Does the fact of Evolution .... (moved)

[Hoghead1]

You again missed my point, AV1611. The punitive God of revelations and the OT as well is definitely not a loving God.

 

[Radrook]

1. The Question is Loaded

A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption.

[Since evolution is indeed controversial because it isn’t accepted by all scientists nor all non-scientists as a fact, then the question asked by the Oped is indeed loaded.]

Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.

Gregory Bassham (2004). Critical Thinking. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780072879599.

My comment in brackets.

Douglas N. Walton, Informal logic: a handbook for critical argumentation, Cambridge University Press, 1989, ISBN 0-521-37925-3, pp. 36–37

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
---------------------------------------------------


3. Not everyone accepts evolution as fact statistics:


Researchers compared the results of past surveys of attitudes toward evolution taken in the U.S. since 1985 and similar surveys in Japan and 32 European countries.

In the U.S., only 14 percent of adults thought that evolution is "definitely true," while about a third firmly rejected the idea.

The only country included in the study where adults were more likely than Americans to reject evolution was Turkey.

The investigation also showed that the percentage of U.S. adults who are uncertain about evolution has risen from 7 percent to 21 percent in the past 20 years.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060810-evolution.html

3.

Is evolution a fact, like gravity?
http://www.creationtips.com/philos.html

Diversification of Kinds
http://www.creationwiki.org/Created_kind

 

[HitchSlap]

Once for life.

Marriage or sex, AV?

 

[Hoghead1]

You touched on precisely my point, ChetSinger. Too much of teh Bible centers on God punishing people to get even. That is not what a loving and forgiving God would do. At a minimum, forgiveness means remission of punishment, to start with. Furthermore, when you truly love someone, you don't seek to coerce them with threats or seek to inflict terrible pain on them. The OT God, however, does precisely just that. More than one OT passage makes a point of arguing God is without mercy and wants others to be so as well. In Deut.7, he told Moses to act without mercy. In more than one passage, God comes out and says she will act without mercy, will make his arrows "drunk with blood." As well, the OT depicts God as having murdered the innocent first-born, sanctifying slavery, sanctifying genocide, having babies smashed to pieces, inflicting absolutely draconian , sadistic punishments on people, which will make "our hairs stand on end," to quote Calvin, etc. Yes, the OT God is one meany. And that is why many became alienated from Christianity and became atheists, such as Dawkins.

 

[Hoghead1]

That isn't at all accurate, Radrook. Only a tiny minority of "scientists" believe in creation science. If you check carefully, you will find the vast majority of creation-science propaganda is written up by persons who aren't really scientists at all. The "legit" scientists who embrace creation science represent an extremely small minority. Also, if you check their work carefully, you will find not a one ever did any actual research in creation science. Often, there research agenda has nothing to do with evolution either. You have to remember than more than one legit scientist has fallen for propaganda. One prime example is the Nazi scientists.

 

[bhsmte]

Does the fact of Evolution question the idea of marriage to one partner for life?

A little something to reflect upon:

'....
Some scientists view both social and sexual monogamy in humans as a societal structure rather than a natural state.

"I don't think we are a monogamous animal," said Pepper Schwartz, a professor of sociology at the University of Washington in Seattle. "A really monogamous animal is a goose – which never mates again even if its mate is killed."

She added, "Monogamy is invented for order and investment – but not necessarily because it's 'natural.'"....' ( http://www.livescience.com/32146-are-humans-meant-to-be-monogamous.html )

Could be one reason, why so many men and women, have extramarital affairs.

 

[AV1611VET]

You again missed my point, AV1611. The punitive God of revelations and the OT as well is definitely not a loving God.

Really?

Do you believe this "punitive unloving God" is:

1. Finishing the transgression.
2. Making an end of sins.
3. Making reconciliation for iniquity.
4. Bringing in everlasting righteousness.
5. Sealing up visions and prophecies.
6. Anointing the most Holy.

If you don't ... and I suspect you don't ... then I can see where you're coming from.

