If evolution is right, then why?

1. 68

   aka-djposted 13 years ago

   Assuming evolution IS correct, and we all evolved into what we are today, WHY does religion, faith or believing in something beyond ones-self pose so much of a problem to so many people?
   
   We just happened to turn out this way!
   
   Why does it bother so many?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Merlin Fraserposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not sure it bothers me at all, I simply don't understand it and that has nothing to do with Evolution.
      
      I think many of the problems arise when people like me ask simple questions like WHY ?
      And other people get upset because to question anything is to show a lack of faith.
      
      You mentioned Evolution, look at the ridiculous lengths Creationists go to prove their point that the Bible version is correct and Darwin is a sort of Blasphemy.
      
      At one point I used to try and debate with those people until I found out it was more fun straightening worms and about as much use.
      
      Personally I could care less what someone believes or wants to worship just so long as they don’t want to kill me for what I believe.  Then they really will have a problem !

      replyreport
      1. 68

         aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I like it when people ask questions like "why".
         My point here is so many "attack" believers, just because they ARE.
         Nothing wrong with discussion. It's ridicule, abusive language, name calling etc that I have seen abounding in this forum.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            It is evolution in action dj. Simple really. In our recent history is was evolutionarily a positive thing to pretend to believe in a god. These believers got the cushiest jobs, the most women and money and wer able to easily indoctrinate their children.
            
            We have now moved on, the believers have been seen for what they really are and anyone claiming such a belief is less likely to breed now (except in certain closed communities.) Hence the rise of atheism.
            
            Evolution. Change.
            
            You no longer have the power to demand respect. So you do not get it.

            replyreport
         2. 0

            Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            they aren't just ARE.  They tell others how to live their lives. I've been ostracised because I can't continue to blindly believe the doctrine of my family.  Yes, that bothers me.
            
            What also bothers me is the way people are ostracised for having an alternative lifestyle eg homosexuals.
            
            Guess having bigger brains than other mammals is our downfall as well as our strength - the morality police go overboard.
            
            Yes, some animals in the wild just attack and eat each other.  It's a shame that humans are no better.

            replyreport
            1. 87

               I am DB Cooperposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Bingo. If people didn't push their beliefs on others and on government policy, there would be no problem. Religious people seem to have this victimization complex, where they are always trying to convince others that they are being persecuted by the non-religious. Most of the world is ruled by religion. Even in the United States, where we have a ruling document that separates church and state, it would be nearly impossible for someone who is openly an atheist to get elected president.

               replyreport
               1. 77

                  brimancandyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I agree with you about the persecution thing. They keep saying that non-religious people are out to get them, yet they are the ones walking around with the picket signs, protesting everything they can think of in the name of God. And, it is only then, that people who might not be as religious at them,  show up to counter what they are preaching.
                  
                  I have never seen a non religious group show up anywhere to protest anything. Sure there are a lot of groups that march for their rights, such as gays, and various other groups. But, all the things they are fighting for, is to stop laws that have been passed usually in the name of religion.
                  
                  You certainly would never see a large group of people promoting being atheists, as you do people promoting religion....wait... if you join the Atheist club now, your donation of $500.00 will get you this piece of crap that is only worth $10.00. But you'll be helping the cause. Sound familiar?

                  replyreport
               2. 57

                  exorterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I believe there has been very few presidents that were Christians, the majority did go to church to enhance their chance of being elected to office.
                  but true Christians are far and few between, you may be surprised if you found out how many non believers go to Church, for what reason I do not know, I have seen many people I know from Church out in the world doing things that Christians would not do.
                  there are a lot of non believers going to church every Sunday.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Let me guess, you are a 'true' Christian, one of the few and far between?

                     replyreport
                     1. 57

                        exorterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        I try, not very good at it but I am trying

                        replyreport
                  2. 62

                     Daniel Carterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     "True" Christians is a definition devised by you and others. If you ask most any past president or current convict they will most often claim to be a Christian, but perhaps not a good one.
                     
                     "True" Christian is an irrelevant term. Association with, and believing in, is all that is required to be listed among the ranks of Christians.
                     
                     Therefore, what Sandra has posted has incredible power in its delivery.
                     
                     Evidence is evidence. It takes deductive reasoning to interpret all evidence unless there is a clear line of thought that accompanies it. However, evidence in most cases only amounts to clues. Many clues are much more powerful than others. Incontrovertible evidence of anything is much harder to obtain when it comes to either evolution or creationism. However, from where I stand there is more incontrovertible evidence of evolution.

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        Daniel:
                        "...there is more incontrovertible evidence of evolution."
                        Why did you use the word "more?"
                        In my many years of study, I have never found any 'incontrovertible" evidence of there being a supernatural divinity. Or any "divinity" except
                        a soft white candy, usually containing nuts.
                        Qwark

                        replyreport
                     2. 57

                        exorterposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        A true Christian is going to try to live their lives according to the Bible, a lot of people that go to church is not trying, they want to enjoy the fruits of the world, such as drugs, drinking and the like

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           Yep, you're correct. And those are just the preachers!

                           replyreport
         3. 60

            Merlin Fraserposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Are you the same aka-dj    who wrote the following statement in another forum ? The same guy who denounces name calling and proclaims an open mind ?
            
            "Darwin is DEAD. So is his theory.
            It's only the ungodly, who have nothing else to put forth that are still trying to keep it alive.
            D, E, A,D, I tell you! (and it stinks)!"
            
            Just thought I'd ask !!

            replyreport
            1. 68

               aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               What name calling? Ungodly? Is that what you mean?
               
               I merely made a statement.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Merlin Fraserposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  And I merely asked a question.
                  
                  At the start of this Forum subject you wrote, “  Assuming evolution IS correct, and we all evolved into what we are today.....”
                  
                  But in a previous Forum subject you wrote, “Darwin is DEAD. So is his theory.
                  It's only the ungodly, who have nothing else to put forth that are still trying to keep it alive.
                  D, E, A,D, I tell you! (and it stinks)!"
                  
                  I merely wonder which way your head was facing today ?  Are you saying that only the Ungodly accept Darwin’s Evolution of the species through natural selection and therefore if you believe Darwin then you cannot believe in a God ?
                  
                  Even those who study science and report to the Pope accept Darwin is right are these highly educated scholars, most of whom hold an ordained position with the church, ungodly ?
                  
                  The reason for my confusion and hence my question is simple, my position remains fairly constant, I hope that my mind is sufficiently open to new ideas and research but I don’t jump from one side to the other in the name of wanting a good argument.

                  replyreport
      2. 59

         ACRichmondposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Evolution and religion... We are all children in some form. Just as you get creative when a three year old asks you 'why?' or when we were three a thirty mile drive seemed like hours. Step off our planet and days may equal seconds. If we are children of God or the Great Spirit, we are not going to be given literal translation. Would you sit down with a three year old and explain how rain is formed in detail?

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Merlin Fraserposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I like your explanation and the introduction of the three year old child.  However I find it works equally well to describe the stories in the Bible.  Simple explanations of complex questions asked by simple people.
            
            As for the three year old always encourage them to continue asking questions and be responsible with your answers, leave the door open for a second more detailed answer that doesn't contradict your first answer.
            
            I am not satisified to accept the answers given to questions asked thousands of years ago and I am delighted that men of science continued to ask questions and seek the answers.
            
