Evolution & Creationism: Why can't people believe both?
- Thread starter seekeroftheway
- Start date
You are a sad strange little man...and you have my pity.
I take it you got that image from the Illustrated Good News Bible. it's certainly appropriate . If only you could see the rest was nonsense also.
Your pity for me is reciprocated because it beggars belief that someone living in the 21st century could still believe what was written by a lot of primtives so long ago.
I suggest you gey an elementary bok on critical thinking, if you dare. The alternative is to remain in your cosy rut while the world passes you by.
If you have something sensible to offer, I'm happy to talk to you but, as I find you beyond reason at present, I won't detain you from your bible studies.
In the entire history of this site, have we ever gotten a theist to admit the what they self proclaim as a "belief" in god is nothing more than that? A reliance on the say-so of other people with virtually zero weight of physical evidence?
Why can't they just admit that their beliefs, whatever they may be, have no more weight than that of any other form of simple hearsay?
Do they remember that the theory of evolution by natural selection was developed by people with religious beliefs? The the overwhelming weight of evidence shows that it happens, despite thousands of years of religious tradition to the contrary?
Why can't they just admit that their beliefs, whatever they may be, have no more weight than that of any other form of simple hearsay?
Do they remember that the theory of evolution by natural selection was developed by people with religious beliefs? The the overwhelming weight of evidence shows that it happens, despite thousands of years of religious tradition to the contrary?
Well I'm not a theist but..
I have said that the Chrisitan faith is based on the bible's testimony.
I'll only go that far because "virtually zero weight of physical evidence" would be ignoring what Christians put there weight in. I think that's why Christians don't respond to contradicting comments such as that. Come'on...the Bible isn't virtual. It's real. So if it's real they do have some physical evidence. But if you wanna say...all you have is the Bible, then yes, that's mostly true.
SaQ Note:
Despite being routed the subject reverts to his only recourse, using indirect perjorative and jujune comments to rouse an emotional reaction.
Additional:
The subject suggest an elementary book but can't seem to spell some common words such as "book", "get" and may be having problems conjugating words. This is a tell-tale sign of an emotional reaction...
This might be marking emotionalism as an inverse reactionary relationship to intelligence. Fascinating.
No? Hmmm...
Right. Thus ignoring the meaning of physical evidence completely. Figures.
Right. Because they're mostly pretty dumb.
Err, no, it's not. That's like saying a physics txtbook is physical evidence for newtonian gravitation. Pretty rediculous when put that way, right?
Ignoring the meaning of physical evidence? No.
I can't agree with that sweeping generalization. Do many of them believe in ignorance? Yes. Are they dumb? I couldn't make that call but knock yourself out.
I don't understand how one can really compare theory which requires evidence, and testimony which can be both supported by physical evidence or may stand independent from evidence.
Everything is not a theory. At least not to me.
The theory thing can be taken overboard. (I don't deal with children that might be telling the truth based on theory.) I deal with people based on trust, loyalty and their track record. Much as the court system does. Sometimes science comes into play in those issues. Issues of evidence.
Like if I see a mess of cheetohs in the living room and I want to narrow down which child was the culprit then likely the kid with the cheetohs mouth and hands is the culprit. But sometimes the weight of evidence is non existent.
In those cases we sometimes have to make a judgement call. The Bible is one such situation.
Last edited:
You didn't understand my simple analogy at all, did you?
The bible is physical evidence for god like a physics book is physical evidence for gravity.
Dig?
Dig?
I fault the thesist who can not answer "Why is the bible trustworthy?" There trust is blind and that is the ignorance to which I refered to.
One would not let a complete strange babysit their child. Why then would one trust a book just because it claims to be inspired of God? Would not a person do research on a person before they trust them. Wouldn't they get to know them before they allow a close relationship? Many baptist, and catholics do not consider this. It's all about tradition. And that is one of the most dangerous customs (doing just because it's always been done.) That is the typical theist.
Don't look down on them. It's human to want to trust. It's human to wish to be guided.
