God Evolved

[Presbyterian Continuist]

It is a bit presumptuous of you to imagine you would know what impacted upon my conception of God. (For the record, you have it wrong.)

I have no difficulty at all imagining a personal God who speaks to people. I'm sufficiently at ease with the concept that I have the occassional conversation with her myself.

Any haziness you detected in my post was an effort to be polite and respectful. I have no meaningful doubt that a personal God would find your choice of taking the easy way out to be abhorrent.

I note that you studiously avoided answering either of my questions. Perhaps you thought they were rhetorical. Perhaps you were just taking the easy way out.

On this occassion I shall overlook the offensive lumping of muslim mosques and Hindu temples with murder and rape. In the UK I think you could potentially be prosecuted for hate-crime for such an outburst.

It would be nice if we could discuss this in a sober fashion. I look forward to your response, preferably without presumptions, or distasteful inferences about other religions.

Respectfully yours,
Ophiolite

I included all those things to show that our society is tending away from Christianity. I am certainly not implying that Muslim and Hindu believers are murderers and rapists, and it would be a misquote of me if anyone says that I am saying that. As far as my remark that you have a hazy idea of God, I am only going on what you are saying. Your ID is "agnostic" the definition of which is not knowing for sure whether God exists or not. I am not goading or flaming you in any way. You have your opinion and I have mine. That is what debating issues is all about.

Furthermore in my job as Victim Advisor with my local district court I had the privilege of meeting and knowing a number of Muslim and Hindu clients, and found them to be the most pleasant, friendly and upright people, and probably more devoted to their faith community than many Christians I have met. So, I am not judging anyone on a personal level, and if I am wrong about my comments about your attitude to God, then I am wrong. Too bad, how sad!

The basis of my remarks is that as our society becomes less Christianised, and more neo-pagan, it is understandable that belief in evolution would be stronger than creation, and will increase in believability as our society becomes even more paganised than what it is now.

 

[HitchSlap]

Dino bone not identified as such were carbon dated between 6000 to 16000 years old.

Great is the faith of the Atheist!

Only gullible people would believe carbon dating would yield accurate dates for dinosaur fossils.

Great is the gullibility of theists.

 

[HitchSlap]

Contrary evidence to Evolution is ignored.

Good Info: Is Carbon-Dating Accurate? | Radiometric dating | Rate of Decay | Clock Reset | Closed System

No one is ignoring evidence. Lol

Creationists lack the skills necessary to understand the evidence.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Only gullible people would believe carbon dating would yield accurate dates for dinosaur fossils.

Great is the gullibility of theists.

Am I mistaken? I thought that carbon dating was an important tool of evolutionists!

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

No one is ignoring evidence. Lol

Creationists lack the skills necessary to understand the evidence.

Huh? So creation scientists are not real scientists then? And Archaeologists whose discoveries are proving that the major places and events depicted in the Bible actually took place, are not real scientists either?

 

[HitchSlap]

Am I mistaken? I thought that carbon dating was an important tool of evolutionists!

Yes, you are mistaken.

 

[HitchSlap]

Huh? So creation scientists are not real scientists then? And Archaeologists whose discoveries are proving that the major places and events depicted in the Bible actually took place, are not real scientists either?

Does mentioning London in a John le Carre novel make the story true?

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Yes, you are mistaken.

Oh. Carbon dating must be at the foundation of the Old Earth theory, not evolution. I can see that it might be important in anthropology where human origins are studied.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Does mentioning London in a John le Carre novel make the story true?

I get your point. I have only one answer to that one!

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Only gullible people would believe carbon dating would yield accurate dates for dinosaur fossils.

Great is the gullibility of theists.

Just as a point of interest, I read where dinosaur footprints were discovered and right in the same place there were human footprints, and those human footprints were exactly the same as seen today. So this shows that there were humans around at the time of the dinosaurs. I am not making any point for or against evolution, but thought it is an interesting piece of information.

 

[HitchSlap]

Oh. Carbon dating must be at the foundation of the Old Earth theory, not evolution. I can see that it might be important in anthropology where human origins are studied.

Why would you use C dating for rock that are billions of years old? Does this even make sense to you?

 

[HitchSlap]

Just as a point of interest, I read where dinosaur footprints were discovered and right in the same place there were human footprints, and those human footprints were exactly the same as seen today. So this shows that there were humans around at the time of the dinosaurs. I am not making any point for or against evolution, but thought it is an interesting piece of information.

I’m aware of this PRATT. You were lied to by creationists. Dinosaurs and humans lived tens of millions of years apart.

 

[miknik5]

Forensic science is used in both cases. A preponderance of evidnece will determine the most likely explanation. To suggest one must “recreate evolution in a lab,” (whatever that means) is ludicrous. ToE is one of the most robust theories we have. So don’t let professional creationists prey on your ignorance and gullibilities just because you are in cahoots with the same god. It’s a big, exciting and mysterious world out there, waiting for otherwise smart people like you to help solve the puzzle. Don’t sell yourself short and buy into the intellectually lazy position of “goddidit.” If your god exists, and our brains have evolved to ponder the mystery, then aren’t you obligated to honor it with your best and honest effort?
2 cents

Hitchslap?
How far can a scientist go back?