            The fact that many millions of people around the world are seeming content to ignore centuries of enlightment is fine however they must appreciate that their arguments lack credibilty when they challenge provable scientific facts.

            replyreport
         2. 62

            Lisa HWposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Actually, I did explain that kind of stuff to my three-year-olds.  It made them turn out to be really smart kids (who also behaved well because they had someone who respected them enough, tried to help them understand, and didn't believe that leaving children in the dark was the greatest idea..  Children of any variety shouldn't be under-estimated.  Leaving children in the dark tends to encourage their imaginations about monsters and burglars and their mothers dying and the house catching on fire.  I don't mean to come across as self-righteous here at all; but - in all seriousness - I loved and respected the children I brought into this world (and in one case, chose as my child) to want to share all I knew about the world with them, and reassure them that I'd try to answer their "why's", in order to that they understand the world/family I brought them into was a kind, understanding, compassionate, and respectful one - not one in which they were left to fend for themselves and worry about things that were nothing more than matters of their wild imaginations.   

            replyreport
            1. 0

               sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I agree with you Lisa.  I have explained in detail a lot of things to my kid.  Just recently she said there was a monster in her closet because she said there was a glowing triangle in there.
               
               I said, "what happened, why do you think it is a monster?"  She goes, "Well, I took my flash light in there and then there was a triangle on the wall.  I saw it!" 
               
               So, I took the flash light into the closet to see what she was talking about.  It was a sticker half hanging off the wall near a corner that the light was reflecting on to the adjacent wall.
               
               Though it took a little time to convince her there was no monster, after she allowed me to show her what it was, she started laughing. 
               
               Then I got the good love that makes you feel all warm and fuzzy when she was like, "Aw mom I love you!" and then went to tell her dad what it was.
               
               Savor the moments.  *sorry, getting all teary eyed*  I love my kid!

               replyreport
               1. 62

                  Lisa HWposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Sandra, and she's closer to you and will have faith in you because of it.  (Oh, I would "win the prize" for being guilty of "all sentimental, mushy, and teary-eyed" when it comes to my kids; but the way I figure it, after a couple of decades of being a mother, you just get so you don't care who knows.  )
                  
                  Back to the God thing:  I don't know if there's God or not, but if there is; I imagine Him more to be a friend, than a parent, with us as his "children".  We've all had times when we have to stand by and watch a friend go through something awful, and all we can do is try to be there for them.  To me, if God's there, He might be a friend or He might be an inventor, with us as his creations.  (Or else He isn't there at all.)  I see no signs that he sees us either as children He loves, or as children he wants to have faith in Him for the sake of His own "ego" (if Supreme Beings have egos, or "love", for that matter).
                  
                  I don't see what's wrong with "God as a friend" if someone chooses to believe in Him.  That just makes more sense to me.   

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     It's not so much the belief or the feeling of being connected to something bigger or grander then yourself.  I accept and feel something for being part of the Universe, it's an aw inspired thing. 
                     
                     Love is an aw inspiring thing so are kids, bees, butterflies, palm trees and for some it's cars, towers, airplanes etc... we all have our 'things' that make us feel "that" way.
                     
                     It's personal, it's a personal feeling, you can't give it to someone and expect them to feel exactly the same.  No one, not one person can say they feel exactly the same way about god. 
                     
                     So, keep it personal, no one speaks for god.  And to me, nope NOT even Jesus speaks for god and whatever it is in the mind that 'accepts' some sort of external god, you can bet that their god will always see their side... Always because, like you said, it's your friend.
                     
                     Lucky for you, you aren't like the ones with pith forks demanding things from other people to gain some sort of fulfillment or adoration or accomplishment.  It doesn't work that way.
                     
                     Hence, Bible scholars know the Bible by heart, can recite whatever by verse number and book but they will never, ever, ever, ever, ever..... be able to tell what it means or how to feel or what to do. 
                     
                     Anyone who believes it, in my opinion, never knew, never felt, never truly appreciated the aw that there "really, really" is. xoxoxo

                     replyreport
                  2. 0

                     Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     My boy asked me if I believe in God.  I said that I used to, but don't think God helped me out much in my life.  He said very firmly that he doesn't believe in God, because he can't see God (he's very literal, as a lot of children with Aspergers are).  Will be interesting when he has the god conversation with his grandmother (who is very emotionally led & fanatical about god)

                     replyreport
               2. 0

                  Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  you're both great mothers - my boy has a zillion questions - I like that he is so inquisitive.  I tell him the truth aobut hard things.  He's a matter-of-fact kid.  Like when our cat died.  Next thing, he was announcing to everyone "our cat died today and she's in the ground turning into dirt!"  We had to smile through our tears with that one.

                  replyreport
   2. 61

      pisean282311posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      religion too get evolved and we dont have religions which existed 10k years ago now...current religion too would get evolved , changed or even perished...so it is normal ...nothing to get bothered about ...yes fanatics is something which has potential threat...my way only way stuff which when induced into larger masses can turn destructive...other than that nothing to be really bothered about...

      replyreport
   3. 81

      pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Even if evolution is correct whose to say, what religion, faith and believing in (what appears to beyond one-self) is not part of the evolutionary process? Now that statement might just cause a problem....mmmm
      
      I don't know why it bothers so many?

      replyreport
   4. 60

      kessposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      since your goal is to dividing the right from wrong,  your focus wil remain on the wrong thus alienate yourself from Life which uses both to fulfill It's good purpose.

      replyreport
   5. 59

      William R. Wilsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      If a particular belief system is faulty, and causes bad behavior, it is not good for the proponents or those they come in contact with.
      
      I choose not to believe because blind faith is a defective way of thinking.  An open, analytical, skeptical analysis of the world yields better results.  Superstition cannot reveal truth.  Blindly clinging to superstition even in the face of evidence to the contrary is pathological.
      
      Humans evolved with pattern seeking brains.  There's othing inherently wrong with that.  But there's nothing inherently right, about it either.  Questioning assumptions is what led us out of the dark ages - the earth is not flat, the sun does not fly across the sky, fire is not alive, and sickness is not caused by small dwarfs living in the belly. 
      
      Reject faulty belief systems - your progeny will thank you for it.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         At this risk of sounding ironic I would like to say, "Amen to that!"

         replyreport
      2. 62

         Lisa HWposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I'm in favor of rejecting what we see as faulty belief systems; but what a lot of people don't realize is that science now knows that there is a part of that brain that, when well developed, "specializes" in spirituality and morality.  In research I did on gifted and highly gifted people), I learned, too, that highly gifted people often a sense of a "higher calling" in life and well developed sense of spirituality. 
         
         In other words, don't be too quick to write off people who believe in a higher power as being stupid. either   
         
         The brains of sociopaths have showed up in scans as not having that part of the brain well developed.    The population of people in prison has a very high percentage of people with very low IQ's in it.  In other words, sense of morality, spirituality, and empathy (all of which criminals and sociopaths lack) is associated with poor brain development; while empathy, a sense of morality, and a sense of spirituality are generally associated with one kind of higher than average intelligence.

         replyreport
         1. 59

            William R. Wilsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I don't think that people who believe in some higher power are stupid.  I know and respect many very intelligent and devout Christians and Muslims.  And I am an agnostic, not an atheist.  I believe in what I can see and work with, but I have space in my mind and in my "soul" (whatever that is) for wonder, empathy, love, etc. 
            
            I believe you and agree with you completely about the necessity of love, empathy, etc.  But there doesn't have to be a higher power of any sort for these things to be part of us.  Love and empathy are a very good trait for humans to have, since our survival and success depends on close social networks and trust.  Without love we would not be able to raise children to the point at which they can fend for themselves.
            
            My point of view is that you can only believe what you can see.  Everything else is just conjecture.  Given all the evidence that is readily available to support the theory of evolution(the age of the earth, evolution that can be seen happening in real time in microbes and insects, the fossil record, etc. etc.), the theory of evolution has a lot more explanatory power than any mysterious force in the sky that has never been seen subjectively, that can't be communicated with except subjectively, etc.
            