If you do ... and I suspect you don't ... then I think you're missing something somewhere.

In any case, I want to see if you're willing to admit you're missing a lot of what is really going on in the book of revelations [sic].

What's also interesting is that you're laying a hefty accusation at God's feet, yet you didn't even get the name of the book right.

 

[AV1611VET]

You touched on precisely my point, ChetSinger. Too much of teh Bible centers on God punishing people to get even. That is not what a loving and forgiving God would do. At a minimum, forgiveness means remission of punishment, to start with. Furthermore, when you truly love someone, you don't seek to coerce them with threats or seek to inflict terrible pain on them. The OT God, however, does precisely just that. More than one OT passage makes a point of arguing God is without mercy and wants others to be so as well. In Deut.7, he told Moses to act without mercy. In more than one passage, God comes out and says she will act without mercy, will make his arrows "drunk with blood." As well, the OT depicts God as having murdered the innocent first-born, sanctifying slavery, sanctifying genocide, having babies smashed to pieces, inflicting absolutely draconian , sadistic punishments on people, which will make "our hairs stand on end," to quote Calvin, etc. Yes, the OT God is one meany. And that is why many became alienated from Christianity and became atheists, such as Dawkins.

Wow -- let's have a simple quiz here, Hoghead1.

Match the judgment with its proper definition:

1. Justice ----- A) Getting what you don't deserve.

2. Mercy ------ B) Not getting what you do deserve.

3. Grace ------ C) Getting what you deserve.

(No fair peeking.)

 

[dad]

You again missed my point, AV1611. The punitive God of revelations and the OT as well is definitely not a loving God.

Once we know Jesus, we can relook at the OT with a new perspective.

 

[AV1611VET]

Once we know Jesus, we can relook at the OT with a new perspective.

Indeed!

And according to Psalm 2, until they do, all unregenerates will fight against Him.

Philosophers, scientists, atheists, agnostics, humanists: all will be against Him.

 

[Jimmy D]

1. The Question is Loaded

A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption.

[Since evolution is indeed controversial because it isn’t accepted by all scientists nor all non-scientists as a fact, then the question asked by the Oped is indeed loaded.]

Aside from being an informal fallacy depending on usage, such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda.

Gregory Bassham (2004). Critical Thinking. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 9780072879599.

My comment in brackets.

Douglas N. Walton, Informal logic: a handbook for critical argumentation, Cambridge University Press, 1989, ISBN 0-521-37925-3, pp. 36–37

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
---------------------------------------------------


3. Not everyone accepts evolution as fact statistics:


Researchers compared the results of past surveys of attitudes toward evolution taken in the U.S. since 1985 and similar surveys in Japan and 32 European countries.

In the U.S., only 14 percent of adults thought that evolution is "definitely true," while about a third firmly rejected the idea.

The only country included in the study where adults were more likely than Americans to reject evolution was Turkey.

The investigation also showed that the percentage of U.S. adults who are uncertain about evolution has risen from 7 percent to 21 percent in the past 20 years.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/08/060810-evolution.html

3.

Is evolution a fact, like gravity?
http://www.creationtips.com/philos.html

Diversification of Kinds
http://www.creationwiki.org/Created_kind

How many biologists can you show who don't accept evolution as fact?

Can you point us to any peer reviewed papers that provide evidence for alternative theories?

Your stats showing how many Americans believe in evolution is irrelevant, is the quality of any scientific theory decided by a poll of US citizens? Why not show a poll of how many biologists who actually have a relevant education accept evolution?

The only reason for not accepting evolution as fact is because religious types feel it conflicts with their interpretation of the bible. The 'controversy' only exists because of creationist propagandists writing pointless articles like the ones you posted and a refusal to accept evidence that conflicts with their beliefs.

 

[Derek Meyer]

Indeed!

And according to Psalm 2, until they do, all unregenerates will fight against Him.

Philosophers, scientists, atheists, agnostics, humanists: all will be against Him.

And Jewish people will also ask that Jesus is part of or God himself. Not much of a prophesy.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Really?

