Originally posted by Scriabin
there is no debate here and precious little discussion. Just a lot of chest beating, as is the usual thing in this medium.

yes i agree. though hamilton, twhitehead, fabian, palynka, black beetle when he is not using that funky sense of humor, me, etc will feel very unhappy because you haven't acknowledged our attempts to have a civilized discussion. one where we can all learn something. a debate, real one, where someone posts an argument, the other posts the counter-argument and an argument of his own, etc.

the robbie mostly shouts "lalalalala you have offered NOTHING, you hear me ? NOTHING, you are deluding yourself, evolution is wrong, you have no proof, nothing." and of course hamilton or twhite (mostly they are the more patient) try and say they did offer proof and then the robbie barks like a mad dog "NOTHING! you have NOTHING"

Originally posted by twhitehead
You could start here:
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members

As far as I can tell, Catholicism constitutes about half of all Christians. Last I heard the Pope said he had nothing against evolution.
I was brought up in the Anglican Church and my parents have nothing against evolutionary theory, and as far ...[text shortened]... erica.
Zambia claims to be a Christian Nation yet our schools teach evolution, not creationism.

The two terms evolution and creation I do not think are mutually exclusive. For example, evolution does not attempt to explain our origins, rather, it simply attempts to follow the path of our origins. That is why I object to the notion that Catholics reject creationism, rather, I think they probably acknowledge evolution but reject the notion that God is not at the helm.

Originally posted by whodey
The two terms evolution and creation I do not think are mutually exclusive. For example, evolution does not attempt to explain our origins, rather, it simply attempts to follow the path of our origins. That is why I object to the notion that Catholics reject creationism, rather, I think they probably acknowledge evolution but reject the notion that God is not at the helm.

back to asking what you mean by "God?"

another way to phrase the question:

who gets to tell us who "God" is and what "God" says and wants us to do or not do?

Originally posted by Starrman
By onslaught you mean of course gentle, almost imperceptible whisper?

'Tis basically the same thing, really...

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
yes i agree. though hamilton, twhitehead, fabian, palynka, black beetle when he is not using that funky sense of humor, me, etc will feel very unhappy because you haven't acknowledged our attempts to have a civilized discussion. one where we can all learn something. a debate, real one, where someone posts an argument, the other posts the counter-argument an ...[text shortened]... y they did offer proof and then the robbie barks like a mad dog "NOTHING! you have NOTHING"

What's up with you friend? There is often good debate in this forum albeit little spirituality. There is only one person barking at the moment.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
evolutionists do not try to do moral values. at least they shouldn't. why do creationists try and do science?

are you trying to say that ultimately every knowledge is to some degree faith? because scientists do agree there is no ultimate proof, that we should question our knowledge constantly and try to improve it. however what are the creationists ever ...[text shortened]... e to be. we need facts, verifiable facts which we could use to learn new facts and so on.

I beg to differ, evolutionist do setup morals; value systems have come
up from those that buy into evolutionary theory, things are accepted
and rejected, things are valued and devalued. As soon as someone
starts down the path of a master race, or pigeonholed some group as
being less than acceptable, that is justified by evolution. Simply buying
into the notion that our value systems are ever changing for the good
suggests that whatever group enters power some how has the right,
the authority, nearly a divine calling to crush those that are holding
back the evolution of the rest of humanity from agreeing with them.
Kelly

Originally posted by Scriabin
there is no debate here and precious little discussion. Just a lot of chest beating, as is the usual thing in this medium.

Get off your high horse, stop attacking people for their differing views, and actually debate then!

Originally posted by KellyJay
I beg to differ, evolutionist do setup morals; value systems have come
up from those that buy into evolutionary theory, things are accepted
and rejected, things are valued and devalued. As soon as someone
starts down the path of a master race, or pigeonholed some group as
being less than acceptable, that is justified by evolution. Simply buying
into th ...[text shortened]... ose that are holding
back the evolution of the rest of humanity from agreeing with them.
Kelly

first of all, your post cannot get any more abstract. it is very hard to figure out exactly what you are trying to communicate but i am gonna try.

are you by any chance saying that evolutionists are setting up morals? i would like to hear an example of that. evolutionists that do that are not scientists, or they have extra preoccupations. being an evolutionist means supporting, understanding and perhaps teaching the theory of evolution. researching wouldn't hurt either. that is it. no morals. none. claiming that evolution suggests morals because some evolutionist appears on TV telling you how to live your life is the same thing as saying all physicists play football just because niels bohr did. it is ignorant. there are separate phenomenons. an evolutionist is allowed to go on tv and tell you how to live your life, and then he is allowed to go to the store and buy milk, come home and watch tv, collect stamps, tend to his garden and whatever else he wants. not everything he does has a connection to evolution.

are you saying that evolution is responsible for nazism or any other "superior" race theory? have you researched much? is nietzsche responsible for nazism? not to mention evolution simply explains the diversity of life, it doesn't say one lifeform is better than another and it certainly isn't telling whites are better than blacks. this is another case of making a claim without processing it for stupidity or ignorance. or both.

Originally posted by Scriabin
back to asking what you mean by "God?"

another way to phrase the question:

who gets to tell us who "God" is and what "God" says and wants us to do or not do?

Specifically this thread was boasting that Darwin has killed the God of Abraham. I think I have shown ample evidence that this is pure bunk.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
first of all, your post cannot get any more abstract. it is very hard to figure out exactly what you are trying to communicate but i am gonna try.

are you by any chance saying that evolutionists are setting up morals? i would like to hear an example of that. evolutionists that do that are not scientists, or they have extra preoccupations. being an evolut ...[text shortened]... s another case of making a claim without processing it for stupidity or ignorance. or both.

Unless you want to tell me that evolutionist are without morals we can
have this discussion.
Kelly

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
first of all, your post cannot get any more abstract. it is very hard to figure out exactly what you are trying to communicate but i am gonna try.

are you by any chance saying that evolutionists are setting up morals? i would like to hear an example of that. evolutionists that do that are not scientists, or they have extra preoccupations. being an evolut ...[text shortened]... s another case of making a claim without processing it for stupidity or ignorance. or both.

Yes, people who claim one race isn't as advanced as another are using
evolution to promote their hate.
Kelly

Originally posted by whodey
The two terms evolution and creation I do not think are mutually exclusive. For example, evolution does not attempt to explain our origins, rather, it simply attempts to follow the path of our origins. That is why I object to the notion that Catholics reject creationism, rather, I think they probably acknowledge evolution but reject the notion that God is not at the helm.

Maybe I phrased what I said wrongly. What I meant was that most Christians accept evolution. I do realize that 'creationism' can include both Young Earth Creationists and various other versions.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Maybe I phrased what I said wrongly. What I meant was that most Christians accept evolution. I do realize that 'creationism' can include both Young Earth Creationists and various other versions.

So perhaps this is why creationism still lives?

Originally posted by whodey
So perhaps this is why creationism still lives?

No. There are still plenty of Young Earth Creationists who deny the validity of the Theory of Evolution.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Yes, people who claim one race isn't as advanced as another are using
evolution to promote their hate.
Kelly

That is an over generalization and thus untrue. People were making that claim long before Darwin was born. Yes there are people today who do exactly as you say but there are just as many who make the claim on religious grounds and do not bring evolution into it.