I’ve been sitting here for a while now trying to sort out how I feel about this story in the Ocala Star-Banner. I’m fine with the sentiments of the quoted science teachers, but I have this nagging heartburn over how the word theory seems to be trampled on in the process. The point of the story, despite its misleading headline, is that there are starkly contrasting views within the overall religious community concerning evolution. I just wish that the whole “it’s just a theory … don’t worry about it” meme would go the way of the dodo.
On a separate subject, Florida Board of Education member Donna Callaway is one very confused individual. Read her ramblings at the Florida Baptist Witness. How in the world can she say with a straight face that she’s not bringing religion into her stance on the science standards? She’s writing in the Florida Baptist Witness! And look at how her justification bounces back and forth between “religion,” “not religion,” “religion,” “not religion.” I got whiplash reading that twisted logic.
Did you happen to notice the date at the beginning of the FBW article? When did the hearing take place, again?
The first THREE WORDS of the article are factually incorrect. They couldn’t even be bothered to fact check a date. I guess when you have the age of the earth off by a few billion years, the three or nine month difference between November and February doesn’t seem like such a big deal.
“Evolution is a major thread in the larger tapestry that I like to call…REALITY!!!!!!!” -Lewis Black
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_BRZoXjOmI (NSFW)
Go to 3:37…I suspect you were making a similar face while reading the article.
@ Mike O’Risal – The (Donna Callaway) piece that you wrote on your blog is fantastic! 🙂
Thanks Scott… though I messed up Katherine Harris’ name at the end. For some reason, I always want to call her Kathleen. Oops!
Mike, how about sourpuss? I think that sums up harris pretty well!
“David said she tells her students that “there is no inherent conflict in fact-based science and fact-based beliefs.”
Whaaaaaaa??????????
And then, there’s this gem
“I don’t have a problem with the ‘Big Bang Theory’ as long as God was ‘The Big Banger,’ ” he said.
Oh the image! Oh the humanity!!!!!!! Everyone stand back, time for the money shot!
A morale builder about viruses
I’m signed up for an email from the site “Talk Reason” which sends updates about new articles. Some I understand more than others and this is one of the “others”; however, I thought I’d pass it along since it has something for everyone–it really does.
Smith’s blog: http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot.com/
Practical applications!!! This really caught my attention:
The practical applications of evolution are worth stressing very heavily.
Religion has very often faught new discoveries but people have finally accepted them by giving the benefits (like life) priority over the holy men’s dogma. That’s the way it works. I have doubts about knocking the hard core nutters lose from their dogma, but the vast number of people sitting on the fence could be swayed by repeatedly informing them about applications. And, understanding about scientific “theory” is not required. I’m not suggesting giving up the epistemological battle; I’m suggesting adding practical applications and giving them priority of emphasis.
Try to calm yourself, some of the contrasting views over evolution do not categorize it as a theory. One origination sees it as much more. Not all together science but partially a faith based religion. Ha Ha http://www.fcefaith.org
ABO, you (or the site’s author if not you) forgot the 2 ingredients of good satire.
1. There has to be an element of truth to it.
2. It has to be clever.
fcefaith.org fails at both.
Correction: It has to portray a given position to a certain degree of accuracy. It doesn’t have to necessarily be true.
Good satire: http://www.satirewire.com/news/march02/coincidence.shtml
I don’t think satire is the goal here. Apparently this is a religious cult.
And you are the cult leader … you are so transparent – get a life.
ABO aren’t the same wooer that posts inane messages on Pharyngula?
I think ABO is “Bob”. This is the same nutball troll who talks about everyone worshiping the prophet “Darwin”. Nobody cares.
Otherwise known as “Pastor Bill”.
Josh Krupnick say’s ,”I think ABO is “Bobâ€. This is the same nutball troll who talks about everyone worshiping the prophet “Darwinâ€. Nobody cares.”
I’m honored that you think my commentary is as eloquent as Pastor Bill’s, but who is Bob?
Try not to get your underwear waded up, you could explode. There’s a lot of people on this site who have put their faith and trust in the imaginations of Darwin, and they do care.
There’s a lot of people on this site who have put their faith and trust in the imaginations of Darwin, and they do care.
I think you meant to say, “I think there are a lot of trolls on this site who have put their faith into a literal interpretation of the creationism story in their bible.”
ABO, nobody here has put their faith in anyone’s imagination regarding evolution. Scientific opinion is based the evidence produced through experiment and observation.
Even given the limits of mid-19th century science, Darwin still managed to come up with a whole heap of it himself, enough to rival the volume of any mythological tome, though perhaps a bit drier without the rape, incest, murder, genocide, ritualized cannibalism, or cosmic Jewish zombies that are contained in the Bible. I mean, it took me months (years counting a few false starts) to get through On the Origin of Species….