Do you believe this "punitive unloving God" is:

1. Finishing the transgression.

1. The transgression of what? If this is a reference to Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit, the fact that god reacted so harshly is a great demonstration of how little it loved them. You wouldn't kick your child out of the house over them eating a cookie before dinner, would you? You also wouldn't disown them if they ate a razor blade you left on the counter, and told them not to eat because it would kill them. Love compromises. The god of the bible does not.

2. Making an end of sins.

   Something the bible never actually does: explain what makes "sin" bad. Most that you get out of it is that god doesn't like it, and some loose association with human suffering. From personal experience, working on the weekends doesn't make me suffer any more than working on any other days of the week.

3. Making reconciliation for iniquity.

   For god being unfair to humanity? Because I don't think it is humanly possible to be unfair to a deity that powerful.

4. Bringing in everlasting righteousness.

   In its opinion.

5. Sealing up visions and prophecies.

   Those prophecies are so vague, that if they didn't all have to happen in sequence, more than half of the Revelations ones would be accounted for.

6. Anointing the most Holy.

   Itself... just in a different form.

 

[AV1611VET]

1. *
2. *
3. *
4. *
5. *
6. *

Those were a reference to ...

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

... which give us the reasons for the Tribulation period and millennial reign of Christ.

Jesus fulfilled 109 of 333 prophecies during His first advent.

He will fulfill the remaining 224 during His second.

 

[HitchSlap]

Those were a reference to ...

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

... which give us the reasons for the Tribulation period and millennial reign of Christ.

Jesus fulfilled 109 of 333 prophecies during His first advent.

He will fulfill the remaining 224 during His second.

When does the second begin?

 

[Radrook]

How many biologists can you show who don't accept evolution as fact?

Can you point us to any peer reviewed papers that provide evidence for alternative theories?

Your stats showing how many Americans believe in evolution is irrelevant, is the quality of any scientific theory decided by a poll of US citizens? Why not show a poll of how many biologists who actually have a relevant education accept evolution?

The only reason for not accepting evolution as fact is because religious types feel it conflicts with their interpretation of the bible. The 'controversy' only exists because of creationist propagandists writing pointless articles like the ones you posted and a refusal to accept evidence that conflicts with their beliefs.

A theory stands or falls on its merit and not on the number of those who accept it.There are many popular theories which were once predominantly accepted and are now considered total drivel. So your premise is way off. In fact, it sounds like an appeal to bandwagon which is a well-known fallacy.

You are also employing strawman fallacy by claiming that the only reason why the evolution theory is rejected is because of religious reasons. There are many very compelling, non-religious counter-arguments provided as the reasons for the rejection. The problem might be that you prefer to focus on the religious ones or perhaps tag all of them as religious because of an inability to tell the difference.

 

[AV1611VET]

When does the second begin?

I don't know exactly.

I'd say it officially begins when 1 of 224 is fulfilled.

 

[HitchSlap]

I don't know exactly.

I'd say it officially begins when 1 of 224 is fulfilled.

What is #1?

 

[Hoghead1]

The truth of the matter, Radrook, is that creation-science people do present their religious beliefs as the major challenge to evolution, as I explained in a previous email. Try reading the AIG's statement of its policy. Also, their counterarguments prove all too easily to be bogus., deliberately falsified information. An outstanding case of the latter can be found in their widely circulated propaganda about Darwin and the finches.

 

[Hoghead1]

Doesn't cut it, AV1611. You forgot all about God's mercy and forgiveness, which traditionally were understood as meaning we do not get what we deserve. For example, Augustine argued we should stop complaining about God being unjust. The reprobate got what they deserve; the elect are the ones who got what they definitely did not deserve, salvation. The elect were taken to be only lucky reprobate and so in no way did they merit or deserve salvation. Read Calvin and Luther. My point is that God is loving and therefore does not seek to coerce others by threats. The problem is that much Christianity presents a highly contradictory image of God where God appears to be saying, "Love me or I"ll beat the tar out of you."