            Now, what I do think is stupid is dogma of any kind.  That is what I mean when I say defective thinking.  Religious people are not the only people who are prone to this sort of defect but they do seem to me more prone to it because they have to make the world fit into their preconceived worldview rather than simply observing the facts and allowing conclusions to change as the facts available change.

            replyreport
   6. 59

      Paul Wingertposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      A response to aka-dj's first statement, "Assuming evolution IS correct,..." My question is why wouldn't it be?

      replyreport
   7. 59

      qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      "...believing in something beyond ones-self...," isn't the problem.
      The problem lies in the abject ignorance and disgusting arrogance of an infantile species of human life 
      that has imagined and created metaphysical concepts of supernatural entities that "it" will kill and die for!
      The only concept that man has created that has destroyed more life than religious belief and activity, is the automobile!
      To me, life is a precious, one time experience.
      I study the anthropological history of man and the anomaly "consciousness," and I become painfully aware of the fact that man is a genetically predatious animal that uses supernatural divinities as an excuse to commit "murder and mayhem!"
      Religion is and has been a salient factor in his evolution. Consciousness has caused man to question and invent.
      As his sophistication increased, his once simple belief in gods followed suit.
      He, for power and control, conceived abstract concepts of "gods" that no amount of gained knowledge could challenge! 
      I hate all religion because it relates to man's most primitive fears and superstitions. It is indicative of the tortuously slow characteristics of the evolution of a complex species of life.
      Religion has been the bane of human progress, and has,historically, been the absolute cause of terrible human pain, suffering and death!
      The concept of religion can only be defeated by universal education!
      Unfortunately, religion will, most likely, be the catalyst that will end the reign of contemprary life on "Mother Earth."
      If that happens, then the Gaia Hypothesis has come to pass and Mother Earth's  protective immune system will have won!
      She will then, no doubt begin another experiment with the processes of eternal evolution at her beck and call!
      Qwark

      replyreport
      1. 68

         aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Religion responsible for killings. Ye, you're right.
         BUT, you conveniently leave out, atheist regimes oppress, torture and kill innocent people too. North Korea but for one example.
         Drug dealers enslave, and torture and kill, tens of thousands.
         Gang violence. Organised crime.
         If you want to be fair, give these some credit too. Jails are full of murderers, and I don't have stat's, but I'd confidently say, VERY few christians are in there. Oh, some converts after the fact, maybe.
         
         Oh, and let's not forget your (lovely) "mother earth" , she's killed MILLIONS, through floods, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, again, to just name a few.
         
         If you really want to blame, blame the wickedness of man(kind). Call it depravity, violent nature, whatever. He is the one responsible. BTW, not many guilty ones in prison either. They were all wrongly judged.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Population of Judaic/Christian of US, nearly 80%
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_i … ted_States
            
            Only about 15% (being generous in that number) are atheist or agnostic or just don't care or didn't care to state their preference.
            
            To say that "very few" Christians are in prisons is an outright lie. 
            
            Countries with higher atheist populations have significantly less people in their prison systems but the US tops the list of the HIGHEST concentration of religiously affiliated convicts in the world. 
            
            39% are Catholic
            35% are Protestant
            7%  are Muslim
            10% are other Christian sects. such as Mormon, JW, Church of Christ, Advent or Orthodoxed. 
            
            3% of the entire US Prison system is something else: Scientology, atheist, Hindu, Bahia and Krishna being the smallest number.
            
            Coincidentally, that number of people in prison has doubled since 2008 but of course you will say either. 1) that's because Christian's are being unfairly persecuted or 2) they are Muslim or 3) that's because there are more atheist in prison because the Atheist population has grown.
            
            There in no data whatsoever that could conclusively make your statement true but there is enough evidence to conclude that YES, in fact, the majority of people in prison are Christians.

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               You are probably right.
                 I can see where there would be truth in your facts as presented.
               
                   Could it be that those countries with a higher % of atheist have less strict and less hypocritical laws?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually I was going to go with a better education system.  Better educated leaders and yes, probably more relaxed and less hypocritical laws.
                  
                  But I don't know but Sweden is 80% atheist of the crimes committed, most.. nearly all are petty crimes and about .05% are violent ones.
                  
                  So maybe atheist are petty thugs lol but at least not violent.  
                  

                  replyreport
            2. 59

               William R. Wilsonposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Nice.

               replyreport
            3. 0

               Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               while we're at it, I read that the US has the highest rate of antidepressant use, and believers in god(s) are more likely to suffer from depression than atheists.  Sounds like a lot of depressed christians out there (I know I was more depressed when I was a christian)

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Actually Baily, I was too come to think of it.  My life did improve after I let go of the idea that someone was going to make it all better.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     I'm reading a book by Eric Maisel "The Atheist's Way - Living Well without Gods" - fascinating read and not hateful - even believers might get something out of it.
                     
                     He quoted testimonies of many people that were more depressed as god-believers.   He reakons it's because everyone contemplates that the universe doesn't care for us/life is meaningness from time to time, but believers also have niggling doubts that their beliefs are a lie - so they have a double-whammy to get depressed about

                     replyreport
         2. 59

            qwarkposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Aka:
            You must read a thought completely before you reply i.e.
            "Religion responsible for killings. Ye, you're right.
            BUT, you conveniently leave out, atheist regimes oppress, torture and kill innocent people too. North Korea but for one example.
            Drug dealers enslave, and torture and kill, tens of thousands.
            Gang violence. Organised crime."
            I wrote: 
            "The problem lies in the abject ignorance and disgusting arrogance of an infantile species of human life 
            that has imagined and created metaphysical concepts of supernatural entities that "it" will kill and die for!"
            I'm not going to go back over my response to you. I said what I said and it stands as is.
            "The concept of religion can only be defeated by universal education!
            Unfortunately, religion will, most likely, be the catalyst that will end the reign of contemprary life on "Mother Earth."
            You can offer nothing that will/can change the mind of an educated "thinking" man!
            Evolution has been proved, is eternal and is "busy" wherever life exists.
            If the human species "makes it," sophistication will end the reign of the myth of supernatural heroes i.e.god/s.
            Qwark

            replyreport
         3. 60

            Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            "If you want to be fair, give these some credit too. Jails are full of murderers, and I don't have stat's, but I'd confidently say, VERY few christians are in there. Oh, some converts after the fact, maybe."
            
            
            http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm
            
            
            So much for your confidence!

            replyreport
   8. 61

      Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I just addressed another forum on roughly the same subject. Most who can't accept the evolution of thought, have no idea whatsoever about the mechanism which Darwin first describe, and with only half baked concepts, they charge into battles they are poorly equipped for. They tend to protest when they believe their sensibilities  are being attacked, wether that is a correct assumption or not, and lash out with insults and ridicule which defiles the spirit of the forum, and the debate which should normally take place. They would rather work in the colliseum, where they can throw those who donot agree with their distorted veiw, to the proverbial (and virtual) lions.

      replyreport
   9. 60

      dutchman1951posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Aka, some things as perfect as the Univere, and The Human Body, just showing up, evolving...etc...   Hard to take.
      
      If Evolution progressed from Monkey to man or animal to man, then why are there still animals, mamals, monkies. Evolution, if it is natural does not just stop at a certin point?  Why does space matter not contain the essential complex sugars and carbons to make life? To many questions, to many false beliefs, to much un-proven science. So Poeple ask, why and how?
      
