what you are advocating is the Fundamentalist position, which can't reconcile science with the strict literal interpretation of the religion's myths, particularly their creation myths. By world population, that appears to be Islamic Fundamentalists, Hindu Fundamentalists, and Christian Fundamentalists. I'm not at all sure about the Hindu demographic, so it may in fact fall in third place.
The largest of these then is the Islamic Creation Myth. From what I can tell, it looks like about 40% of Muslims in the older traditions do in fact take their creation myth literally. This amounts to about 8% of the world population. Without numbers for the Hindus we can estimate the Protestants (about 10% of world population) among whom it seems around 30% take their creation myth literally, or about 3% of the world population. That takes us to 11% of the world population plus the Hindus. They are 13% of the world population. But if we take the "orthodox" Hindu view of creation as given in the Rig Veda, we note that it states
Who really knows, and who can swear,
How creation came, when or where!
Even gods came after creation’s day,
Who really knows, who can truly say
When and how did creation start?
Did He do it? Or did He not?
Only He, up there, knows, maybe;
Or perhaps, not even He.
I think the best we can do is to guess that it's a 50/50 split among them, adding another 6.5% - call it 7% - to the 11% we've accounted for, leaving us with a total of 17%. This number is equal to the sum of all other religious people in the world, of which the largest portion, about a third, are Buddhist. It's hard to imagine what "fundamentalist Buddhist" means, but if we consider their creation myth
There comes a time, Vasetha, when, sooner or later after a long period this world contracts. At a time of contraction, beings are mostly born in the Abhasara Brahma world. And there they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious—and they stay like that for a very long time. But sooner or later, after a very long period, this world begins to expand again. At a time of expansion, the beings from the Abhasara Brahma world, having passed away from there, are mostly reborn in this world. Here they dwell, mind-made, feeding on delight, self-luminous, moving through the air, glorious— and they stay like that for a very long time.
since it is compatible with the Big Bang, there does seem to be an ease with which they accept teachings of science, it's just not clear if they care one way or the other. Suppose we assume 25% of them deny evolution. That's just going to add maybe 2% at most to our total. At this point I would hazard a guess that our 17% might get as high as 25% of the world population if we were to include all of the smaller groups.
I think this topic only covers about 1 out of 4 people in the world. It's a minority view, one that will likely fade, even though fundamentalism has surged in recent decades in the Middle East and in the last 2 decades within the US a few other countries that have strong evangelical movements.
I know it was not directed to me , but Chemically some how the DNA or RNA have to be put together , even if you have this component you cannot produce life yet , you have to have the mechanism of a cell in order to reproduce . After said so we are to far away from understanding this process and even if we understud it to put it together is an other problem. in the early environment . Therefore there must be a highly intelligent mind to do all that and that is the Creator mind which is God.
In other words, I don't know how it happened, therefore a magic man did it.
Well we just don't know exactly how old the earth is and how many cycles ir come to life . But in reality let any scientist that is hones say on how he can put a cell to work . and don't brig that primordial soup bologna , that is a waving hand.
The reason it is "fanatically pushed to be taught to children" is the same reason algebra or grammar or atomic theory is fanatically pushed. Because such knowledge readies them for lucrative careers after they graduate. Nobody's going to hire a geneticist or a biologist or an anthropologist or ANY scientist that believes God created everything in 7 days approximately 6000 years ago. It's simply scientifically established fact that evolution has occurred and continues to occur in all species on this planet. If you want to succeed in this world you HAVE to accept the paradigm we live in. You may not like it, but it's just the way it is.
The point is that the theory of evolution "as proposed by Darwin" has long since been superceded. Anybody who is still advocating Darwin's theory as written is in the wrong century. You should be calling the theory of evolution "the theory of evolution", not "darwinism".
I wasn't comparing the existence of France to the existence of God. I was comparing the fact that France exists to the fact that evolution happens. It makes no more sense to deny one than the other, whether you believe in God or not.
Care to share?
If it was simply a matter of science there would be no contraversy
You don't need surveys for that.
It extropolates from what happens in nature.
Using that logic explain the brutal attacks made by Stalin, Pol Pot, and so on.
I'm not disputing that children must have an education.
It's neither fundamentalist or non fundamentalist, it is a truth based on the fundamentals of the said concepts.
Science isn't darwinian evolution so don't even go there.
No it doesn't.
A theist is a person who believes in God, and I've given the definition of God. If you don't believe in God, you're not a theist.
People say lots of things, which is why surveys aren't a good way of collection accurate information. So please give a link to these surveys so we can scrutinise how they come to the conclusions they do.
I don't know what you mean by ''fundamentalist position''. If by that you mean ''God'' is the essential component in ''theism'', then the very definition of ''theism'' speaks for itself. The intelligent thing for a theist to do, is to enquire about God, going from a spiritual notion that there is an superior intelligence behind the cosmic machine, to learning more about it from sources who are advanced in that realisation. There is no way that dismisses any discipline which can help with that process. Science is born out of theistic religion.
And you trust these surveys.......why?
What do you think is meant by this verse?
