Should scientists demand evolution is taught in churches?

[Polycarp1]

1*1=1

 

[stan1980]

1*1=1

Thanks for that.

4*9=36.

Look, I can do irrelevant sums too, and mine are more complicated.

Me>You

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Well at least the thread hasn't descended to the whole 0.999... = 1 argument.

 

[stan1980]

Well at least the thread hasn't descended to the whole 0.999... = 1 argument.

Where is the argument, 0.9r does equal 1.

 

[seeker777]

I'm sure this 0x0 nonsense makes more sense in polycarp_fan's head than anyone elses, but I think I have a vague idea where he is coming from. The thing is, if this 'intelligent designer' started life, where did the intelligent designer come from? The trouble is, the more complicated you make the scenario, the more implausible it becomes.

The answer I get is that God lives outside of time, he does not have to subscribe to the realites and laws of the universe he created.

Of course, there is also, God always was, he had no begining and he had no end.

I have to remind everyone that these are the same people that insist that everything has to have a creator....except for the creator, he doesn't need a creator?

They may as well just say " divine magic".

 

[Polycarp_fan]

The answer I get is that God lives outside of time, he does not have to subscribe to the realites and laws of the universe he created.

Of course, there is also, God always was, he had no begining and he had no end.

I have to remind everyone that these are the same people that insist that everything has to have a creator....except for the creator, he doesn't need a creator?

They may as well just say " divine magic".

Just because any one individual human cannot grasp the concept of "God" makes little difference to God.

"I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation. I cannot do this in spite of the fact that mechanistic causality has, to a certain extent, been placed in doubt by modern science. [He was speaking of Quantum Mechanics and the breaking down of determinism.] My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality.

Morality is of the highest importance -- but for us, not for God."

[Albert Einstein, from "Albert Einstein: The Human Side", edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press]

Einstein was just one human being.

 

[seeker777]

Just because any one individual human cannot grasp the concept of "God" makes little difference to God.

There is no evidence that Einstein could not grasp or understand the concept that is the traditional vision of God.

Rather, it appears that Einstein simply chose to reject that vision.

 

[LittleNipper]

Or should they stay out of things that have nothing to do with them?

Discuss

In the United States, the President is not the head of the "CHURCH," the LORD JESUS CHRIST is. Scientists certainly have the right to their opinion; however, churches in the UNITED STATES are privately funded. Public educational facilities are presently under Federal control. But it can be reasoned that funding may also be coming from private individuals, and that research and educational opinions should be of greater importance than Federal "values." In other words, the learning process of the students should be of a higher regard than judicial Constitutional prudence. Students learn best by thinking things through for themselves and not the memorization of presumed facts. One can best teach by presenting various trains of thought and then allowing the student to come to his own conclusions.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

There is no evidence that Einstein could not grasp or understand the concept that is the traditional vision of God.

Rather, it appears that Einstein simply chose to reject that vision.

I agree.

He also rejected the vision of common atheism.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Thanks for that.

4*9=36.

Look, I can do irrelevant sums too, and mine are more complicated.

Me>You

0v1=1,
0^1=0,
^!=**.
1**1=1,
1^1=1,
1v1=1.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

0v1=1,
0^1=0,
^!=**.
1**1=1,
1^1=1,
1v1=1.

Awesome. Cool type.

Oh, by the way could the following apply to "universal health care" for all of America's children so loudly proclaimed from America's Democrat political party?:

"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation." - Adolph Hitler

You can start another thread to answer me if you'ld like.

 

[jcook922]

In the United States, the President is not the head of the "CHURCH," the LORD JESUS CHRIST is. Scientists certainly have the right to their opinion; however, churches in the UNITED STATES are privately funded. Public educational facilities are presently under Federal control. But it can be reasoned that funding may also be coming from private individuals, and that research and educational opinions should be of greater importance than Federal "values." In other words, the learning process of the students should be of a higher regard than judicial Constitutional prudence. Students learn best by thinking things through for themselves and not the memorization of presumed facts. One can best teach by presenting various trains of thought and then allowing the student to come to his own conclusions.

You mean presumed facts like Christianity? Everything is a "presumed fact" because very few things are absolute and proven. Faith = Presumption.

 

[Polycarp_fan]

You mean presumed facts like Christianity? Everything is a "presumed fact" because very few things are absolute and proven. Faith = Presumption.

Does this mean we all (ALL) just wander around in the dark until we die? Humanism and Christianity are ways of "seeing" the world are they not?

The Humanist Manifesto (I, II, III,) is it not just opinion (presumption)when all is said and done?