 

[HitchSlap]

Hitchslap?
How far can a scientist go back?

Huh

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Why would you use C dating for rock that are billions of years old? Does this even make sense to you?

I think geologists would be the ones most interested in the age of the rocks. I can't help sharing this story that might have happened in a church once:
The church midweek meeting started and the M.C. got up and said:
"This evening we have Dr Cornelius Fossil to speak to us on "Stones of the Past". I'm sure that will be of interest to many of you, although I'm not sure it is my cup of tea. However, when Dr Fossil has finished his dissertation, I will ask Sister Mabel to finish us all off with prayer."

 

[Ophiolite]

I included all those things to show that our society is tending away from Christianity.

I agree that, in the West, many (most) societies are moving away from Christianity. I do not agree that your list supports that view.

• Occult - You would be hard pressed to show that there is more engagement with the occult today than there was in, for example, Victorian England. Here sceances abounded and individuals such as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle and even, Alfred Russel Wallace (cofounder of evolutionary theory), investigated them and were convinced by some of what they saw.
  
• Homosexuality - It is interesting that you view the current broad acceptance of homosexuality, a natural phenomenon, in a negative light. Not all Christians take this viewpoint. [Note: I haven't double checked the rules, but I think this is a topic that has to handled delicately, or not at all.]
  
• False cults - Again, you would be hard pressed to demonstrate an increase in such cults. However, if you have data I would be pleased to see them.
  
• Mosques - for the most part the increase in mosques over the past few decades reflects the growth of the muslim population through immigration and (probably) an increase in the wealth of the muslim community. Conversions from Christianity to Islam have almost no impact on the increase. Certainly, from what I have seen of the work done by the muslim community in my home town, centred around the mosque, society has benefited significantly.
  
• Hindu temples - I suspect the same may be said of temples as of mosques, but I lack the personal experience regarding temples.
  
• Rampant crime, murders, rapes, prostitution - You are asserting that, throughout the West, for the most part, crime is significantly worse to day than a decade ago, fifty years ago, a century ago. A rather large assertion. I wish you luck trying to demonstrate that.

As far as my remark that you have a hazy idea of God, I am only going on what you are saying. Your ID is "agnostic" the definition of which is not knowing for sure whether God exists or not.

Adopting an agnostic position does not prevent me from imagining a great variety of Gods. Such imagining, for many of those speculative Gods, is not hazy.

(For full disclosure I should note that while I am decidedly agnostic (certain of my uncertainty) I am atheistic in regard to the Christian God. This position was arrived at after approximately two decades raised in the Christian faith. )

I am not goading or flaming you in any way. You have your opinion and I have mine. That is what debating issues is all about.

That's good. However, I confess I am doing more than debate here. I am seeking to persuade you not to base your view on what is easier, but to take the harder route and take a closer look at evolutionary theory. The majority of Christian denominations have no problem with it. It's a pretty awesome theory and, if your worldview is correct, then it was conceived and created by your God. It would be a shame not to have a chance to appreciate it.

 

[miknik5]

Perfection is an arbitrary term and has no utility in describing biological processes. ToE is not an ideology, and only serves as the best explanation for the bio distribution and biodiversity of life on this planet.

It is only an arbitrary term because scientists CANT go back to the original and first state.

They can only back into and go back as far as the physical evidence that is present

It’s all an overlay to the original and first design

 

[miknik5]

It is a bit presumptuous of you to imagine you would know what impacted upon my conception of God. (For the record, you have it wrong.)

I have no difficulty at all imagining a personal God who speaks to people. I'm sufficiently at ease with the concept that I have the occassional conversation with her myself.

Any haziness you detected in my post was an effort to be polite and respectful. I have no meaningful doubt that a personal God would find your choice of taking the easy way out to be abhorrent.

I note that you studiously avoided answering either of my questions. Perhaps you thought they were rhetorical. Perhaps you were just taking the easy way out.

On this occassion I shall overlook the offensive lumping of muslim mosques and Hindu temples with murder and rape. In the UK I think you could potentially be prosecuted for hate-crime for such an outburst.

It would be nice if we could discuss this in a sober fashion. I look forward to your response, preferably without presumptions, or distasteful inferences about other religions.

Respectfully yours,
Ophiolite

If you do have the occasional conversations with her as you mentioned in your above post


Then who is JESUS?

 

[Ophiolite]

Hitchslap?
How far can a scientist go back?

The Cosmic Microwave Background, around 380,000 years after the Big Bang was initiated and about 13.8 billion years ago.

 

[HitchSlap]

It is only an arbitrary term because scientists CANT go back to the original and first state.

They can only back into and go back as far as the physical evidence that is present

It’s all an overlay to the original and first design

You just literally claimed we could only go back so far, then assert you know something before that time. Lol

I should take you seriously at this point because why?