Is the science/theism dichotomy necessary?

Originally posted by OdBod
What about the unreliable human element in relation to the writing and interpretation of your bible?

In one sense that's true. The Bible has been misinterpreted by just about everyone, myself included.

But that doesn't change the veracity of the scriptures.

Originally posted by JS357
I think a creationist might say that the first life on earth came from the living God who had no beginning, whether He started with mud or not.

But to the point of the OP, science stops when the super-natural is invoked as an explanation. If God were recognized by science, it would be treated as a natural object, to be approached using the 4-steps of scienc ...[text shortened]... it: There is something like worship found in the awe that the natural universe sometimes evokes.

Real science knowledge is determined by repeated observation (including by telescopes and microscopes) and repeated testing to determine if their are exceptions. Gravity, the science of falling bodies, is an example.

Reproduction of of animals after their kind is observed scientific knowledge. Selective breeding and natural selective breeding have also been observed. However, that is far from the conjecture that monkeys evolved into humans which has never been observed.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Real science knowledge is determined by repeated observation (including by telescopes and microscopes) and repeated testing to determine if their are exceptions. Gravity, the science of falling bodies, is an example.

Reproduction of of animals after their kind is observed scientific knowledge. Selective breeding and natural selective breeding have also ...[text shortened]... that is far from the conjecture that monkeys evolved into humans which has never been observed.

Does a scientific theory say monkeys evolved into humans?

Originally posted by josephw
...God made man and all living creatures only some six thousand years ago.

This is is exactly the kind of superstitious thinking the OP is talking about. You've obtained this "knowledge" from ancient mythology expressed in allegories written by iron age tribesmen in one corner of the world. It's as if you are not actually interested in the reality of what you see as your God figure's creation. It also seems like this trenchant lack of curiosity is worn like a badge of sincerity or religiosity upon your sleeve. The OP asks, is this kind of intellectual behaviour really necessary to be a Christian theist. I don't think it is.

Originally posted by JS357
Does a scientific theory say monkeys evolved into humans?

No, but the non-scientific theory called the theory of evolution says humans were not created by God, but instead evolved from apes, like monkeys and chimpanzees.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No, but the non-scientific theory called the theory of evolution says humans were not created by God, but instead evolved from apes, like monkeys and chimpanzees.

I have met many Christians who believe that the process of evolution is evidently the method their God figure used to populate the earth with the life that we see has developed to this day. The only thing preventing some Christians from seeing their God's work this way is an insistence on taking ancient, unscientific literature and claiming it somehow pre-emptively trumped thousands of years of subsequent discovery and deepening of human knowledge and awareness.

Originally posted by RJHinds
No, but the non-scientific theory called the theory of evolution says humans were not created by God, but instead evolved from apes, like monkeys and chimpanzees.

quote:

Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans are more closely related to modern apes than to monkeys, but we didn't evolve from apes, either. Humans share a common ancestor with modern African apes, like gorillas and chimpanzees. Scientists believe this common ancestor existed
5 to 8 million years ago. Shortly thereafter, the species diverged into two separate lineages. One of these lineages ultimately evolved into gorillas and chimps, and the other evolved into early human ancestors called hominids.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat02.html

Originally posted by JS357
quote:

Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans are more closely related to modern apes than to monkeys, but we didn't evolve from apes, either. Humans share a common ancestor with modern African apes, like gorillas and chimpanzees. Scientists believe this common ancestor existed
5 to 8 million years ago. Shortly thereafter, the species diverged into two ...[text shortened]... ly human ancestors called hominids.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat02.html

Those so-called scientists can believe what ever they want. BUT THEY HAVE NOT OBSERVED IT HAPPEN, SO IT IS NOT SCIENCE KNOWLEDGE!

There is no written history that goes back more than a very few thousand years, so to claim something existed 5 to 8 million years ago is only speculation based on unproven assumptions. That is not science, but philosophy or religion. I don't need the evolution religion for I have a better one.

HalleluYah !!! Praise the LORD! Holy! Holy! Holy!

Originally posted by JS357
quote:

Humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans are more closely related to modern apes than to monkeys, but we didn't evolve from apes, either.

Wrong.
Humans are apes, and evolved from apes.
And it is only a quirk in our nomenclature that stops us from being monkeys too. We certainly did evolve from monkeys by any reasonable naming system.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Wrong.
Humans are apes, and evolved from apes.
And it is only a quirk in our nomenclature that stops us from being monkeys too. We certainly did evolve from monkeys by any reasonable naming system.

By that logic we are blue algae or whatever we are actually descended from on the great tree of life. OK by me.

Originally posted by JS357
By that logic we are blue algae or whatever we are actually descended from on the great tree of life. OK by me.

No. We are however Eukaryota, which I believe blue algae are too.

You can hardly deny that we are apes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

Now look at the family tree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey

Notice that 'Monkey' includes two groups, one of which is closer to us than the other. So us and some monkeys are Catarrhini, whereas other monkeys are Platyrrhini.

Originally posted by twhitehead
No. We are however Eukaryota, which I believe blue algae are too.

You can hardly deny that we are apes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hominidae
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

Now look at the family tree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey

Notice that 'Monkey' includes two groups, one of which is closer to us than the other. So us and some monkeys are Catarrhini, whereas other monkeys are Platyrrhini.

Wikipedia is a nice quick source of information, but perhaps it would help you to read the following referenced articles.

http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/03/are-humans-apes-monkeys-primates-or-hominims/

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/phylogeny/taxonomy/humans-arent-apes-2012.html

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

(Genesis 1:26-27 KJV)

Originally posted by RJHinds
Wikipedia is a nice quick source of information, but perhaps it would help you to read the following referenced articles.

http://evolvingthoughts.net/2012/03/are-humans-apes-monkeys-primates-or-hominims/

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/phylogeny/taxonomy/humans-arent-apes-2012.html

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our lik ...[text shortened]... he image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

(Genesis 1:26-27 KJV)

The big problem is no deity ever said that. MEN said that. ONLY men. And for the sole purpose of control and power building.

Originally posted by sonhouse
The big problem is no deity ever said that. MEN said that. ONLY men. And for the sole purpose of control and power building.

You have no credibility with me on this matter.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Those so-called scientists can believe what ever they want. BUT THEY HAVE NOT OBSERVED IT HAPPEN, SO IT IS NOT SCIENCE KNOWLEDGE!

Despite your prolific posting, you come across as purely ideological (in so far as information is apparently chosen and/or rejected according to whether it fits with a pre-determined conclusion or assertion). You don't come across as being genuinely interested in knowing about the nature of the universe at all.

In terms of appreciating the actual wonder of creation and the real achievements of your God figure's creatures (at least of the human kind), you appear to have allowed yourself to be rendered an intellectual (and perhaps emotional) victim of your religious beliefs rather than empowered by them. This is just my view having read many of your posts over the years.