 

[lawtonfogle]

Awesome. Cool type.

I was just wanting to inject some logic into this thread.

Oh, by the way could the following apply to "universal health care" for all of America's children so loudly proclaimed from America's Democrat political party?:



You can start another thread to answer me if you'ld like.

Um... I think it could.

 

[LittleNipper]

You mean presumed facts like Christianity? Everything is a "presumed fact" because very few things are absolute and proven. Faith = Presumption.

I would suggest to you that the most backward countries in this world (or those fast becoming backward) are always those attempting for whatever reason to silence the open discussion of Christianity. As India has become more receptive to Christian discussions, it has begun to come out of the darkages of class distinction. China (always a class society) has begun to be affected by Christian thinking.
On the other hand, the United States seems to be losing the fight for education whenever it tries to become a social reformer without GOD as its prime objective. Hedonism does nothing to enlighten, only distract. A persuit of happiness without a heart for GOD brings division and strife and not blessings.

 

[OdwinOddball]

I would suggest to you that the most backward countries in this world (or those fast becoming backward) are always those attempting for whatever reason to silence the open discussion of Christianity. As India has become more receptive to Christian discussions, it has begun to come out of the darkages of class distinction. China (always a class society) has begun to be affected by Christian thinking.
On the other hand, the United States seems to be losing the fight for education whenever it tries to become a social reformer without GOD as its prime objective. Hedonism does nothing to enlighten, only distract. A persuit of happiness without a heart for GOD brings division and strife and not blessings.

This is correlation without causation, pure and simple. You believe Christianity to be a force for good, therefore you tend to associate good in the world with Christianity. But belief is not fact.

India has increased in Christianity, but they have also increased availability and quality of health care, access to clean food and water, improved education, etc. All of these contribute far more to India's success than the rise of Christianity.

The latest census of religious belief in India shows 80% Hindu, 13% Islam, and only 2% Christianity.

 

[jcook922]

Does this mean we all (ALL) just wander around in the dark until we die? Humanism and Christianity are ways of "seeing" the world are they not?

The Humanist Manifesto (I, II, III,) is it not just opinion (presumption)when all is said and done?

Here's the difference, while I accept Humanism as an opinion, or a possibility, people take religion as an absolute. When you don't accept the possibility of being wrong, your mind is closed and arrogant. Why do I argue against Christians justifying the input of their values into our society more than any other topic? Because it isn't fair to the world as a whole, many Christians seem to want to make a society tailored to them, with no tolerance for the people who disagree with them.

Religion is a personal experience, our society and our government must be secular. Religion has no place in deciding what we are allowed to do where either is concerned, out of fairness for the melting pot of opinions and philosophies present in our nation.

 

[The Princess Bride]

Or should they stay out of things that have nothing to do with them?

Discuss

That is like wanting to teach creatonism at the Super Bowl.

Most evolutionists say that religion and science shouldn't mix, so why now?

 

[The Princess Bride]

Religion is a personal experience, our society and our government must be secular. Religion has no place in deciding what we are allowed to do where either is concerned, out of fairness for the melting pot of opinions and philosophies present in our nation.

But if everything in our government were secular, what would determine if something were moral/ethical or not?

You'd have views from one end of the spectrum to the other [most obviously already happening] yet there would be more areas of gray and even less define on simple "Right" and
"Wrong".

 

[Polycarp_fan]

Here's the difference, while I accept Humanism as an opinion, or a possibility, people take religion as an absolute.

C'mon now. Humanism is the exclusive ideology of our school system. Nothing else is allowed to equal it.

When you don't accept the possibility of being wrong, your mind is closed and arrogant.

And that sounds like the people that signed the Humanist Manifesto to a tee. Pompous doesn't begin to describe the arrogance and elitism.

Why do I argue against Christians justifying the input of their values into our society more than any other topic? Because it isn't fair to the world as a whole, many Christians seem to want to make a society tailored to them, with no tolerance for the people who disagree with them.

What proof of that do you have? I see humanism as very much a plagarism of all of the greatest thoughts of Christian culture.

Religion is a personal experience, our society and our government must be secular.

There is no way really, to divorce our belief systems from our desires for society to behave. Humanists are a perfect example. Why, is "secularism" better than Gospel reality? The Gospel, applied for real, ends all wars with just one individual. Retribution does not exist in the Gospel.

Religion has no place in deciding what we are allowed to do where either is concerned, out of fairness for the melting pot of opinions and philosophies present in our nation.

Why not? If the country is run as a republic or as a democracy, the majority voice is going to take influence. That is precisely how and why Humanism is spread the way it is. Mold minds and you hold power.