      As for that bothering people?   From reading the posts in this Religious forum it seem's to only bother the folks not so grounded in their proclaimed beliefs as they claim, And I mean that on both sides, (Beliver - Non beliver)

      replyreport
      1. 59

         spookyfoxposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Perfection is only a judgement that comes after the object itself, it's only an observation. Like saying a banana is yellow. You can't use a judgement like that to describe the origin and escence of the thing. You can't find out what trees, in what areas and wheather bananas grow simply by observing that their skin reflects yellow light. The same way, you can't simply make a line from "this is perfect, therefore it came to being under this and that circumstances". Besides. in order to say something is perfect, you need to compare it to something else. Have you seen an imperfect Universe.
         
         Secondly, the human body is far, far from perfect.

         replyreport
      2. 58

         Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Usually, at this point, when one does not know an answer, they attempt to do the research to see if the answers are available. In this case, they are.
         
          
         
         There is space and there is matter, but there is no such thing as 'space matter.'
         
         
         
         The answers you seek based on your post are available if you simply take the time to find out.
         
         

         replyreport
   10. 51

       paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       We must reconcile on truth; that is the only way out. We got evolved as per the design of the Creator-God who set everything in motion by his commandment to the Universe and the life in it with His words "to be"  and everything started evolving.

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Of course, this is merely your opinion.  Which is really worth no more than any other religious adherent.  What about if we have a god race between all of the deities represented on these religious threads!
          
          The first one to show up and post here will be the winner!  Ready, get set, go.....!

          replyreport
          1. 51

             paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             
             
             I think you want to win. Don't you?

             replyreport
             1. 60

                Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                No I do not want to win.  Although my surname indicates the possibility, I would rather one of the favored deities win.  This would settle the matter once and for all. 
                
                But as you can see, none of them appear to care what we think about their abilities or their actual existence.  Or, we can also assume silent assent or just the opposite, whichever one prefers.
                
                I assume you prefer the former.

                replyreport
       2. 58

          Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Funny, that's not what your Quran says.

          replyreport
          1. 51

             paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Humans have been evolved/created in stages; different forms and conditions; I quote from Quran:
             
             [71:14] ‘What is the matter with you that you expect not wisdom and staidness from Allah?
             [71:15] ‘And He has created you in different forms and different conditions.
             http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/sh … p;verse=14

             replyreport
   11. 0

       Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I've just publised a hub about what bothers me - it's a rebuttal to an anti-evolution hub.
       
       My hub is called:  Darwin - The Man Who Killed God
       
       I called it that, because it's like Darwin's getting the blame for murdering God

       replyreport
       1. 51

          paarsurreyposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Darwin could not kill the Creator-God; Darwin just told how the things have been evolved/created.
          Darwin could not escape death nor he could create anything.

          replyreport
2. 75

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   Assuming evolution?
   
   This is where your problem starts with monotheistic assumptions/hypothesis treated like facts when you resort to deny evolution.

   replyreport
3. 75

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   You can't teach anthropology to Christians who deny evolution or don't want to study evolution. Christians assume world with 6k years creationism. If you debunk their theory they'll fowl cry by name calling and accusing you for ridiculing their faith, views and this holy theory. They think they have right to shove these deluded theories on non-Christians, kids and anyone who is skeptical of their faith. They don't have proof for 6k years old earth but denying and disagreeing with them will only lead you to their gang reply-flagging.
   
   If they do the attack on facts of evolution or science it IS fine. But if you debunk their theories with science then they'll resort to attack or fowl cry for being attacked. They'll shout loud saying science is wasting money/time by denying god or disapproving god or taking people away from god.

   replyreport
4. 60

   Merlin Fraserposted 13 years ago

   In science we start with the statement, “I do not know !”
   
   In Region, any of them, they start with, “I was told !”
   
   In science we challenge accepted theory and try to prove it wrong, or take someone else’s theories and try to prove them correct by simply duplicating their claims and we expect and demand they do the same with our own theories.
   
   In religion you are given a defined set of unsubstantiated facts and told  “you must accept these and believe as an act of blind faith.” 
   
   This is where theory and Fact collide, or where Faith and Science collide.   You simply cannot take a statement and try and jam into an equation and make it work.  “God” is what creationists try to jam into the equation of life and it doesn’t work.
   
   Creationist say God created the world and all life in six days, Science has proved this is not true and Darwin proved it didn’t even need a God in the first place.
   
   Same applies to the whole Universe, Steven Hawking, someone a damn sight brighter and more intelligent than most, has written an equation that explains the creation of the entire Universe and there is not a God Factor in his equation.
   
   Fair enough, he may be right or he may be wide of the mark, time and science will tell one way or the other in due course.
   No need for abuse or name calling from either side.

   replyreport
   1. 81

      pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Nice post

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         agree - I like reading what merlin writes

         replyreport
   2. 59

      Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Steven Hawking, someone a damn sight brighter and more intelligent than most, has written an equation that explains the creation of the entire Universe and there is not a God Factor in his equation.
      
      - - - - - -
      
        Steven Hawking is the best reverse engineer ever to examine how the universe was CREATED.   I agree with you 100%

      replyreport
      1. 59

         Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         No Jerami. He has proven there was no need for a creator. Too bad huh?

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            What I am referring to here as CREATOR,  is what ever lies just outside the perimeters of his insight, that first put into motion those things which he described.
            
                I'm not limiting "IT"  to an old man sitting in THE  BIG  Chair.   
            
               You can not get something from nothing. 
               We  CAN  have nothing one minute and have something the next.  That something simply came from someplace else.
             
              No one has ever been able to look over there and see what is there;  so you say that over there does not exist? 
            Is that correct?

            replyreport
            1. 59

               Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               You have obviously not read what he wrote.
               
               But - yes - he is saying there is no need for an "over there" which you are so utterly certain must be there because you do not understand physics.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I could be and according to you, I am.
                  
                    Wasn't there one component concerning matter "popping in " and out of our reality?  And this could have set the ball rolling in the very beginning.
                  
                      And this was his explanation as to how GOD wasn't necessary to have been the ... "In The Beginning" that started it all in motion?
                  
                      Just asking.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     Not that I am aware of. As far as I can recall, Hawking is of the opinion that it is not possible to know the true nature of reality in any case.
                     
                     But - he is certain that the universe created itself spontaneously, and has proven this to be possible. Now - that does not prove there is no CREATOR, just that one is unnecessary.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        One of Lawrence Krauss' lectures... I believe it was called, "A Universe From Nothing," pretty much settles the matter.
                        
                        If anyone watches that lecture and is unable to see how the universe could have spontaneously came into being, they are intentionally persisting in delusion.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           FindMyTeenFashionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           I am shocked by the natural selection supporters. You guys seem to be very "closed-minded."  I do not consider myself to be a "religious" person. However, i do believe in a higher power. I have watched the lecture that you are speaking of, and I did not hear an answer about the orgin of life. He did offer a theory; but there was not sufficient proof to come to any sort of conclusion. I'm not saying that creationism is right, but no scientist has proven it to be absolutley wrong.

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              You mean by proving a negative?  They haven't proven the Easter Bunny doesn't exist yet either.  Still believe in him, do you?

                              replyreport
                              1. 60

                                 FindMyTeenFashionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 I do not believe in the Easter Bunny. However, the lack of evidence about the orgin of life has convinced me of a higher power.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 0

                                    sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    Does that "higher power" have a name?
                                    
                                    Does it talk and speak English? 
                                    
                                    Does it look like a human?
                                    
                                    Can you pinpoint its' origins?
                                    
                                    Do you have a predetermined definition of a "higher power" so conclusive to know exactly what it is?
                                    