One would not let a complete strange babysit their child. Why then would one trust a book just because it claims to be inspired of God? Would not a person do research on a person before they trust them. Wouldn't they get to know them before they allow a close relationship? Many baptist, and catholics do not consider this. It's all about tradition. And that is one of the most dangerous customs (doing just because it's always been done.) That is the typical theist.
Don't look down on them. It's human to want to trust. It's human to wish to be guided.
I completely agree. But when presented with the facts of the cosmos as we currently know them, the ones who fight so fervently and stupidly to maintain their cuddly blanket of security deserve my scorn.
Oh...I see...
No I don't agree.
What I mean to say is that your analogy was fine but I found the application inappropriate. You see the bible is proof that some one existed. It's proof as to events....it's testimony. You see the bible isn't proof of God. It's testimony, proof of those that have dealt with God.
God has no physical form, ergo there is no proof, no link at all to his existence but communication...or a log of it. A text book of physics has nothing to do with communication.
That is why I don't agree with the analogy. I understand what you mean and you're correct. But take note. I don't think the bible is proof of God itself. It's testimony that there was communication between him and those on the Earth...it's an indirect proof. (ah that's what I'm trying to say.)
Perhaps that is where your "virtual" comment comes into play.
I completely disagree. Testimony is in no way proof of anything. It's the worst form of evidence possible. It proves nothing.
The situation will be remedied soon, as experimental evidence for god's existence is produced any day now. So, taking the textbook, the bible as their guide,they will
Walk on water......this time without stepping stones
Restore putrefying corpses to life.
Ascend into the sky without motive power
Feed the starving masses in Africa with loaves and fishes
If this weight of evidence is not forthcoming it doesn't really matter because the bible is not like that; neither is Alice in Wonderland
Walk on water......this time without stepping stones
Restore putrefying corpses to life.
Ascend into the sky without motive power
Feed the starving masses in Africa with loaves and fishes
If this weight of evidence is not forthcoming it doesn't really matter because the bible is not like that; neither is Alice in Wonderland
That amounts to irritation to me.
Personally I don't want them to be scorned because then they're far less likely to listen.
We all go through a fair amount of conditioning even in a public school. Educating requires that we take somethings on the credit of the individual teaching it. Breaking what we've grown to cherish is very very difficult.
Again the difference between man and ape is that we want to be taught. We expect it. I saw that on PBS. A child shown how to open a box does just as they are taught to open the box every single time despite the fact that there are many unnecessary steps like slapping the box.
When the ape was shown he eventually figured out within two or three runs that slapping the box is irrelevant to opening the box. The child trust and expects to be taught to do so correctly...not expecting to be deceived.
That's human nature.
Last edited:
Neat! I always wanted to be able to just flap my arms and fly!
I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. It can be a very bad form of evidence.
But I don't think it should always be ignored. We actually depend on it greatly in every culture.
The testimony of witness on the scene to exonerate a criminal.
A notorized document of endorsement.
Job referals, etc.
So obviously testimony needs some sort of support. A resume is often researched at major facilities....credit checks, drug testing, a paper trail if you will or even test of some sort.
More than irritation. I hate the fuckers that preach the absolute TRUTH of their god and his "laws" and that we must all obey or be converted or killed. All with zero evidence. Just believe me. Evil, lying, weak-minded bastards.
I don't know that sounds like a personal experience superluminal.
I wasn't told things like this when I was a kid. Nor have I ever had to deal with someone with that kind of attitude.
My reactions are, I know, atypical. I don't take what anyone says personally, just a matter of persepective and on occasion ignorance, arrogance or bullying. Some people have nothing better to do. I've heard of churches which say as much and I find it difficult to not say anything...
but then I just end up offending a bunch a people.
That one time in a baptist church was all I need at 10 years old. I'd never been spoke to in such a way.
I wasn't told things like this when I was a kid. Nor have I ever had to deal with someone with that kind of attitude.
My reactions are, I know, atypical. I don't take what anyone says personally, just a matter of persepective and on occasion ignorance, arrogance or bullying. Some people have nothing better to do. I've heard of churches which say as much and I find it difficult to not say anything...
but then I just end up offending a bunch a people.
That one time in a baptist church was all I need at 10 years old. I'd never been spoke to in such a way.
Read a history book.