Help...God is shaking me down!

[Brian-M]

Believe in the Big Bang or be mocked, scorned and called irrational by evolutionists for the rest of your life. Don't you do the same thing as the religious?

Evolution has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Do you mean cosmologists? You won't be mocked by cosmologists (or evolutionists), for not believing in the Big Bang if you can come up with a rational explanation for everything in the universe to be moving away from a single point in space. I regularly read New Scientist magazine, which sometimes includes articles on cosmology. One or two of them have described theorys of the origin and nature of the universe without a Big Bang, complete with mathematical proof. Nobody was mocking them.

And as for your last sentence; what you say about science is correct, but you fail to understand that theism is actually a form of science; one researches historical records, one philosophises, goes about things logically, and comes to a conclusion. If by "science" you mean the "big bang", then I'm afraid that this is the perfect example of what science is not, according to your own words. After all, it requires blind faith as opposed to evidence.

Theism is not science. Science is a process of accumulating understanding by observation, theorization, logic and experimentation. The key aspect of science is evidence. If the evidence conflicts with a scientific theory, then the theory is flawed. In theology, if the evidence conflicts with your beliefs, the evidence is ignored. Theology is the opposite of science.

According to evolutionary theory, isn't it true that mankind evolved from bacteria that originated from the "big bang", an event taking place in space?

No. Evolution explains how living things change over time. It makes no claims about how life began.

Theism is supported by more evidence than evolution, and as for remaking historical records- many of today's great modern inventions came from England or branches of it in the 17th and 18th centuries, when Christianity was extremely prominent. But evolutionary "scientists" as we call them, wouldn't want us to know that, would they?

Theism is not supported by any evidence. Talk to a historian, and ask him to confirm the accuracy of the bible. Then wait for him to stop laughing.

Many of today's great ideas and philosophies came from ancient Greece and Rome, when Christianity was non-existent or non-influential. Mathematics, mechanics, medicine, philosophy and democracy have strong roots in these polytheistic societies. The church's strong hold on Europe (including England) resulted in centuries of oppression, ignorance and stagnation, until the renaissance in the 17th century when the church's total domination over the populace was loosened enough for the writings of these ancient polytheists to become widely known and begin the new age of enlightenment. Christianity deserves no credit for this progress.

And I suppose what you've studied is the "evolutionary jump"? When one creature suddenly transforms into something else despite the fact that there is absolutely no grounds in logic for it doing so? Or maybe you've studied about why there are no creatures alive today that are half man and half ape despite the fact humanity is supposed to have evolved from them? Maybe you've studied about how the human race could evolve later on in the future? Maybe one day we'll decide we don't want to walk anymore, sprout wings and fly away? Good luck.

As for me, I think that the idea that one can leave the sphere of one's own species to become something entirely different is ludicrous- as much so as the idea of apes developing man-like intelligence. No matter how much you try to educate an ape, and no matter over how many generations, the most one could do is domesticate one. It will throw tantrums, screech, smash things, eat bananas, but it won't gradually turn into a different creature, whether a man, a bird, a fish or anything else. And it won't have intellectual conversations with you. If we apply this evolutionary rule to all life forms, we're expected to believe that this (and men growing wings) is perfectly plausible.

This form of evolution is called Lamarkism and has been discredited for over a century. Perhaps you should learn Darwinian evolution. It's very different.

Intelligent Design at least has some basis in fact, as can be seen in the relationship between the cells of the human body, between flowers and bees, and sexual reproduction.

All this fits in nicely with Darwinian evolution.

It can also be seen in that the nature of our earthly atmosphere (degrees in temperature etc. etc.) was made for the support of life.

The fact that life happened to occur on one of the very few planets capable of sustaining life is not evidence of an Intelligent Designer. It's an example of observer bias. Earth is not suitable for life because we are here. We are here because the Earth is suitable for life. You're getting things backwards

(BTW, our atmosphere is a by-product of life living here. Oxygen was a toxic waste-product to early forms of life.)

 

[sillyhead]

Yeah, Oral Roberts is my least favorite evangalist, like ever, because I had to watch his fat ass as a kid and my g-ma gave him too much money (yeah, I know, her fault).