I'm not really bothered about what you call it, the basic concept always remains, plus you understand what what I mean by darwinism. But if it stops the digression, I will happily term it the theory of evolution.
I'm not concerned with the facts of the term ''evolution'', only with the theory as made famous by Charles Darwin.
Algerbra or grammer isn't fanatically forced on children, and you certainly don't need to use the government to impliment laws to force children to learn them.
If the theory of evolution were an established scientific fact, you wouldn't need to lobby government to force it into the classrooms. It's obviously not an established fact.
It is an established fact. It's as much a fact as anything in science. Nothing about biology would make sense without it. And anyone who still uses the term Darwinism clearly knows nothing about evolution.
Indeed I do. I'm just pointing out that nobody uses that term but creationists. Your idea that there is a "controversy" and that theists don't accept evolution also comes from creationists. There is no controversy in science and, in fact, most theists do accept evolution (see Clergy Letter Project)
It's the creationists who are lobbying to force it out.
As I mentioned, evolution is as much a fact as the existence of France. The Theory of Evolution is an explanation of how that fact works. There is only one scientifically supportable explanation, which is why it is the only one taught in schools.
Even creationists accept the fact that evolution happens. They just have a hypothetical explanation that is not supported by any evidence and is, in fact, contradicted by the evidence.
I believe the universe began with a Big Bang with the galaxies, voids in space, etc..,evolving over time. God being the Creator of it all. The reason I believe this is I don't believe such an occurrence was happenstance. I have always believed that there is a Higher Power. Do I know for certain? I can believe the accounts given in the Bible as such but my faith goes beyond the bible.
I'm not a "Sola Scriptura" believer. I grew up Catholic and the RCC teaches about the mystery of faith and also accepts science as being compatible with faith in God. I come from that school of thought.
Someone or something can not create eternity. I believe God is eternity. This is my belief.
Faith is built in things unseen but also on enough accounts of others. I believe that the bible is a compilation of actual stories and metaphors to foster a belief in God and strengthen ones faith.
Does anyone here have faith in things not yet seen? Yes to some extent. 90% of the distant galaxies are unseen. But for some reason we believe they exist. Why?
Astronomers can only offer an educated guess.
But we take things on faith all the time. Some ppl simply don't share my faith in a higher power. That is ok.
I'm merely answering your questions.
It is not my intent to sway anyone's opinions. And anyone who forces their faith on another needs to soul search further. Faith should unite. Faith should love. Faith should seek to understand.
We are all together here.
And that's my story. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The current leading hypothesis or speculation for abiogenesis is that nonliving chemical complexes underwent a process of evolutionary development - most likely Darwinian. The necessary replication and selection factors are present in some clays as well as the complex lipids and amino acids and other chemicals then thought to be covering the planet, saturating as they were the shallower water bodies and infusing the groundwater complexes and cooking at the crustal vents and continually heated or cooled in global circulation, as well as UV irradiated, struck by lightning, etc.
Most religious people who understand Darwinian theory do accept it, though - even those whose religion incorporates deity. The religious people who do not "believe in" (terminology that betrays a lack of comprehension) Darwinian evolution, like those who do not "believe in" Einstein's Relativity or the germ theory of disease or Bayesian statistical analysis, are largely ignorant (illiterate, unschooled, or unexposed to the theory), or members of one of the several fundamentalist Abrahamic monotheistic sects that have strong presences in the US and Middle East, or both.
If we are allowed to narrow things down to one particular deity and manner of belief, we can probably get a direct and ineradicable contradiction between that particular God and Darwinian evolutionary theory. I'm not sure what the point would be - have a care in one's choice of Deity, lest one be separated from the light and life of the world?
I don't believe a god could exist by happenstance, because god is necessarily complex, that what intelligence is. I do think something like a singularity which set of the big bang could have arose by happenstance, because science reveals that so-called empty space is full of particle pairs arising spontaneously by "happenstance" (particle=simple). Complex things need time to evolve and become complex from simpler origins.
One point I wanted to state.
Darwin grew up with Christianity. He really studied the faith and then decided...this is a bunch of bunk.
Before you reject anything...whether it is the possibility if a higher power or otherwise...I encourage you to study it first.
Darwin was incredibly impressive in many ways one if which being his desire for truth.
He renounced the bible's teachings but he studied it.
I have studied science. I have studied my faith.
I almost left the faith about seven years ago.
To stay, I had to really know why.
Many Christians never question.
I don't judge them.
But to question is normal.
God gave free will so...and a brain to reason.
I just offer that. If you don't believe, know why you don't with certainty.
Like I have faith, with certainty.
As certain as I can be lol
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Ok thx for listening.
Ok. Where u see "if" that most likely should read "of."
iPhone issues. :/
God doesn't exist by happenstance.
I think we can agree that quantum fluctuations could have been the root cause of the Big Bang.
But lets say someone "solves" that mystery conclusively.
What caused the quantum fluctuations?
We could dub this eternity.
I do. Because it will never end.
You solve one theory...then you must solve another.
And so on.
This is what I believe.
You can take science and unravel it and you end up with eternity.
And if given enough time, could we figure "everything" out?
Interesting no? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Separate names with a comma.