There seems to be a recurring theme of the anti-evolutionists arguing the evolution = religion angle with Darwin as a sort of deity figure “worshiped” by the science community. There’s a certain irony to this since we all know that
A)There is no Darwin worship in the sense that the fundamentalists would like to believe. He is credited for his work in developing the theory of evolution, but that’s the extent of it.
B)Evolution is not treated as a religion, since if it were so, we wouldn’t be doing anymore research on it’s unexplained aspects since “questioning the religious dogma” is not exactly keeping the faith.
The irony here is that it is the religious anti-science zealots/fundamentalists who have deified Darwin into a religious figure and not the actual scientific community.
Karl –
It isn’t so ironic when you think of it. People tend to assume that others think the same way they do. Creationists only understand gods and worship. It makes perfect sense that they would assume that everyone worships a god.
For instance, as an atheist, I hear the same inane argument all of the time from those who would try to convert me. They claim that atheism is the belief that there are no gods, which makes it a belief system all the same. They claim that atheism is a religion, because that’s all they understand. Attempting to use logic, to claim that atheism is a complete lack of belief in the supernatural is impossible with these folks.
Likewise, attempting to explain the process in which scientists used facts and observations based on these facts to arrive at the conclusion of evolution is impossible as well. The creationists will need to find ways to inject faith into this system, as faith is all they know. To arrive by any conclusion without faith is beyond their abilities, they lack that crucial skill.
The irony here is that it is the religious anti-science zealots/fundamentalists who have deified Darwin into a religious figure and not the actual scientific community.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cpurrin1/413881663/
😀
PC-Bash
I don’t recall referring to creationism or bible stories, if you have something against those persuasions then so be it.
Your doctrine is of a quite different faith, not being fixed on a deity by rather on imagination. It was Darwin who said, “I am quite conscious that my speculations run quite beyond the bounds of true science.†Can we call the doctrine of evolution true science, when Darwin did not? And it was Darwin who said people had made a religion out of his speculations. So, you appear to be the religious anti-science zealot mentioned by James F.
In Darwins letters we read, “Dr. E. Krause has given a good account of Professor Haeckel;s services to the cause of Evolution. After speaking of the lukewarm reception which the ‘Origin’ met with in Germany on its first publication, he goes on to describe the first adherents of the new faith as more or less popular writers, not especially likely to advance its acceptance with the professorial or purely scientific world. An he claims for Haeckel that it was his advocacy of Evolution in his ‘Radiolaria’ (1862) and at the “Versammlung†of Naturalists at Stettin in 1863, that placed the Darwinian question for the first time publicly before the forum of German science, and his enthusiastic propagandism that chiefly contributed to its success.â€
So this new faith was promoted through propaganda in Germany. Is this faith or foolishness? I think both.
Your doctrine is of a quite different faith
If by different, you mean none, then I agree with you. Evolution does not require faith. It has evidence.
It was Darwin who said…and Can we call the doctrine of evolution true science, when Darwin did not?
Unfortunately, Darwin was not referring to evolution. You are being intellectually dishonest, hoping that no one will actually bother to research that quote. I did.
Nice quote mine. Shall we look at the rest of that quote? You got this quote from a letter from Charles Darwin to Asa Gray. Thanks to Project Gutenberg, I happen to have a copy of all of his correspondences right here on my hard drive. Darwin goes on to say:
So, the quote that you have completely blown out of context had to do with something else that Darwin was researching. Unlike your faith, rational people do not have to see Darwin as infallible in order to appreciate his works. You are unable to attack evolution, so you must attack the man who you feel is responsible for it. You are unable to comprehend that Darwin discovered evolution, that someone else would have if not for him, that evolution exists outside of Darwin’s “imagination”.
So, had you bothered to read instead of regurgitating creationist talking points, you would have seen that you were wrong, and you wouldn’t have just made yourself look like a fool. Nice job. 🙂
In Darwins letters we read… [additional quote mine removed]
So this new faith was promoted through propaganda in Germany. Is this faith or foolishness? I think both.
Once again, you are taking his letter out of context. You are purposefully quote mining and spinning something to support your propaganda. Shall we read the rest of the letter, properly in context?
Do you have anything to attack evolution besides attacks on Darwin? No. Can you provide evidence that evolution should be discredited, outside of quotes from your scripture? No. Hence, you resort to quote mine inanity.
PS-Bash
Apparently we are reading two different resources
I’m not attacking Darwin. Darwin did a lot of good stuff.
The evedence you claim to have would be interesting if it were actually evidence and not just verbiage based on the Darwinian speculation.
I think Darwin was aware and consenting to Haeckles bogus embryos, there by establishing the foundational processes for the evidence. Since that time transitional evidences have all been man made or just declared evidence.
So if you can buy that, it’s OK with me, but ya got faith
Apparently we are reading two different resources
No. That’s the only place that quote comes up, out of all of Darwin’s letters that were published. Either you are being intellectually dishonest, or you pulled that quote from a creationist talking point site. Which one is it?