Anyway, I don't like the way a lot of atheists act, even though I guess I'm one. It's condescending and insulting and alienating. Now, if someone tries preaching at me, they're likely to get some really bizarre, and possibly rude responses from me, but if someone's a xian and says they'll pray for me cuz I'm sick or whatever, I don't get all haughty and start screeching about the non-existence of god. And when I see people who do that sort of thing, it just makes me wince. I remember a long time ago there was one of those on a BBS I was a member of, and I told him he was more dogmatic than any xian I'd ever met. He knocked it off after he thought about it that way.

Anyway, I know plenty of xians who believe the facts about evolution, and it has no conflict with their religious beliefs. I detest those people like Roberts and other televangelists (and most preachers in general), but there are a lot of people I love who are xians, and hell if I'm going to sit around and call them idiots for that, thus depriving myself of their wonderful company. Just because I don't believe doesn't mean someone else doesn't have the right to, or that they're stupid because they do.

 

[arthwollipot]

Anyway, I don't like the way a lot of atheists act, even though I guess I'm one. It's condescending and insulting and alienating. Now, if someone tries preaching at me, they're likely to get some really bizarre, and possibly rude responses from me, but if someone's a xian and says they'll pray for me cuz I'm sick or whatever, I don't get all haughty and start screeching about the non-existence of god. And when I see people who do that sort of thing, it just makes me wince. I remember a long time ago there was one of those on a BBS I was a member of, and I told him he was more dogmatic than any xian I'd ever met. He knocked it off after he thought about it that way.

Have you ever seen an atheist actually do that outside of an internet forum? In my experience, atheists are the most polite and tolerant of people in the real world. Sure, there are the strident ones, but there are not as many of them as you might think if the only time you've ever encountered atheists is on internet forums. People tend to let themselves go a little on the internet.

 

[sillyhead]

Yeah, I have, and it wasn't pretty. Not nearly as often as on the internet, though, granted.

ETA: I have also met the most kind-hearted, patient atheist ever on the internet. She had a terminal illness, and was the object of a lot of preaching in order to quickly save her soul before she died, but she dealt with that with true grace and kindness. RIP

 

[Arkayik]

How much do you know about invisible pink unicorns?

O M G! I nearly fell out of my chair! Thank you that was too funny...

cheers,

Ark

 

[gdnp]

Or maybe you've studied about why there are no creatures alive today that are half man and half ape despite the fact humanity is supposed to have evolved from them?

As others have pointed out, the major flaw in this argument is that "men evolved from apes". In fact, evolution states that modern man and modern apes evolved from a common ancestor.

But there is a second fallacy this argument: I could argue that a chimpanzee is half monkey and half man. Why doesn't that satisfy the requirement for a link? You see, even if there were a creature half way between chimps and humans--let's call it an apeish for want of a better term--we would just be arguing about why there are no creatures today half man and half apish.

 

[TiaH]

And what's wrong with ridiculing the ridiculous?

Right!
If people don't want to have others laugh at their beliefs, then they shouldn't have such funny beliefs.

 

[billydkid]

Relic does have a point. I often question the maturity of Atheists who feel it necessary to use phrases like "big sky daddy" and putting Darwin Fish on their cars. It's deliberatly provocactive. It's not to try to make anyone change their minds. It's ridicule of religious beliefs.

At what point do ridiculous beliefs deserve to be ridiculed? If some do, why do others don't? Is it because some ridiculous beliefs are more widely held? This idea that we are suppose to respect some ridiculous beliefs while holding others in contempt is absurd. Would you argue that we are supposed to respect all ridiculous beliefs? Any belief anyone has? Shouldn't we respect beliefs or not based on their likelihood to have some basis in reality? If I decided to believe that my cat is God and the way to serve him is to take a dump on other people lawns would that belief be worthy of your respect? And yet some other completely baseless beliefs are?

 

[JWideman]

It mustn't have worked too well. He was far short of his goal when some "mysterious donor" gave him the rest of the money just in time.

 

[AZCat]

If I decided to believe that my cat is God and the way to serve him is to take a dump on other people lawns would that belief be worthy of your respect?

I think your cat might already hold this belief.

 

[Mashuna]

The Intelligent Designer is eternal, not only in the sense of forever going back and forward, but also in the sense of creating time itself as a tool for human beings to live within. Further more, the Intelligent Designer is in possession of infinite power- logical grounds for having created the universe.

What colour is he?

 

[Mark Felt]

What colour is he?

Since colour is dependant on the circumstances in which you see something, and since it's impossible to see this eternal god... hot pink?