Rejection of evolution correlates with racism

[BPPLEE]

Besides, I already did answer the question in the previous post that OB cited, even if I did so conditionally.

A better question would be the one that Kierkegaard entertained ...

... would I do what Abraham was asked to do?

Abraham had a promise from God that through his son he would become the father of many (which is what his name means). He couldn't do that if his son was dead. So he trusted in the promise. There's nothing like being lectured on morals by atheists.

 

[BPPLEE]

Bad theology often makes good comedy.

So does bad science

 

[TLK Valentine]

So does bad science

Absolutely... but I can't think of any phrenology jokes at the moment -- at least, not off the top of my head...

 

[BPPLEE]

Bad theology often makes good comedy.

 

[BPPLEE]

Absolutely... but I can't think of any phrenology jokes at the moment -- at least, not off the top of my head...

 

[BPPLEE]

Absolutely... but I can't think of any phrenology jokes at the moment -- at least, not off the top of my head...

I believe that the Evolution fairy sprinkled evodust on a puddle and voila! The ancestor of all life. Of course, it could have been Mary Poppins

 

[TLK Valentine]

I believe that the Evolution fairy sprinkled evodust on a puddle and voila! The ancestor of all life. Of course, it could have been Mary Poppins

And the alternative is... The Bible?

 

[BPPLEE]

And the alternative is... The Bible?

You can ridicule anything

 

[BPPLEE]

You can ridicule anything

“… But I have had no practice in abstract reasoning and I may be all astray. Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?…” Guess who said that?

 

[BPPLEE]

And the alternative is... The Bible?

“… But I have had no practice in abstract reasoning and I may be all astray. Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?…” Who said that?

 

[TLK Valentine]

“… But I have had no practice in abstract reasoning and I may be all astray. Nevertheless you have expressed my inward conviction, though far more vividly and clearly than I could have done, that the Universe is not the result of chance. But then with me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?…” Who said that?

Charles Darwin. Easy-peasy.

Now, doubt is a sin in religious thinking, but an absolute requirement in scientific thinking... so where were you thinking to go with this?

 

[BPPLEE]

Charles Darwin. Easy-peasy.

Now, doubt is a sin in religious thinking, but an absolute requirement in scientific thinking... so where were you thinking to go with this?

Doubt is not a sin. Just showing the man we can thank for all this science had his own reservations. Perhaps his followers have more faith in his theory than he did.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

So, now I'm dishonest? Thanks for the ad hominem! I'll remember that.

It's funny how you pretend to be this super-intelligent mouthpiece, telling us all how idiotic and simple-minded we all are, yet you don't understand simple English. I didn't call you dishonest, but I will call you arrogant.

Is there some kind of Physics or Life Science I'm supposed to get ahold of Frans de Waal style by which I'm going to assert and insert into my little 'noggin and see that, golly gee: God be ... !

Sarcasm. How predictably immature.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Doubt is not a sin.

Since when?

Just showing the man we can thank for all this science had his own reservations.

You're showing a lot more than that -- you're showing how little you actually know how evolutionary theory.

The short version is that it existed long before Darwin, and grew exponentially long after he but the dust... as all good ideas do. All Darwin did was add a crucial piece to the puzzle... the mechanism of natural selection.

Perhaps his followers have more faith in his theory than he did.

I never get tired of religious people using "faith" as a pejorative...

Charles Darwin has no "followers." In science, the idea is bigger and far more important than the person credited with coming up with it.

This can be confusing to religious people, who, far too often, are taught to believe the exact opposite -- praise the person; their words are window dressing. How else can they sing praises to Jesus while ignoring three-quarters of what He said?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

It's funny how you pretend to be this super-intelligent mouthpiece, telling us all how idiotic and simple-minded we all are, yet you don't understand simple English. I didn't call you dishonest, but I will call you arrogant.

Ok. My apologies for misunderstanding you. How would you have preferred that I understand your previous posts? That I'm only dishonest in my interlocution with you? Nothing more?

Sarcasm. How predictably immature.

Well again, my apologies. From my angle those questions I posed are legitimate questions. Do you think everyone else has to derive their morality via the same trains of thought that you do?

 

[BPPLEE]

Since when?



You're showing a lot more than that -- you're showing how little you actually know how evolutionary theory.

The short version is that it existed long before Darwin, and grew exponentially long after he but the dust... as all good ideas do. All Darwin did was add a crucial piece to the puzzle... the mechanism of natural selection.



I never get tired of religious people using "faith" as a pejorative...

Charles Darwin has no "followers." In science, the idea is bigger and far more important than the person credited with coming up with it.

This can be confusing to religious people, who, far too often, are taught to believe the exact opposite -- praise the person; their words are window dressing. How else can they sing praises to Jesus while ignoring three-quarters of what He said?

Doubt is not a sin.
Since when? We all have doubts. Jesus criticized lack of faith but he didn't condemn the disciples for their lack of faith. Their faith grew after he rose from the dead. You're correct I am not an expert on evolution. I don't claim to be.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Ok. My apologies for misunderstanding you. How would you have preferred that I understand your previous posts? That I'm only dishonest in my interlocution with you? Nothing more?

You're not helping yourself. By all means continue with the clown act, but understand that you're just making yourself look foolish. If you still don't understand what the problem is, let me spell it out in simple terms for you - saying you do not engage honestly is not the same as accusing you of being dishonest.

Do you think everyone else has to derive their morality via the same trains of thought that you do?

No, do you?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You're not helping yourself. By all means continue with the clown act, but understand that you're just making yourself look foolish. If you still don't understand what the problem is, let me spell it out in simple terms for you - saying you do not engage honestly is not the same as accusing you of being dishonest.

Sorry teacher, I think that's what I just said, but with different words.

No, do you?

That's good to hear because that means I can say: If God did it, He was morally right to do so!

How's that?

 

[BPPLEE]

Since when?



You're showing a lot more than that -- you're showing how little you actually know how evolutionary theory.

The short version is that it existed long before Darwin, and grew exponentially long after he but the dust... as all good ideas do. All Darwin did was add a crucial piece to the puzzle... the mechanism of natural selection.



I never get tired of religious people using "faith" as a pejorative...

Charles Darwin has no "followers." In science, the idea is bigger and far more important than the person credited with coming up with it.

This can be confusing to religious people, who, far too often, are taught to believe the exact opposite -- praise the person; their words are window dressing. How else can they sing praises to Jesus while ignoring three-quarters of what He said?

Youre correct I'm no expert on evolution and there is no shortage of people who claim to be Christians and don't live like it. Sorry you have had experience with them.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Sorry teacher, I think that's what I just said, but with different words.

More sarcasm. Is that all you have? Perhaps you should read your own posts - you asked me if I was saying you were only being "dishonest in my interlocution with you?" So no, you didn't say what I said, you continued claiming that I called you dishonest. Please, drop the arrogant tone and grow up.

If God did it, He was morally right to do so!

Awesome. Now please explain how that is so.

Cue avoidance and dancing.....