Are you so craven that you cannot even admit when you’re wrong? Which alternate resource are you talking about? Put up, or shut up. I want a citation, or an admission that you were wrong. Are you going to honestly debate me here, or are you just a troll?
I think Darwin was aware and consenting to Haeckles bogus embryos, there by establishing the foundational processes for the evidence.
Regardless of what evidence was used then, we have modern evidence that vastly exceeds and further validates evolution.
Since that time transitional evidences have all been man made or just declared evidence.
Umm.. No. Repeating a lie like this does not make it true.
So if you can buy that, it’s OK with me, but ya got faith
No, I have evidence.
Bash, I know you don’t believe, but I just wanted to tell you that Jesus loves you. It doesn’t matter whether you believe or not. He knows everything about you and he loves you. He loves you in spite of your faults and even in the midst of your rebellion. He knows every hurt in your heart and he wants to comfort you. He loves you in a way that humans can’t. His love is not selfish, it doesn’t depend on your good works or your merit. He loves you and I know He wanted me to tell you that.
He wanted me to tell you that.
Umm… did he tell you that? 😉
Also, I wouldn’t exactly call being truthful a rebellion.
PC-Bash
I think ellie should get 10 points. Everybody else here thinks your just a mutated monkey.
Everybody else here thinks your just a mutated monkey.
Honestly, after being exposed as a quote miner, having your quote mine decimated by pulling the whole quote into context… this is the best you could come up with? Pathetic.
Also, it’s “you’re” not “your”. Otherwise, people would be thinking about my mutated monkey, which I think may be TMI.
QUOTE MINING
PC-Bash
You apparently don’t know what your you’re talking about, the letter had nothing to do with Asa Gray. Perhaps you should box up the Project Gutenberg junk and go back to just mindless babble.
The phrase comes from THE LIFE AND LETTERS OF CHARLES DARWIN 11
vol. 13 page 250.
You know Haeckel had anti-religious motives to spread the new faith throughout Germany and science had little to do with it.
You apparently don’t know what your you’re talking about, the letter had nothing to do with Asa Gray.
Really? Here’s a link to the letter, where you can find the quote that you have so taken out of context:
http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/darwinletters/calendar/entry-2109.html
You are talking out of your ass as usual ABO. As usual, I am making you look like the fool you are.
Although I know that you dread actually reading, here is a listing of various quote mines used by creationists like you, and their refutations. I found this as the first result when I searched for this quote through google. Maybe this might help to prevent you from looking so much like a fool in the future.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html
You know Haeckel had anti-religious motives to spread the new faith throughout Germany and science had little to do with it.
Haeckel… I thought you were bashing Darwin? Can you get it straight? Those two letters were from Darwin, so what does what Haeckel have to do with anything? Not that I am agreeing with your rant here, but certainly you should be able to stay on topic for even a moment? I think you must have difficulty keeping your eye on the ball. Or, perhaps you’ve realize that you’ve lost, and have moved on to your next item of inanity.
What’s next? Are you going to continue this DI line of reasoning, and claim that Darwin inspired Hitler? Are you going to claim that Darwin was a racist? What will be the next inane thing to come out of ABO’s mouth, I wonder? It certainly won’t be anything that stands up to a Google search, or any other amount of research. You will just continue to cut and paste creationist talking points, without even bothering to see how much of a fool these talking points make you. You are nothing more than a troll. Go troll somewhere else.
Bash,
I know you don’t believe that God created you. You are not the first and you won’t be the last. Whether you believe it or not, it is the truth. He knows every hair on your head and He loves every single one of them. Even if you are bald, He still loves you. I can see that you won’t be able to see the truth, until you can know His love.
1 Corinthians 8:1
Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up.
He loves you. He wants to build you up.
Whether you believe it or not, it is the truth.
If this is the truth, then were is the evidence? Do you expect me to take your reality on faith?
That is not what should be taught in a science classroom.
Whoops. That should have read: “then where is the evidence?”
That’s what I get for typing too fast.
You are not the first and you won’t be the last.
Don’t I know it! Less and less people every year are adhering to creationist dogma, instead choosing to live in reality. Even the Catholic Church, which would be a majority of Christians, reject biblical creationism, choosing to support evolution instead.
Yeah, she says that like it’s a bad thing or something.
Ellie,
How can you make a claim to know what gods truth is? your view,that of a religious believer,is reprehensible in its arrogance. The Creator of the Universe takes an active interest in me, approves of me, loves me, and will reward me after death; my current beliefs, drawn from scripture, will remain the best statement of the truth until the end of the world; everyone who disagrees with me will spend eternity in hell,but god loves you.
An average believer as your self, has achieved a level of arrogance that is simply unimaginable to a non believer.