                                    Do you know what that "higher power" is exactly?
                                    
                                    Does it 'whisper' in your mind?
                                    
                                    Does it tell you what to think?
                                    
                                    Does it make you feel good/bad?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 60

                                       FindMyTeenFashionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       I do belive that there is something out there that is bigger than us. I can not see it, so I have idea what it looks like. I do know that there are things that science can not explain. Again, I do not consider myself to be a religious person, but I do consider myself to be open-minded,and respectful of others beliefs. I guess that's what is shocking about many people on this forum. Just the lack of respect for others.

                                       report
                                       1. 60

                                          Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                          And what, particularly, can't science explain that the bible does better?

                                          report
                                       2. 58

                                          Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                          That is true. Yet, given time, science may very well explain those things. But, it would be intellectually dishonest to chose alternative explanations of imaginary super beings simply because the answers are unknown at this time.
                                          
                                          Lightning and thunder are not angry gods, yet that was believed before an explanation became apparent.

                                          report
                                 2. 58

                                    Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    So, essentially you are saying that because science has not provided you the answers you seek at this time, you have decided to chose myths as the answer you want to embrace.
                                    
                                    Will you change your mind if science does provide the answers or will you continue to embrace myths?

                                    replyreport
                                 3. 60

                                    Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    How many Easter egg baskets has Jesus brought you?  And why would scientists be lying about evidence for evolution?  Just to prove the believers wrong?  Do the scientists want everyone to go to hell?  Is that it?  Please give your views for the reasons scientists are falsifying their findings.

                                    replyreport
                     2. 59

                        Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        OK !   That is all that I intended to say.
                        
                           I don't remember his name, that Guy that co authored  several books with Mr Hawkins ? 
                        I was watching an interview with him, and he did say that it has been proven that matter does just pop in and out of this dimension.  That they know nothing about where or how ?
                        
                           I am bewildered when attempting to understand things such as this unless I attempt to understand it from the simplest of prospectives.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                           "Dimension," and "reality," are two distinct and separate concepts. You are talking about string theory - the idea that there are 11 dimensions - we just cannot access them all.
                           
                           Try this video:
                           
                           http://www.ted.com/talks/brian_greene_o … heory.html
                           
                           Still trying to get my head around it myself.

                           replyreport
                           1. 59

                              Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              Thank you.
                              
                                I will watch it !!   but right now I gotta go and try to get some work.   Finances getting shallow.
                              
                                 Few people are caring about maintenance on their houses when the wife is out spending all the money on Christmas.
                              would give ya a LOL ...  but it isn't funny. LOL
                              
                              see ya later.

                              replyreport
                           2. 59

                              Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                              I sat down and watched it instead of leaving to find work.
                              Will do that momentarily.
                                This was fascinating the way that he explained it.
                              
                                I predict that when this theory is proven (absolutely) then each of these eleven dimensions will be found to have another dimensions that is not included in this theory.
                              
                              Can we imagine being in another dimension where more than just our three are IMMEDIATELT apparent?
                                Is this where you believe our evolution will bring us.
                              Because it seems that once mankind has become aware of things, that we learn how to use it for our advantage???
                                 
                              What will he next?
                              And who is to say that we are not following an others footprints?.
                              
                                  YEP!  I must be crazy. Just proved it.

                              replyreport
                              1. 75

                                 skyfireposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 After reading about string theory i can tell you one thing - you're not crazy for posting this. Many of us had similar questions related to string theory.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 66

                                    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    string theory is really cool in that it is really nothing moving around in these loops.

                                    replyreport
                              2. 0

                                 sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                 I think you overlook one thing.  Just like the idea of anti-matter, you would have to bring it into a material dimension, that would be ours.
                                 
                                 String Theory can suggest that we can bend spacetime and make giant leaps "threw" dimensions but on the other side, it would still be this one at a different time.
                                 
                                 I suggest some reading about the Atomic clock and how time slows away from Earth.  It is a fact.  If we could do it, we could travel 45 days (or whatever) and reach some unknown region of the Universe, but time here will have lapsed something like 800 years.
                                 
                                 Relativity is an important aspect to consider.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 66

                                    ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                    I love Sting! I didn't know he had a theory! :LOL: just kidding sandra

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                       lol, ooops.

                                       report
5. 68

   aka-djposted 13 years ago

   Neither camp has a monopoly on the past.
   One says created, the other says evolved.
   There is not PROOF, only evidence. Evidence that needs interpretation.
   Interpretation becomes subjective.
   Hence I am right. You are right.
   Why do I believe? Because the evidence convinces me.
   Why do you believe? Because the evidence convinces you.
   That's been my position all along.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No - there is proof we evolved dj.
      Plenty of it.
      These are scientific facts.
      Sorry.
      No creation - no evidence of this either.
      Only people like you repeating nonsensical claims.
      Too bad huh?

      replyreport
      1. 68

         aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Why argue with me?
         I'm trying to see it from your side!
         So, if evolution IS a FACT, then, there is room for me to believe whatever i want!
         I evolved with a greater capacity to believe that you, NO?
         But you don't acknowledge my RIGHT to believe. DDAAHH!!!

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Evolution is a fact.
            I acknowledge your right to believe whatever you wish.
            Beliefs and facts are not the same thing.
            Why are you trying to make them the same thing?
            
            You believe humans were created, by a creator.
            There are facts that prove we evolved.
            
            So - your beliefs are wrong. That doesn't mean you have no right to believe them, just that they have no basis in reality.

            replyreport
            1. 68

               aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               Based on the meaning of "reality", yea.
               But God is in the "super"natural, whilst you, and evidence is in the natural.
               So, based on that I have no problem resolving the two.
               You on the other hand, dismiss, ignore and ridicule the "super"natural, which you are free to do. I have no problem with that either.
               So- your beliefs are wrong. (or at best, limited to this present reality).

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  Yes - I dismiss your fantasy.
                  Why do you dismiss my proven facts in that case?
                  
                  If you cannot understand why you are ridiculed for dismissing proven scientific facts in favor of a "super natural" explanation - I am probably not going to be able to enlighten you.

                  replyreport
                  1. 68

                     aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                     " I am probably not going to be able to enlighten you."
                     Haven't you learned this yet?
                     We've been here lots of times, Mark.
                     I am a hardcore believer! Jesus IS LORD!
                     All the rest is fluff!
                     Sorry, man, I gotta sleep. Early rise coming.

                     replyreport
                     1. 59

                        Mark Knowlesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                        What has that got to do with the proven scientific facts of evolution? Confused.
                        
                        Nighty night.

                        replyreport
            2. 66

               ceciliabeltranposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               they are facts, I agree. but belief is also fact shrouded in ignorance.

               replyreport
   2. 81

      pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Evidence does certainly need interpreting and I agree it is subjective

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         While evidence is up for interpretation there are interpretations that fit better with other established facts.
         
         If a door slams shut on its own I can "interpret" that to be ghosts, demons, aliens, extra-dimensional beings and so on...
         
         ...or, I can look at the fact that sometimes a change in air-pressure can cause a door to shut "seemingly" by itself.
         
         Occam's Razor in action!

         replyreport
         1. 81

            pennyofheavenposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Apparently so

            replyreport
   3. 0

      Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      as someone that's been a christian and now isn't, I don't see much 'evidence' for christianity at all - it's all believe it because I told you so (that the bible is inspired by god etc).  I see much more for evolution.  I'd like to believe a God that loves us unconditionally and takes care of us exists, but I don't see any evidence of that.

      replyreport
6. 58

   NewYorkerposted 13 years ago

   Some people just have a hard time admitting they're wrong..
   
