Evolution v Creationism

[JOHNNYAITCH]

. Also, the book states that God made plants before he made the sun.....

 

.

 

True but it also states that he created light on the first day, so before he created plants..plants need light not specifically sunlight. So light existed before plants

 

Not that I belive that happened but it's no argument to claim it's a flaw that plants were created before the sun

[JOHNNYAITCH]

I don't know of any evidence for god..

 

You don't know of any scientific evidence for God

[JOHNNYAITCH]

A point I have often put to believers regarding dinosasurs (they often crop up!!!)

 

The reason no one who wrote the holy books wrote about dinosaurs is that they had not been discovered when the books were written. I believe that dinosaur fossils were first found in the 1820s..surely if the Bible etc were the word of God they would have got a mention somewhere...they didn't cos the books are the words of men, men who at the time did not know about dinosaurs

[Warren]

I think within his quote he makes it abundantly clear that he does not believe in an afterlife Warren and just because someone does not believe in an afterlife does not mean they have not explored themselves. I also believe when I die I will be buried and the fauna and flora can live off me as i have lived off them throughout my life. I am currently reading a brief history of time written by Hawking and as of yet there is no mention of multiverse, It seems the multiverse theory was denounced at his own 70th birthday party too http://carm.org/atheism-and-the-multiverse

 

His beliefs are different in form from some other peoples' but nonetheless he is not bounded by this universe. http://marydaly.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/hawkings-multiverse/

 

He can indeed understand his mind and its nature without believing in life after death or god. The challenge of Buddhism is whether its teachings are philosophy or religion. Nonetheless the observation I made that he may be missing quite a lot by having a dominance of calculation in this thinking is relevant in affecting his views. The thing that he needs to do and a lot of people would benefit from in understanding self is just to be and see what they reveals when the monkey mind of thought after thought and perceptional thinking is calmed and the underpinning force that exists is allowed to have more of a role.

[Andyregs]

Well the Bible is very complex and I guess passages can be picked out in isolation to support or put down all sorts of arguments

 

Broadly what you refer to is I think Old Testament which is not what Christianity is about..Christianity is about New testament. The Old Testamant is the Hebrew Bible and is the basis for Judaism not Christianity...although there are references to the Old Testament in the New Testament. At least that's my understandiong

 

I was raised a Christian but lost what faith that I had,my brother is a devout Christian and his wife is a CofE minister(which I reckon makes her something of an expert) and I have spent countless occasions talking issues over with the both of them..doesn't make me an expert but gives me some insight into what they believe and what the CofE is all about.

 

The old testament is a Christian book. The whole point is the new testament is the prophecy of the Old Testament coming true. Christian leaders constantly use the Old Testament for reference (though only the bits that fit their agenda and ignore the other bits), the Ten Commandments being an obvious example. Christian believe that god is infallible so if your understanding comes from conversations with other Christians, then it sounds like they are trying to fit a rigid dogma and trying to bend it to fit with what they want to believe.

[Andyregs]

You don't know of any scientific evidence for God

 

He doesn't know of any evidence full stop, and by not suggesting any I presume you don't. And please don't suggest the bible. That's basically saying the bible is true because the bible says so.

[SuperValiant1876]

He doesn't know of any evidence full stop, and by not suggesting any I presume you don't. And please don't suggest the bible. That's basically saying the bible is true because the bible says so.

 

Don't forget you are supposed to pick and choose which bits are true.....basically none of it in realism.

 

Also, don't mention that the stories are pretty much the same as ones told over a thousand years before about a different God and prophet.

[SuperValiant1876]

His beliefs are different in form from some other peoples' but nonetheless he is not bounded by this universe. http://marydaly.wordpress.com/2010/06/21/hawkings-multiverse/

 

You completely ignored the post where I posted a link which shows Hawkings denouncing his multiverse theory at his 70th birthday party.....

[JOHNNYAITCH]

He doesn't know of any evidence full stop, and by not suggesting any I presume you don't. And please don't suggest the bible. That's basically saying the bible is true because the bible says so.

 

 

Are you suggesting that the only evidence for anything is scientific evidence?

 

Why would I suggest the Bible when i don't believe in it and have said repesatedly onm here that I am not religious?

[JOHNNYAITCH]

The old testament is a Christian book.

 

Is it?

 

The Old Testament is the Jewish Bible..it forms part of the Christian Bible but Christianity is based on the New testament

 

The word "testament" means "covenant." The term "old testament" refers to the covenant which God entered into with Abraham and the people of Israel, and"new testament" refers to the covenant the earliest Christians believed God has entered into with all believers through Christ.

 

The whole point is the new testament is the prophecy of the Old Testament coming true.

It's not that simple, it never is.Early Christians decided that while Judaism was the true revelation of God and the foundation of Christianity, Christianity represented a new era of God's dealings with the world so the extensive body of Jewish law was no longer binding.

 

Christian leaders constantly use the Old Testament for reference (though only the bits that fit their agenda and ignore the other bits), the Ten Commandments being an obvious example.

 

Indeed they do

 

Christian believe that god is infallible so if your understanding comes from conversations with other Christians, then it sounds like they are trying to fit a rigid dogma and trying to bend it to fit with what they want to believe.

 

My understanding does not solely come form such conversations..and why do you use the phrase 'other Christians' ? I have repeatedly stated and state again that I am not religious...I am not a Christian

 

I don't recognise anything you say about rigid dogma, bending things etc..does not match with those I know best at all. If anything the people I know best have changed and grown and gained a better undersdtanding as they have learned more as opposed to dogma and bending 'it'...I don't find them dogmatic at all

[JOHNNYAITCH]

Don't forget you are supposed to pick and choose which bits are true.....basically none of it in realism.

 

No you are not..like many things in life one grows and comes to understand it as one develops.

 

Also, don't mention that the stories are pretty much the same as ones told over a thousand years before about a different God and prophet.

 

Does that mean they are not true?

[JOHNNYAITCH]

He doesn't know of any evidence full stop, and by not suggesting any I presume you don't. And please don't suggest the bible. That's basically saying the bible is true because the bible says so.

 

Someone religious would tell you that the evidence for God is the universe and all within it. It's not scientific but then they would not cliam that it is. It's not proof but then they would not claim that it is

[JOHNNYAITCH]

Christian believe that god is infallible

 

What do you mean by infallible in this context?

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fallible?s=t

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/infallible?s=t

[SuperValiant1876]

Someone religious would tell you that the evidence for God is the universe and all within it. It's not scientific but then they would not cliam that it is. It's not proof but then they would not claim that it is

 

No you are not..like many things in life one grows and comes to understand it as one develops.

 

So evidence is different than proof?

 

 

And that is the biggest cop out going JA. So why is it taught as fact at primary schools? Why is every child in primary education indoctrinated in this day and age?

 

You say you know a minister so this gives you an insight. I know a doctor but I don't know the ins and out's of medicine. The FACT is that there is NO proof whatsoever for a God and only proof that we have evolved over the years into what we are now. Creationists and some Christians believe we were created as we are now and that is in spite of scientific proof that we did not. HOw is that so hard to take in?

[Andyregs]

Someone religious would tell you that the evidence for God is the universe and all within it. It's not scientific but then they would not cliam that it is. It's not proof but then they would not claim that it is

 

The universe is evidence that the universe exists. Logically it can't be anything else. Not knowing where it came from isn't evidence for a god. It's as much evidence for god as it is for fairies at the bottom of my garden.