If you are really convinced that you know what god is thinking, ask (him, her, it) the winning Florisa Lotto numbers for tomorrow night. Play the numbers and convince us all. Also I have a friend who came home from the first Iraq war missing a big toe,please ask your god to regrow it,should be a piece of cake for a all powerfull being.
That makes for an interesting question. How do you know that your scripture is true? What process do you use to validate it?
Now have I ever said that we should teach this in science class?
It is not arrogance, for I am just thankful and blessed that He opened my eyes so that I could see that I was a sinner, that I was not worthy of the love that He freely offers to us all. Yes, I do know of these things from reading it in the scripture, yet it is proven to me in my heart. That I can feel love and caring for you even though you are so mad at me. I can only do that because of the love that He gave me.
I did not mean to make you angry, I just wanted to share with you some of the love that I feel from Him. As for approval, I know that God does not approve of or accept all the things that I have done. In fact the more that I have come to know Him, the more repugnant some of my behavior has been. The more grateful that I am that He has saved me from it. It is only from being so lost myself that I more fully appreciate what He has done for me. I only wanted to share that with you. I wish you could know Him as I do. The n you would surely love Him too.
As for the lotto, I do not seek that kind of wealth. I know that God will help me to pay my debts and He makes sure that I am clothed and fed. If He wishes for me to be wealthy then He will show me the way. I trust Him. I respect my earthly father, but he has never given me the assurance that he would always be there for me. I know that whatever I go through that even though it looks bleak He is there.
Jonathan, I like that my name. That is my brother’s name. I am sorry for your friend, that came back from Iraq and lost his toe. I am thankful that he came back from Iraq otherwise intact. I assume that you would mention if there were something worse. I believe that God could grow a new toe for your friend. Sometimes, are physical bodies are not the most important thing. God can do wonderful things to a person’s heart when they suffer a loss. It depends on the person though and how they react. Sometimes we react with bitterness and anger which ends up eating away at our very souls. I know that before I was a Christian, I used to look at every obstacle and think why me. Now I look at it as How does God want me to grow from this. What is He trying to teach me? I really don’t think I am arrogant. I know I have much to learn.
Now have I ever said that we should teach this in science class?
So, teaching evolution as-is in the science class is okay by you?
PC-Bash
I don’t know what you are smoking but it’s got to be potent. The quote I listed was pointed out by Francis Darwin, not me.
I’m not bashing anybody, Darwin or Haeckel. My post simply tells a few facts, can’t you handle that. You’re saying Darwinian evolution has no religious significance, but when the fact don’t boost the faith you hold, you get bent. How sad.
And of course Darwin inspired Hitler, every body knows that don’t you? Hitler provided the greatest example of natural selection the world has ever seen. That’s just a fact.
The talk origins site is filled with bias atheist garbage, so I have to take it with a grain of salt. The fancy website doesn’t make it accurate. So far you have provided nothing other than whimpering for you’re savior the Prophet Charles Darwin. Provide something he couldn’t find, like a flying cat or monkeys farming tomatoes, or anything which proves the faith you have is science and not religion.
Who would like to remind ABO of all the wars that have been fought in the name of religion?
My post simply tells a few facts, can’t you handle that.
After I showed to you that you were taking the quotes out of context, you still continue to flaunt them as some sort of “evidence” that evolution is a faith, which is not only incorrect, but laughable.
And of course Darwin inspired Hitler, every body knows that don’t you?
Actually, if you want to know one of Hitler’s biggest influences, it was Martin Luther (the guy who provided you with your bible that you are thumping so loudly right now). In fact, Hitler wrote of this in Mein Kampf. So, I think by your inane logic, this should prove that your bible is also evil, no?
The talk origins site is filled with bias atheist garbage
Oh, is that what you call it when you are given evidence that you are wrong? That’s doublethink enough to make Orwell proud. You can’t attack the position, so you attack the messenger. How typical of the creationist mindset. You are boring me.
In other words, you can’t be bothered to read the evidence. You are willfully ignorant, ABO. You are the exact reason why we need stronger science standards, people like you are proof that the educational system that you went through failed.
Who would like to remind ABO of all the wars that have been fought in the name of religion?
Yeah… I think I just did that. 😉
Bash, I didn’t say that either. As, I have mentioned before. I value honesty. The bible says that the devil is the father of all lies. I personally thnk that it is dishonest to say that there is an intelligent designer and not to name Him as the one and only most holy God.
I do think that we should teach evolution in the classroom. However, the manner in which it is currently taught is misleading. Misleading is lying.
Evolution is currently taught as a spectrum. Since one part of that spectrum is established and proven we should just accept the whole thing as fact. That is a lie.
Evolution should be broken down into 3 parts.
1. origin of life
2. mutations selected by natural selection resulting in new species
3. molecules to man
Part 2 has been proven and is accepted and it does not conflict with the bible’s description of life multiplying after its own kind.
Parts 1 & 3 are merely speculation.