   Personally, I don't believe in God or Jesus or any of those dudes, but I respect y'all who do. At least it doesn't bother me. What bothers me though are all those people who try to force their beliefs on me. I choose to believe in science - not God, and that is just my business. I do not my days trying to get Christians or Jews to start believing in science.

   replyreport
   1. 58

      NewYorkerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I do not spend my days * lol

      replyreport
7. 75

   skyfireposted 13 years ago

   LOL. This is what happens when people interpret thing without any facts behind.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      What is it in that statement that you find offending?

      replyreport
      1. 75

         skyfireposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Offending ? LOL. Claiming that hawkins said universe is created without any link to his work/peer-reviwed journal is what i'm pointing out. I don't expect any authentic source from you because i know you lack peer-reviewed resources and it shows in the way you debate on topic science.

         replyreport
         1. 58

            NewYorkerposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            You're a bit of a know-it-all, aren't you?

            replyreport
      2. 0

         Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I know that your question wasn't directed at me, but which statement are you referring to?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            Never mind, skyfire clarified for me.

            replyreport
8. 41

   Mikeydoesposted 13 years ago

   Evolution is a theory.
   
   Religion defined as
   
   "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs."
   
   By no means should they ever be brought up in the same context. I am fine with religion and love what it is about, and also support it. However I am curious about the universe and beyond. Whether we want to believe it or not we are stardust, trillions and trillions of pixels held together somehow.
   
   Evolution is based on science and is  100% not complete by any means. Darwin found the base of a very complex, much more confusing reality.
   
   For some reason some religious people think that the idea evolution was put on earth by atheists to ruin them. Not at all, you are spiritual through god and I am happy for that. I however can not experience that, but I can experience the origins of life and make up my own theories on how we are created.. Through evolution, I was made by my parents and they were made by their parents. Humans weren't always around and we just didn't appear. So what reproduced to have us, and what reproduced to have that. Before earth life-forms were here, something had to evolve in order to create us.
   
   It makes more sense in my head, hard to explain.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      I mostly agree with you, but I would like to add:
      
      The scientific definition of a theory is, "an explanation of the facts."
      
      So the "theory of evolution" could be viewed as, "an explanation of the fact of evolution." Darwin did not create a theory he created a hypothesis which later became theory.
      
      Also, you said:
      
      "Whether we want to believe it or not we are stardust, trillions and trillions of pixels held together somehow."
      
      That somehow you mentioned is: weak and strong nuclear force, electromagnetism and gravity. Just FYI.

      replyreport
      1. 41

         Mikeydoesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         I'm just not sure, after hearing and learning about Dark energy and Dark flow. Also string theory, I am intrigued and really, I am not setting anything in my mind in concrete, because there is so much we just don't know, but will learn in my lifetime.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Jake Gene Barnesposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I see what you're saying, and I respect your stance. It's good to keep an open mind.
            
            I, for one, go where the evidence leads. I am a staunch supporter of what we understand as "The Facts." But that doesn't mean that new evidence couldn't dissuade me from my current understanding of things.
            
            In other words, I am NOT dogmatic in my approach to anything. There is always room for both error and improvement.

            replyreport
9. 77

   psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

   As to the original question: beats me.  I though that a major advantage of atheism was that you didn;t need to run around trying to convert people.
   
   That said, there is nothing that prevents a person from being religious *and* beleiving in natural selection.  The idea that evolution and Christianity are in direct conflict seems to be perculiar to the United States.

   replyreport
10. 0

    sandra rinckposted 13 years ago

    Well for one, religious people say that "god doesn't change". 
    Everyone else has noted that everything changes.
    
    It's not the people who understand it who have a problem with it, it's the ones who don't understand it who feel "attacked" for not believing things change.

    replyreport
    1. 59

       Jeramiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       If things change as you are addressing in your comment here.
       Which I agree whole heartedly;
       Then our vehement argument of what is reality also will change, will it not?
       
          So, for me or anyone else to be so staunchly positioned in our understanding of REALITY  would all be vanity would it not?
       
         So we might as well just eat drink and be merry.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          No actually you are confusing reality, what is real with a fantastic reality... the kind you make of it relatively speaking.
          
          Vehement though? I didn't realize I made you that angry.

          replyreport
       2. 71

          Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          No. Reality doesn't change based on perception/perspective. Reality exists free of any human thought.
          Vanity has nothing to do with what is knowable.
          
          Just a thought.

          replyreport
          1. 71

             seanorjohnposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Cagsil, why do you keep entering these forums on religion? You say you are an atheist but nevertheless you seem obsessed with religion.

             replyreport
             1. 58

                Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                That's very similar to the question of why believes tend to be obsessed with discrediting science, or reality, or mankind, or... etc. etc. etc. in order to prop up their belief systems.

                replyreport
                1. 68

                   aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   "prop up belief system"
                   
                   
                   
                   You're kidding, right?
                   
                   Let me simplify it for you, seeing as you don't do anything for yourself.
                   The claim is....
                                            "Jesus is Lord, & saviour"
                   The response is....
                                            "I believe that....or....no, I don't believe that".
                   
                   I don't need to knock science to prop this up.

                   replyreport
                   1. 58

                      Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      How can I be kidding when there are mountains of evidence here on the forums alone to support that?
                      
                      
                      
                      LOL! Now, you're the one who is kidding.

                      replyreport
                      1. 68

                         aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                         Oh, yeah, Hubpages forums are a real authority on that.
                         GMAB.
                         
                         You need science to prop your views up. Without them you'd be in la la land. Nothing to hang your hat on, so to speak.
                         
                         BTW, I'm still laughing.

                         replyreport
                         1. 58

                            Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                            I never claimed it was an authority, just a repository amongst many with evidence to substantiate the observation.
                            
                            
                            
                            Without them, you'd still be living in a cave.
                            
                            
                            
                            That's nice.

                            replyreport
                            1. 68

                               aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                               Sorry mate.
                               I was born into THIS generation.
                               I missed out on the caveman era.
                               That's if it ever was.
                               Adam wasn't evolved from monkeys, and he wasn't a barbaric caveman. He had a bit more intelligence than that.
                               
                               
                               Sorry, to disappoint you. I know you don't believe Adam ever existed either.

                               replyreport
                               1. 58

                                  Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                  Well yes, you are free to ignore the mountains of hard evidence that show cavemen did exist and instead embrace the myths and superstitions of the Bronze Age.
                                  
                                  
                                  
                                  I would suspect you would be far more disappointed to know that we are primates, just like monkeys. Or, is that another fact you choose to ignore in order to embrace myths?

                                  replyreport
11. 0

    Antoine Van Hoveposted 13 years ago

    Because religion (and politics) are both about institutes concerned with social organisation and control.
    
    They both make use of our deep desire to search and find the truth about ourselves and the universe.
    
    Through a process of conditioning we are given all kinds of ideas and concepts about this or that being "the truth". And the reason we accept these finds it source in our need for security. because we our not aware of the truth which lies behind our existance.
    
    Once we have accepted all these concepts and ideas about ourselves and the reality we live in, we identify ourselves with them.
    
    Once we identified ourselves with them, we feel the need to protect them, because we think we have to defend ourselves.
    
    Every insult, doubt or questioning about everything we have ourselves identified with, is wrongly seen and interpreted as an attack from the "outside".
    
    This is a reaction out of fear and out of ignorance about our real nature, being ourselves expressions of the Devine truth.
    
    Religiosity is a personal issue, which arises from our awe and astonisment of our own existance, which we witness through our conscious.
    
    Therefore, religiosity, is something which has to and can only be lived as a lively experience and expression of life itself.
    
