Evolution Validates My Belief In God.

Everything has something to do with who you are.

Everything is what grants you the ability to say what you are not in the first place.

 

That is too much of a brain teaser riddle for me....^

This world , as we know it, was here long before I was or any of us were.
It will go on without us, too.

 

No. You are misunderstanding me. I didn't insult anyone there.

I don't know why you are asking that last thing. Did anybody tell you that you have to? Surely not me.

No. Perhaps to people who don't understand how someone can believe in a god. But as it is apparent: that's just because they don't understand. Therefor it may seem to you the same kind of thing as believing in Santa.

Well, this thread seems about individual belief in a God. That was what I was talking about at least. Sure, (religious) organisations tend to prescribe how to do and interprete things. That's a different thing. And to say in earnest that everyone who joined such an organized religion is conforming all their beliefs to the dogmas and prescribed way of thinking/believing of that religion would be ludicrous. Same with that generalisation that all leaders or people that fullfill a role in such a religion want their fellow followers to do such a thing. It seems to become less and less common in my part of the world. I think it is time for those antitheists and blatant haters to acknowledge that. Even if they themselves live in a part of the world were it may still be more prevalent.

 

I think one problem with what I see as trying to fit your favorite idea of a "god" or gods and their "creation" myth with science is that you are losing sight of the fact that these myths were written by people (yes people) who lived in the Bronze Age, lived in,what basically amounts to manufactured "cave dwellings", and separated themselves and their people from everyone else. If what you are referring to is the Judeo-Christian "God" then you are , IMO, talking about a concept which was a product of the Jewish priesthood. These people saw the Earth as flat (basically a table with four "pillars" (legs), just had bronze and iron weapons, slaughtered livestock as blood "sacrifices" and taught that this planet was the center of the Universe and that the Universe was eternal. Squaring that with science as we know it IMO is pretty much impossible. (And no I don't buy the "allegory" stuff. These people actually thought this was literally true friends)

 

And I apologize for my grammar. That first part is one incredibly long run on sentence I know. OMG! LOL!! :dizzy2:

 

I didn't say anyone who joins such an organized religion is bound to become disempowered by it. I said that's often the case, and I should have added, in my own experience. I know of Anglicans for instance who are very liberal and even enlightened in their view of their religion, but at the other end of the spectrum are Bible literalists, young earthers and so on.

Where I'm in full agreement is that hate serves only to create dissonance and conflict. However, I can sympathize with people who live in places where fundamentalism has got a hold, and who see it as a negative element in their culture. I have little sympathy for the views those who criticize all religion and spirituality as if it were all the same.

 

I know you are one of the more nuancing ones, Blakey. Didn't mean to put words in our mouth Overall there is a distubring tendency though to generalize everyone who is part of a religious organisation as either a sheepish follower or an evil brainwashing nutcase that is out to make others conform. I think people who are doing that consistently can pretty much be described as extremists themselves.

That the people who forged the original concepts of god(s) were believing this stuff literally does not mean we today can't believe in it in our own metaphorical way. In fact, you say in order to believe in both god(s) and evolution people tend to lose sight on the fact that these concepts/myths were written in tbe bronze age, I disagree with that. A lot of people who actually can acknowledge the possibility of both are fully aware that the theistic concept(s) stems from ancient times. But the theistic concept on itself is very broad. People who say these 2 things can not both be believed in seriously usually are focussing on a specific theistic concept, which indeed is hard to take literally and connect to the idea of evolution.

 

Damn.....that hurt me just reading it.....but I'm still liking your post....in spirit since I have "reached my positive vote quota for today"!

 

It does all get very polarized, and I think the trend towards generalization maybe a result of ignorance, or at least a lack of familiarity with more progressive types of religious thinkers and ideas. Or on the religious side, an unwillingness to adapt to new knowledge. There's also the unfortunate fact that some people are just plain stupid. They only look at the surface of things and don't have any interest in becoming more fully informed about either religion and spirituality or science.

Also egoism plays a role. On one hand the 'traditionally' religious person feels they've got it all pat, all their questions about life have been answered by their adoption of a particular belief system, whilst the antitheists seems to revel in what they regard as their own superiority. Neither position has much merit in my view. Both seem to lead to a closed minded attitude, and often one that is also combative and belligerent.

 

Why in earth does reading that hurts you?

 

Cause I'm a redneck and ye hurtin' my brain dude!! :smoking:

 

A lot of stuff actually comes from the iron age. The entire New Testament for instance, the Koran, many Hindu scriptures, ditto Buddhist.

Also the notion that bronze age people lived in caves is a example of Flintstonization.

 

Increasingly I am finding in these "discussions" of God one of the sticking points for a reconciliation between a scientific concept of God and a more traditional, specifically Biblical religions, concept of God is the acceptance of paradox.
A scientific concept of God usually is along the lines of some non-involved "source", maybe an impetus for everything, but not a "personal God".
Whereas Biblical religions teach of a very personal God that deals directly with mankind and guides and dictates events.

Why can't it be both?

will admit to being more and more intrigued with the concepts outlined in the Law of One stuff, a fair bit of it actually makes a lot of sense, both in terms of spiritual/religious concepts and scientific concepts, including evolution.
some of it I still think is a little whack, but that is also in part due to my ignorance of some of the topics covered.

 

that's just plain silly because you are making a lot of assumptions concerning their actual knowledge level and intelligence.
"And no I don't buy the "allegory" stuff"
LOL
What the hell do you think 99% of all religious writings are??????????????


FYI, literally thousands of people, places and events recorded in the OT have been confirmed as real according to modern archaeology, so be careful you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

It's called using discernment.

 

I am very spiritual. I am just not religious at all. Everyone has the right to believe or not believe what they want. I was just expressing how I saw things, even though some people seemed to get their pants in a tizzy over that.
I guess I should know better by now, shame on me!

 

We live in Gods oil painting. He is always touching it up. Creation happens every day and invasive species and extinction are a part of Creation.

The world is Gods canvas

True faith requires no proof and no validation.

 

But you should preface that with I believe or think rather than saying it is some fact that all see.

 

Lol... You were the one who felt insulted for some reason and making all kinds of assumptions.

*Big sigh* Hope you don't really mean that...

 

Is that what "they" regard or what you regard?

To paraphrase a Lawrence Krauss (antitheist) quote regarding the scope of the universe: "The findings in quantum mechanics are suggesting we are insignificant in a way Copernicus couldn't have even imagined."

Humbling statement...

Assuming you don't follow a religion, why does antitheism not have much merit to you?
Do you maintain theistic beliefs or is it something more along the lines of the apparent crassness of antitheism in rejecting aspects of culture associated with quaint tradition?

 

I want to mean that....but you know....me and my big mouth....
Funny, in real life, I am soft spoken and generally just walk away....It is that wizard of oz behind the curtain thing....
I cannot make any promises. i don't trust myself with this keyboard.....LOL