To say that scientists have solved the mysteries of the universe is arrogance and misrepresentation. They may have some ideas, hypotheses or even theories; but they do not have observed evidence to back that up.
However, the manner in which it is currently taught is misleading.
How is it misleading, precisely?
Evolution should be broken down into 3 parts.
1. origin of life
2. mutations selected by natural selection resulting in new species
3. molecules to man
Evolution is not about the origin of life. That is abiogenesis. 1 and 3 are bunk. I’ve already given sufficient evidence for 2.
but they do not have observed evidence to back that up.
They have observed a multitude of evidence to support evolution.
Ellie – I must say that it is quite refreshing when I hear someone say…
” I personally thnk that it is dishonest to say that there is an intelligent designer and not to name Him as the one and only most holy God.”
It drives me quite crazy when someone tries to hide behind the “Dishonesty Institute” and claim that “ID” is science.
It leaves me one of two opinions of them:
1. – That they are arrogant enough to think that no one will figure out what they are trying to do.
or
2. – That they are ignorant of science and are being used (like pawns) by the “DI” to implement their “Wedge Strategy”
Either way, it is the deceipt that bothers me the most.
I might encourage you to read the Clergy Letter if you haven’t done so already.
http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/religion_science_collaboration.htm
Have a happy day 🙂
ellie
I am not the least bit angry so you can stop the martyred Christian ploy,its very mendacious.
You quote frequently from the bible,why?
Quoting from a work is fruitless unless you first prove the book is valid, truthful and reliable, instead of proving the book to be true, valid and inerrant, you merely assume as much and proceeded to quote at will.
All you know about god comes from Scripture. The validity of god depends upon the validity, reliability and accuracy of Scripture. But how do you know god except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not god’s word and does not present a picture of god that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true god you are following? You are just worshipping a god of your own imagination.” The Bible says, “Prove all things…” (1 Thess. 5:12) show me the proof. If asked how you know your statements are true, you would probably say, because they are in the Bible. But, instead of asking yourself the Bible is true, you just assumed as much. It says for instance, that “all have sinned,” which is completely false. How do I know, because your own book says so. Don’t you believe it? “Noah was a just and perfect in his generation,…” (Gen. 6:9); “… that man (Job-ed) was perfect and upright,…” (Job 1:1). These men were perfect, so obviously they could not have been sinners. How can you be a sinner and be perfect? The Bible has hundreds of problems of this nature.
The bible says, “No man who abides in him sins;…” (1 John 3:6). If you abide in him, as you believe, why are you still sinning. Surely you are not saying you no longer sin. With all due respect, if there is any verse in the Bible you and those of like mind should commit to memory it is Proverb 14:15, which says, “The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going.”
Jonathan,
1 Thess 5:12
12 And we urge you, brethren, to recognize those who labor among you, and are over you in the Lord and admonish you.
You must have had the wrong reference for that one, but I thought of this one that may be what you were trying to say.
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,
1 Peter 3:15
I found it amusing that you would quote from a book that you consider so fruitless. Maybe you consider it so, because you are looking for different fruit. You and your friends quote from Dawkins and Darwin and i would consider their work to be fruitless. I understand if you don’t share my views in this regard.
Galatians 5:22-23 says –
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
These fruit may not be of value to you, but they are to me.
You may not have been mad at me, but you you seem to be mean-spirited. I consider calling me a liar to be an attack and I will defend myself with the word of God as my sword.
You make an assumption about the origins of my faith. You assume that I just gave my heart to God and my mind with it. Let me tell you about my spiritual journey. I would not be so bold to assume that you are interested, but I am responding to your accusations.
I grew up in an agnostic/atheistic home. My father today cannot stand to hear about my beliefs and convictions. You would probably get along famously. I grew up believing all the things you espouse. My father is a physicist and I have a science background too. I have always looked at things analytically much like you do.
For many reasons I was unhappy even though I had many reasons to be thankful. I guess you could say that I had a self pity thing going. Then I met oe of my best friends. She was very happy and joyful. I wanted that too. She is a Christian and she will quote the bible to you more frequently than me. I wasn’t ready to commit my life to Christ, so I observed her. I found that she was thankful for simple things and i contrasted that to myself. I was more worried about what I didn’t have, than thankful for what I did have. I had always thought that, if God was so great, then why did he need us to thank all the time. Watching my friend though, I thought God doesn’t need us to be thankful for His good as much as we need to be thankful for our own good. I still didn’t accept everything the bible had to say, but for the first time in my life I was willing to consider it hypothetically. I started looking at the bible trying to see if it could be true.
Proverbs 8:17
I love those who love me, and those who seek me find me.
I started seeking Him through His word. It is said that the bible is a living word. It is amazing how your attitude affects your interpretation of the bible. If you are looking for contradictions you will find them, but if you are seeking answers then you will find them as well. Now tell me another book that can do that.