    And life in all its potential, can hardly be enchained or bound in a set of social rules to live by.
    
    Live according to that which feels to you as being good. Simply look into your heart to feel it. Free yourself of all what they told you, whatever it was, or might be, so that you finally can start living life the way it was meant.

    replyreport
12. 59

    Paul Wingertposted 13 years ago

    The todays western religions, Judism, Christianity, and Islam, are also a product of evolution. All three evolved from the ancient Eqyption religious cults. Commandments, book of living a moral life (todays, Bible, Tora, and Koran), judement of the soul before entering the afterlife, etc. were all ancient Egyptian beliefs. These beliefs are 5000+ years old and modern science has only been around for under 500 years. There's there's a huge gap between the two. As humans developed more technologies and got out more, they soon start questioning the old belief system. But some people still want to hold on to the old beliefs. It's like going to see a doctor for a migrain headache and the first thing the doctor wants to do is bleed you while performing a prayer ritual.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       I disagree with you about Judaism, Christianity and Islam having it's roots in Egypt.
       None of Moses' writings had a basis in Egyptian religion. The "religion" he started was unique for it's time.
       Christianity has been birthed out of Judaism, only so far as declaring that Jesus WAS the Christ (Messiah) of the Old Testament. Again, NOTHING to do with Egyptian origins.
       Islam, which came hundreds of years after the birth of Christianity bears NO resemblence to either of the preceding "faiths".
       About the only thing it had in common was the peoples ancestry being traced back to Abraham, and the declaration that Allah was "one" god. It was declared in a world of polytheism. Allah is definitely NOT the same person as God, the Father as declared by Jesus, and the NT writers.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Moses was raised by Egyptian and not just any Egyptian, a Pharaoh no less.

          replyreport
          1. 68

             aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             I know!
             That's what makes it so clear. He did NOT include into the Torah, anything he was taught in the house of Pharaoh. He received it all directly from God, on Mt Sanai.

             replyreport
             1. 60

                Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I suppose you were there at the time?  LOL!

                replyreport
13. 59

    Jeramiposted 13 years ago

    Jerami wrote:
    If things change as you are addressing in your comment here. our vehement argument of what is reality also will change, will it not?
    
    Cagsil  wrote   
    No. Reality doesn't change based on perception/perspective. Reality exists free of any human thought.
    
    
    Jerami wrote:
    So, for me or anyone else to be so staunchly positioned in our understanding of REALITY  would all be vanity would it not?
    
    Cagsil  wrote
    Vanity has nothing to do with what is knowable.
    
    Just a thought
    ===========================================================================================================================
    
    
    Jerami
       I said  "Our arguement"   ABOUT   ???  would change would it not?
    
       So YES  reality stays the same regardless of what You or I BELIEVE it to be, because what you and I preceive as reality changes.
       This is what the discussion was about
         but thanks anyway.

    replyreport
14. 59

    Jeramiposted 13 years ago

    aka-dj wrote:
    I disagree with you about Judaism, Christianity and Islam having it's roots in Egypt.
    None of Moses' writings had a basis in Egyptian religion. The "religion" he started was unique for it's time.
    Christianity has been birthed out of Judaism, only so far as declaring that Jesus WAS the Christ (Messiah) of the Old Testament. Again, NOTHING to do with Egyptian origins.
    Islam, which came hundreds of years after the birth of Christianity bears NO resemblence to either of the preceding "faiths".
    About the only thing it had in common was the peoples ancestry being traced back to Abraham, and the declaration that Allah was "one" god. It was declared in a world of polytheism. Allah is definitely NOT the same person as God, the Father as declared by Jesus, and the NT writers.
    
    - - - - -
    
    
    sandra rinck  wrote
    
      Moses was raised by Egyptian and not just any Egyptian, a Pharaoh no less.
    
    - - - - - - -
    
      ME   
       I think that Moses was raised by both the Pharaohs' daughter  and his birth mother.
       
      His mother would have taught him what Hand-me-down stories such as she knew  AND  he was taught by the Egyptians.
    
      So his understanding of those events that he had would have been influenced by both. 
       And this is what was written.
    
       It wasn't too many generations before these teachings were lost or forgotten.  Thus, the need for the prophets being sent.
    
       And everyone and no one, knows the rest of the story.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       So, according to your understanding, Moses just made it all up.
       
       He didn't really have an encounter with God, (burning bush), nor did he have  a one-on-one with God on Mt Sinai. And God didn't give him the Ten Commandments either.
       
       Or am I completely misunderstanding you?

       replyreport
       1. 58

          Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          How can a myth make up more myths? 

          replyreport
          1. 68

             aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             AHHHH, I see.
             Moses was a myth.
             
             You have a very fertile imagination.
             Oh, no. You're not THAT creative. You must have read that somewhere.

             replyreport
             1. 58

                Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Here's a hint, it wasn't the bible.
                
                And, speaking of reading, will you ever read anything about evolution so that you gain some sort of understanding of it before you make comments about it?

                replyreport
15. 77

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    That's because science doesn't prove things absolutely wrong (or right).  Perhaps before criticising science you should under the very basics about how it works. 
    
    e.g. the hypothetico-deuctive methos, options = fail to reject null hypothesis vs. reject null hypothesis provisionally, revise as new information is acquired. 
    
    Doubt is the basis of science, nothing is ever absolute (that would be called faith).  However the evidence is in some cases very overwhelming and would take quite a lot to reverse (e.g. the germ theory of disease approaches certainty, so does evidence for natural selection).
    
    Also natural selection doesn't posit anything about the origin of life.  That would be abiogenisis, which is another subject.
    
    I have read the Bible a few times, have you read the origin of species?

    replyreport
16. 59

    spookyfoxposted 13 years ago

    We're as bothered as you could be by a flat-earthist or a holocaust denier.

    replyreport
17. 77

    psycheskinnerposted 13 years ago

    You can;pt call something 'unproven science' when you clearly haven;t read even on easy-reader book summarising the evidence available.  Dude, questions like 'if man evolved from monkeys, way are there still monkeys' are just... um... showing you haven't looked into this at. all.

    replyreport
18. 78

    DoubleScorpionposted 13 years ago

    I am curious of something..speaking on Evolution...Most "believers" have no issues with being made of dirt but take serious offence to the thought of evolving from a monkey type primate...(Borrowed from a source..Forget who said this first)..Now why is that.. Is dirt higher on the list of things acceptable to be made from than what a Monkey would be? Or is it unacceptable to think that maybe this "God" everyone is so concerned with, decided to make some of his Monkeys a little smarter, give them less hair ( in most cases ) and have them live in better shelters, ability to use logical thinking to solve problems?

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Not really unacceptable, just completely silly.

       replyreport
       1. 78

          DoubleScorpionposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          I was asking the "believers" which is "sillier" being made from dirt by an unseen being or being evolved from a early primate at the discretion of an unseen being. For those who have managed to evolve past the point of needing an unseen all powerful being to justify thier own existance in this world. you already know that believing that an unseen beings doing either the dirt creation or the primate evolving would be considered silly.

          replyreport
19. 0

    sandra rinckposted 13 years ago

    
    
    
    Notice anything?
    
