Does learning about evolution make you uncomfortable?

[Strathos]

What does that mean?

He believed that God and the universe were one and the same.

The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things.

I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind.

 

[NBB]

I agree, just because you have special needs does not excuse your behavior. There are many here who are happy to help you understand ToE. Just be polite and you might be surprised.

Maybe you are in dire need to learn a bit about God... he exists you know, you here to teach about evolutoin and reject God too? that is .. ehm... not so wise...

 

[Speedwell]

Maybe you are in dire need to learn a bit about God... he exists you know, you here to teach about evolutoin and reject God too? that is .. ehm... not so wise...

Nor is it wise to preach the falsehood that evolution denies the existent of God.

 

[NBB]

Nor is it wise to preach the falsehood that evolution denies the existent of God.

I don't believe that, but you must agree that evolutionist say evolution is a process that alone can create humans without the need of God at all. The process is 'self-sufficient' it just works and produced something alone like they say. To what i disagree completely.

 

[Speedwell]

I don't believe that, but you must agree that evolutionist say evolution is a process that alone can create humans without the need of God at all.

No, I don't agree. It looks to me that you are moving on from just parroting a falsehood to outright lying.

 

[pitabread]

It is quite telling that you define credible sources as only those that are known to support your position. For that reason alone, this ends my discussion in this debate.

Creationist materials exist to provide commentary on evolution, not actually teach it.

If you had to pass a university course on evolution and all you relied on was creationist materials, you wouldn't be able pass such a course. Hence why I excluded them in the OP.

If you are uncomfortable learning from proper academic sources on the subject, then I imagine you would vote the third option in the poll.

 

[AV1611VET]

If you are uncomfortable learning from proper academic sources on the subject, then I imagine you would vote the third option in the poll.

I voted the third option in the poll, since evolution ain't my thing.

I'd be just as uncomfortable taking music lessons.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I have recently taken an interest in botany and have become frustrated because "clades" are now thrown into the classification system. It is confusing. When I studies this stuff back in in the 70's it was the taxonomic system from Domain down to species. Clades are groups of organisms believed to have evolved from a common ancestor. They seem to be just inserted into the different levels of the taxonomic ranks.

 

[April_Rose]

He believed that God and the universe were one and the same.

You mean instead of God creating the universe?

No, I don't agree. It looks to me that you are moving on from just parroting a falsehood to outright lying.

And you are being outright rude to people who disagree with you because I do believe that person you quoted is right.

 

[pitabread]

And you are being outright rude to people who disagree with you because I do believe that person you quoted is right.

Science is effectively agnostic. It can't make a claim one way or the other about God's specific involvement in physical processes.

If a person believed that God guided evolution, the science of evolution couldn't confirm nor deny that.

This is why I included the disclaimer at the beginning of the thread, that this isn't about atheism versus theism.

 

[April_Rose]

Even if that's true no need for nastiness and name calling.

 

[Speedwell]

And you are being outright rude to people who disagree with you because I do believe that person you quoted is right.

I'm an "evolutionist" by his description and I am also a Christian so I know he is wrong. I also know that trying to turn the creation/evolution discussion into a contest between theism and atheism is a dodge played by many creationists who are willing to abandon intellectual integrity for their cause.. It's the Big Lie of creationism, originated by the founder of modern creationism, Henry Morris: "The purpose of the theory of evolution is to deny the existence of God."

 

[April_Rose]

I'm an "evolutionist" by his description and I am also a Christian so I know he is wrong. I also know that trying to turn the creation/evolution discussion into a contest between theism and atheism is a dodge played by many creationists who are willing to abandon intellectual integrity for their cause.. It's the Big Lie of creationism, originated by the founder of modern creationism, Henry Morris: "The purpose of the theory of evolution is to deny the existence of God."

A. I get where you're coming from because I believe in both as well but you could be a little bit nicer about it because being rude and nasty about it isn't representing Christ all that well and isn't a Christlike attitude.



B. I realize that it isn't always true, but in a lot of cases it is and I think that's all that he is saying. So calling him a liar is uncalled for.

 

[sesquiterpene]

I have recently taken an interest in botany and have become frustrated because "clades" are now thrown into the classification system. It is confusing. When I studies this stuff back in in the 70's it was the taxonomic system from Domain down to species. Clades are groups of organisms believed to have evolved from a common ancestor. They seem to be just inserted into the different levels of the taxonomic ranks.

I think a new clade is formed any time a population splits into two distinct populations so, they be inserted into every taxonomic level. It might be confusing but it also is a grouping that reflects reality more than other ways of classifying organisms.

 

[Speedwell]

A. I get where you're coming from because I believe in both as well but you could be a little bit nicer about it because being rude and nasty about it isn't representing Christ all that well and isn't a Christlike attitude.

Calling someone out for an intentional falsehood is not all that rude and nasty, but you're right, it is not particularly Christlike and I shouldn't have done it--even though NBB can't acknowledge that I am a Christian.

B. I realize that it isn't always true, but in a lot of cases it is and I think that's all that he is saying. So calling him a liar is uncalled for.

I don't think a lot of cases.

 

[April_Rose]

Calling someone out for an intentional falsehood is not all that rude and nasty, but you're right, it is not particularly Christlike and I shouldn't have done it--even though NBB can't acknowledge that I am a Christian.

I'm not sure who or what NBB is but you called yourself a Christian and no I don't believe that he's a liar and I certainly don't believe it was intentional,.. however,.. if you really do mean that last part then I can at least you give credit for admitting your mistake.

 

[Halbhh]

Creationist - One who believes that organisms / populations of organisms were created independently, and that life on Earth does NOT share common ancestry.

Whoops, I bet like me some voted without this (overly) restricted definition. Of course, it's quite easily possible that the 2 are just hand in glove (though I don't assume that in the simplest way, I recognize that's logical and plausible).

This one was funny! --
"I am an evolutionist and learning about evolution makes me uncomfortable."
heh heh

So, none of these various possibilities would ever make me uncomfortable -- why would they make anyone uncomfortable even? I consider everyone is partly in the dark anyway, and never take the viewpoints all that seriously, actually. It's fact that the Earth is old, the stars older, though.

 

[Halbhh]

If God exists (as I found out He does!), then every process of Nature is His -- His design in action. Since as Creator, He would of course have created all the laws of nature, everything that happens from physics (i.e. -- everything).

So, the entire debate people have in its detail has nothing to do with God existing, even though that's what they are trying to argue about.

For me, to tell my real attitude, the debate about details tends to be (from a distance) sorta amusing at this point. I take it for granted that many will realize in time nothing they argued about proved anything about God.

Of course, it's good if someone realizes the Earth is old, and time does not affect God.

 

[NBB]

No, I don't agree. It looks to me that you are moving on from just parroting a falsehood to outright lying.

Do you see anywhere where evolutoinist say evolution process needs something else to work? no... so no, don't accuse.
and you said i'm linking evolution with denying God? i don't say it denies God, it denies him of the credit of creation, and people think the universe doesn't need God since evolution can create us...

 

[April_Rose]

Do you see anywhere where evolutoinist say evolution process needs something else to work? no... so no, don't accuse.

Oh,.. so you're NBB, and don't worry I already talked to him about this. Using different words but still. I really don't want this to turn into a messy argument.