It has taken me along time to understand perfection and righteousness as defined by the bible. The answer to this seeming contradiction is through their faith they were made righteous.
Hebrews 11
7By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
If you read the whole chapter, it expains it more fully.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews%2011&version=31
The scripture that you took out of Romans is true ” all have sinnned” but you have to keep on reading.
Romans 4
22This is why “it was credited to him as righteousness.” 23The words “it was credited to him” were written not for him alone, 24but also for us, to whom God will credit righteousness—for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 25He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.
If you keep on reading then you find out that when we take Jesus as our saviour and commit our lives to Him we die to sin and become slaves to righteousness. This doesn’t mean we are perfect it just means we have committed our lives to being obedient to Him and he has credited us with righteousness because of our faith. It also means that you find it harder to sin. Your conscience tends to bother you. Also, desires are taken away. For instance I used to drink quite a bit before I was a Christian, but now I don’t really have that desire.
Being a Christian does not mean that we think we are better than everybody else. We have seen our flaws mopre than we care to admit and we have been given the opportunity to clear our slate and we have taken it.
Bash,
If you think 1&3 are bunk, then we are in complete agreement.
I don’t think we are though and it may be in the way that I am phrasing it. By molecules to man I mean that man evolved through various steps from microbe to mammal to man. That is what I mean by part 3. Maybe you have different terminology to express that.
If you think 1&3 are bunk, then we are in complete agreement.
I think that it is bunk that you are attempting to attribute this to evolution, which has absolutely nothing to do with the origin of life. Period.
By molecules to man I mean that man evolved through various steps from microbe to mammal to man. That is what I mean by part 3.
Then as my father once said, “say what you mean, and mean what you say.” You said molecules to man, which is not evolution. Microbes to man is evolution.
ellie
First let me say that we have some common ground we can both agree on.
You said ” joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
These fruit may not be of value to you, but they are to me”.
Of course they are of value to me,the Golden Rule (do unto others) is a worthy way for any one to live.There are many paasages in the bible that reflect goodness,but there are many that are full of hate.
Where I think we disagree is on the nature of faith itself. I think that faith is, in principle, in conflict with reason (and, therefore, that religion is, in some instances, in conflict with science), while you do not.
When I consider your kind of faith, I see belief in specific religious propositions without sufficient evidence,(prayer can heal the sick, there is a supreme Being who created all things and is listening to our thoughts, we will be reunited with our loved ones after death.)
I am not criticizing faith as a positive attitude in the face of uncertainty, of the sort indicated by phrases like, “have faith in yourself.” There’s nothing wrong with that type of “faith.”
Given my view of faith, I think that religion is basically an elaborate exercise in self-deception, while you seem to think it is a legitimate and intellectually defensible.
The word of god as found in the bible would be a poor sword to defend yourself with, more on the level of a tooth pick.
You again quoted scripture and again I will say “Quoting from a work is fruitless unless you first prove the book is valid, truthful and reliable, instead of proving the book to be true, valid and inerrant, you merely assume as much.”All have sinned means all, no matter how you try to worm your way around it.
Your road to faith is meaningless,many people.Muslims,Hindus experience the same feelings about their faith,faiths that you would consider false,
as they would consider yours false.
How ever Muslims and Christians cannot disagree about the causes of cholera, for instance, because whatever their holy books might say about infectious disease, a genuine understanding of cholera has arrived from science. Epidemiology trumps religion (or it should), especially when people are watching their children die.Science (and rational discourse generally) delivers this understanding and offers a very frank appraisal of its current limitations; Religion fails on all counts.
If God loves the world, he has a terribly noncommittal way of showing it.
S.Scott
I noticed you have referred to the Clergy Letter Project. Wouldn’t you agree that the author has been successful in bringing science into the religious realm. Notice the thousands of signatures agreeing that science should remain science and that religion remain religion. But with each endorsement is the transformation of science from the realm of knowledge and the scientific method to the sanctuary as church doctrine in many cases.
With the teaching that man has descended from ape like creatures now being taught in a religious environment as a new gospel, how would you differentiate this new church doctrine from the resurrection of the dead or water baptism.
ABO –
If evolution is “faith” as you believe, then please refute the evidence for it as I have posted multiple times, that way your inane statement will actually make sense.
” ABO Says:
March 5th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
S.Scott
I noticed you have referred to the Clergy Letter Project. Wouldn’t you agree that the author has been successful in bringing science into the religious realm. ”
No …
Just successful at enlightening some religious leaders to the B.S. that is taking place.
There are religious SCIENTISTS as well, and they are quite comfortable keeping their religious beliefs out of the laboratory.
I don’t know why, but I feel the need to bring up Saint Augustine again.
Did you know that Saint Augustine believed that everything that man learned from science is necessary for our salvation?
It seems to me that people that try to “stifle” science, are going against God.