    The statues are 10,000 years old.  The monkey is a rare mangabey.

    replyreport
    1. 61

       Druid Dudeposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Has anyone here ever considered that our spiritual concepts, our philosophies are part and parcel with the mechanism we call evolution. Can't re-phrase this too much more than I already have. Our belief systems, for whatever purpose, EVOLVED! Next time you see animals going to chapel....remember what I said.

       replyreport
       1. 0

          sandra rinckposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Did you just catch up to the 21st century? lol

          replyreport
20. 72

    dahoglundposted 13 years ago

    There should be no conflict between evolution and religion. One should understand both because there is a lot of false information out there. If one believes God created us, than evolution is part of the process.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       And, if one understands evolution, then gods are not required to be part of the process.

       replyreport
21. 72

    dahoglundposted 13 years ago

    Nor are they ruled out.

    replyreport
    1. 58

       Beelzedadposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Using your logic of bringing into this process invisible super beings that defy all laws of nature, we can also not rule out leprechauns and unicorns, or the fact that maybe the universe was sneezed out of a giant invisible pink dragon.
       
       But, I know what you're asking yourself at this point, how do I know the dragon is pink if it's invisible?

       replyreport
       1. 60

          skipper112posted 13 years agoin reply to this

          Just 1 small point, Charls Darwin, Died a Christian. He also stated that he did not belive his own theory...................................... just a point
          
          
          
          
          skipper

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             This story, if you have researched it anywhere but on a religious site, is unsubstantiated.  It was created by a very religious woman who didn't publish it until 15 years after Darwin's death.  His family denied there was any truth in the account.  There has never been any facts which supported this hearsay account.
             
             
             In essence, it is not true!  Good try, but next time don't believe something just because you want to!

             replyreport
             1. 60

                skipper112posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Randy,
                It matters not to me if Darwin become Christian or not..................... and almost every thing here is hearsay. And if I applied  your maxim to these posts, I would not belive anything. It might be true , it might not be, but if memory serves me well I did see something about Darwin later in life sheading doubt about his own theroy. And for your information I did not reserch this on any religious site. But it was noted elsewere, ok. Thank you for your input.
                
                Skipper

                replyreport
                1. 61

                   rickyrt44posted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   posted a new hubs today. please come see. thanks

                   replyreport
                2. 0

                   Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   oh, so that quote was another myth/lie spread doing its rounds?

                   replyreport
          2. 60

             Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Your post doesn't say "perhaps" this happened.  It was written as a statement.  Merely pointing out Darwin's own family said he never said any such thing. 
             
             The lady who claimed this happened was a well know religious zealot.  It is not uncommon for these types to make untrue statements to support their religious views.

             replyreport
22. 60

    Randy Godwinposted 13 years ago

    Why do those who do not believe in evolution refer to the theory as saying "men evolved from monkeys"?  Apparently, they never took the time to understand what the theory actually states.

    replyreport
    1. 68

       aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

       Because it's easy as denying God, when He is as close to you as your every heartbeat. It has to do with the will.
       
       Would you like me to say that we evolved from slime?
       I'm happy to exchange slime for monkey1

       replyreport
       1. 60

          Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          No, it's because you do not understand the theory at all!  The same as if I said the bible was crapped by Moses on the mount. Not true of course, but it makes it sound derisive and ridiculous, just as your assertions are.

          replyreport
          1. 68

             aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Please simplify it for me!
             
             I thought evolution was a process.
             Life starts by accident in some primordial puddle.
             Slime (aka bacteria) evolves.Add some (magical) information
             and billions of years, and voila...we have modern homo sapiens (man) as we know him today.
             
             You mean I got all that wrong?     /

             replyreport
             1. 60

                Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                No magic involved at all!  Save that for the invisible deity who merely grabs up some dirt, says presto change-o, and makes a man.
                
                Then takes a rib, makes a woman, populates the world,, and then kills everyone but a few, even babies and animals with an impossible flood when the deity gets pissed off.  Even though he already knew it was going to happen
                
                Then the deity impregnates a 13 year old virgin, makes another deity, kills him, brings him back to life, and wants everyone to believe the whole thing or burn in hell for eternity, all because he is bored and insecure.  Yep, makes perfect sense. LOL!

                replyreport
                1. 68

                   aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                   There you go!!!
                   
                   Really simple for you too.
                   What a view!
                   
                   I guess slime wins.
                   

                   replyreport
                   1. 60

                      Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                      Certainly!  I would pick slime over delusion every time!  It makes no difference to me how we came to be, just that we are.  There are many animals much nobler than some human beings in this world.

                      replyreport
                      1. 68

                         aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                         Give me a break!!!
                         Who's talking fantasy and delusion.
                         
                         The worst thing about it is that you ACTUALLY believe this "slime" stuff!
                         
                         Stuff "appeared" out of NON-stuff, all by ...what means? Exactly? Oh, yeah, magic. It JUST HAPPENED.
                         
                         Oh, and life, which ALWAYS, ALWAYS  comes from life.  EXCEPT, in the one case way back when. We just don't know how.
                         That's REALLY intelligent.
                         Highly rational.
                         NOT to mention reasonable.
                         
                         I see you put a little emoticon at the bottom, that I guess depicts one your "more noble than ourselves" creatures.
                         He has a name, BTW.

                         replyreport
                         1. 60

                            Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                            You brought up the slime scenario, AK!  I never said I thought slime was what we came from.  But if you spread spermatozoa and a female egg on a glass slide, it won't look like the Gerber baby. I promise you that!  LOL!  It would probably look more like....well,...SLIME!  You would hate these organisms of course!  "Oh No!  I didn't come from that crud, I came from dirt!"  LOLOL!
                            
                            
                            Yes, the asp is much nobler, and frequently more intelligent, than some living creatures which should know better!

                            replyreport
                            1. 68

                               aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                               Thanks for helping my argument!
                               
                               Spermatozoa, and a female frog egg BOTH come from a donor. LIFE.
                               
                               Maybe try making both in a test tube out of "dead" material, bring it to life, and I might listen.
                               
                               Until then, the Biblical account serves me just fine.
                               (My view is just slightly different to the summary you gave me of yours).

                               replyreport
                               1. 60

                                  Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                  Oh, you only dislike certain kinds of slime!  HAHAHAHA!  Just pointing out slime can produce living things!  Try using the same scenario with dirt or clay! 
                                  
                                  Believe what ever fairy tale you like, AK.  Just do not try to pass it off as logical facts.  You will be called on it every time!

                                  replyreport
                                  1. 68

                                     aka-djposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                     Slime is usually very slippery.
                                     I notice you slipped right out of the point, NO, challenge, I gave you.
                                     Produce life from NON-life, and I'll listen.
                                     
                                     Till then, "fairy tales" suit me fine.
                                     
                                     You see, dirt and clay IS what we are made of, after all. So, for God, who IS all powerful, has NO problem adding LIFE to it. Thereby (originating) consistency to this day, the LAW of life from life!
                                     
                                     Besides, dirt and clay is what we're supposed to have originated from according to evolutionary theory. So, even if you are right, origins of life are still vital to both our arguments. So, you can't say, it doesn't matter. It DOES matter!

                                     replyreport
                                     1. 60

                                        Randy Godwinposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                                        Tell you what, AK!  Tell me where god came from and then I will tell you where life came from.  Unless you tell me he didn't come from anywhere.  Then I can say the same for life.  You cannot have it both ways!  LOL!

                                        report
                         2. 61

                            Woman Of Courageposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                            aka-dj, This thread is quite interesting, and very funny.

                            replyreport
       2. 0

          Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

          well, your version is made out of dirt.  Take your pick - slime or dirt.  What's so bad about being related to a monkey.  You're as closely related to a monkey as a wolf is to a dog

          replyreport
          1. 73

             Eaglekiwiposted 13 years agoin reply to this

             Close is not the 'same

             replyreport
             1. 61

                Woman Of Courageposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                Agreed.

                replyreport
             2. 0

                Baileybearposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                I agree.  Aka dj was calling people slime and monkeys.  He doesn't seem to know the difference.

                replyreport