S.Scott
You could call The Clergy Letter enlightening for some I suppose, but a close examination of the letter would categorize it as B.S. Zimmerman’s attempt to pretend his concern is the preservation of science is trash. He clearly is willing to sacrifice science to promote the theory of evolution. Twisting the meaning of science shouldn’t be the process used to identify the issue at hand.
I’ve been around a day or two and to this point I’ve never met anyone who was anti-science. Yet this is all we hear. You would think if scientist or their constituents were really concerned about science they might dissect the issue to determine just what the problem is. But of course then, that part of science, which isn’t science at all would be reviled.
Science is a pretty big word and evolution is a just a part of science not all of science. There is either a lot of confusion here, playing word games or just flat out evil.
I’m not sure what type salvation Saint Augustine obtained from science, but you have indicated people who stifle science are going against God. Could you be a little more descriptive here. Are you referring to science or are you referring to the portion of evolutionary theory which contains man’s claimed decent from ape like creatures? If the latter, then going against God is of no concern because God is unnecessary.
And you are mistaken, the theory of evolution, has become as religiously adhered to as the resurrection of the dead.
And you are mistaken, the theory of evolution, has become as religiously adhered to as the resurrection of the dead.
How predictable, ABO. Do you think that if you continue repeating this lie that eventually people will believe you?
Scientists are not so attached to evolution that they would support it if there was any evidence to discredit it. However, there is no evidence that discredits evolution. None. Period. You have been completely incapable of providing any.
PC-Bash You and I both know you’re not looking for evidence. Your faith is set, you don’t need evidence.
No, I haven’t provided you any evidence neither will I. Not until you provide something which gives some credibility to what your saying. So far you have evaded my questions and provided only irrelevant or stupid stuff. I know you’re smarter, so lets have it.
I am referring to ALL science INCLUDING evolution. If you are curious about Saint Augustine – Look him up.
PC-Bash You and I both know you’re not looking for evidence. Your faith is set, you don’t need evidence.
I’ll restate it again. There is no evidence that discredits evolution. None. Period. You have been completely incapable of providing any. You aren’t refusing to provide me with any, you are not capable of doing so. Just admit it already. You keep dodging here, because you know that you have nothing. Are you so craven that you can’t admit that you have no idea of what you are talking about?
there is no evidence that discredits evolution. None. Period. You have been completely incapable of providing any.
I have already provided you with a half dozen links. You dismiss these without even bothering to read them, because you are too afraid to confront reality.
Regardless, evolution is the status quo. You are the one who needs to provide evidence to discredit it. You can’t. You don’t have any.
All that you have is an inane little comment about giraffes, that thirty seconds of research on google completely dashed to pieces. That, and quotes from scripture. You are ignorant of science, of biology, and of debate.
So far you have evaded my questions and provided only irrelevant or stupid stuff.
What questions have I evaded? You asked for evidence for evolution. I provided you links to a copious amount of articles. You dismiss these without even reading them, because you are too craven to admit when you are wrong. I’ll “have at it” when you respond to the articles that I have posted. But, I know that you won’t. You have no desire to seek the truth, only to be a boring troll.
Jonathan,
First of all you keep making statements against the bible and to answer them I must refer to the bible. Do you think that I could answer you by quoting the dictionary? Or do you think that I could just say’ “Ellie says it is so” and you would believe that line of reasoning? If you want answers to your questions, then you will have to bear with the scripture. If you want me to be scared off by your questions, then you might want to consider another strategy.
Let me say that our common ground lies not where you think it does.
Joy despite circumstances and peace that surpasses all understanding and goodness without selfish motivation does not come out of the goodness of our hearts. You may say that there are atheists that do good things, but are there atheists that love their enemies? Are there atheists that rejoice in their afflictions? Even Christians have a hard time doing these things and we have help.
As for faith in yourself, I would say that this faith is misplaced. It is another example of our continuing desire to be in charge and control of our own lives. When we drive down the highway we may have control of our speed and have prepared by having a well tuned vehicle and good tires, but we have no control over the patch of fog or ice that may lay ahead of us or even of the drunk guy driving in the oncoming lane. If we have faith in ourselves, then we don’t have to submit to a higher authority.
Now, there are places we do have common ground.
In my agnostic years, there were a few problems that bothered me. One was that a loving God could condemn so many to hell. Another was that God asked His people to kill all of the people in the promised land. That included women and children. If God is a loving God, this seems like the biggest contradiction of all.
Now bear with me because this is difficult to explain.
Many Christians don’t want to consider the old testament. They say, “That’s the old God, this is the new.” This is who He is speaking to when He says –
Hebrews 5:12
In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the elementary truths of God’s word all over again. You need milk, not solid food!
They want to just consider “God is love”, the warm and fuzzy God. They want the milk and are not willing to go on to solid food.
You can’t accept this. You say I will not accept the milk, because of the solid food that comes with it. You are right. They go together.
14But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.
The only problem is that you have to see it from God’s perspective. In order to see from this angle, since you don’t believe, you will have to go on a hypothetical journey with me. This is the part that has convinced me of the truth in His word. When I opened my mind to the possibility that there could be truth here, then I was able to see things from such a perspective that all the pieces seem to fit together perfectly. Admittedly, they didn’t all go together at first. I took baby steps. But as it came together it seemed to be inside out from the way that man would think, yet more truthful than the way that man would think. To me it seems that man could not have made this up, because we just cannot think this way without God’s help. Once you start to see the whole picture, the more it unfolds, the more you realize it is the truth.
To me it seems that man could not have made this up, because we just cannot think this way without God’s help.
If I write nonsense, it can either be “profound”, or it can be nonsense. Injecting “god” into nonsense does not make it profound.
Nor does it help to explain whether evolution should be taught in the science classroom or not. Theology does not belong in the science classroom, as it requires faith and laughs in the face of empirical evidence.
Bash,
It’s a hypothetical journey. You can take it or leave it. You have a choice. Whatever choice you make, God will love you. He will grieve if you turn from Him. He will rejoice if you turn to Him.
Jonathan,
I gave you a long intro to that journey and then left you hanging. Well the journey starts with choices which I discussed with Bash on blog 432. For your convenience, I will paste it here.
First of all, God created angels and humans to have a choice.
If he didn’t give them a choice then it would all be just like Satan said about Job.
8 Then the LORD said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil.”
9 “Does Job fear God for nothing?” Satan replied. 10 “Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.”
Satan is saying you have given Job everything. Of course he will follow you anyone would. You didn’t give him a choice.
What Satan seems to be forgetting is that he was with God as the chief angel and yet he wanted more. He refused to be second in line and he parted from God and took other angels with him. He made a choice.
Then God created the world and all it’s creatures. Adam and Eve didn’t have to work they could just lay around in hammocks and drink pineapple juice. In that garden there were no mutations – no sickle cell anemia and no cancer. However, He gave them one choice.
What would you pick?
Deal or No Deal.
You already have the suitcase with the Garden of Eden, but that one other suitcase could have something better than paradise in it. God has already warned you not to take that suitcase, but you are tempted. You want to be as great as God, so you take that suitcase. Big mistake. Not only did Adam and Eve get kicked out of paradise, they condemned us all into living in a fallen world.
So you see, all this suffering is not because of the way that God created this world. It is because of the choice that was made. We are still trying to make this choice. We want to be the top dog. We don’t want anyone telling us how to live our lives. We don’t want an authority over us that tells us to stop doing the things we like to do. Even though most of the things that we do that are against God’s rules lead us not into happiness, but heartache. Just like the choice that Eve made.
Then God, in His mercy, offers us another choice. He offers the death of His son to pay for our sins. He offers this to you and me and everyone. He says that all who make this choice will one day see paradise. We have to make the choice.
Deal or No Deal.
Will we submit to His authority or will we continue on in our struggle to be first.
They all had the choice to submit or to try and be like God. Everyone is offered the same choice. Yes, He knows who is going to make the right decision and who isn’t, but He has to offer them the choice. Otherwise their obedience doesn’t mean anything. If I lock you in a room and tell you not to go outside does that make you obedient. No it makes you trapped. If you want someone to love you, do you hold them at gunpoint? No you have to offer them the choice. God created us to love Him and He loves us even when we don’t love Him, but He never forces us to love Him. He just offers His love to us and allows us to make a choice.
It’s hard for us to see that, because we don’t realize what Adam and Eve had with Him.
Really hell is just life without God. If you hate Him so much, then that should be fine. But you may not realize all the times He touches your life that make this life bearable. Without any hope for anything good that would really be hell.
Alas, none of this has anything to do with whether we should teach evolution in science class.
Although, you must admit that my logical trap on the other blog entry is pretty damning. You cannot have it both ways. You cannot believe your god to be all-loving, all-knowing, and infallible if you stick to a strictly literalist interpretation of your bible. If you do not take your bible literally, then you cannot, with any honesty, tell me that some parts of it are definitely literal and other parts are allegory. If you cannot make a definitive claim as to which parts are literal, you cannot claim that the creation story is literal. If you cannot claim that the creation story is literal, then you have no leg to stand on with your YEC “theory”.
I believe that my God is all-loving, all-knowing, and infallible, but He is also just. He is merciful, but He also has to punish.
So… he creates people who he knows will sin, just for the sake of punishing them with eternal damnation? That is not all-loving. If he is all-loving, then either he does not know that they will sin, which invalidates the all-knowing, or he made a mistake when he created them, which invalidates the infallible.
Do you not see the logical contradiction here?
This contradiction goes away the moment you stop taking your creation story literally. So, you must choose. Young-earth creationism, or your god. You cannot have both.