The answer to Evolution vs. Intelligent Design
POSTED BY: BadgersHat
UPDATED: Tuesday, April 25, 2006 22:38
VIEWED: 15240
PAGE 4 of 11
I think the problem here is that people do not truly understand the logic behind "faith" in God or divinity.
Consider Abraham,
Abraham is told by God that his son will bring about the kingdoms of earth, that through Abraham the kingdoms of earth will become populated with people.
God then commands Abraham to murder his son.
The quandary is how can Abraham kill his child and still foster the kingdoms and peoples of earth.
Abraham does as God commands and takes his son to be killed. God delivers a ram for Abraham to slaughter in stead of his son.
However this is more complicated then it looks at first glance. Why would Abraham kill his son if God said essentially that his son would populate the earth? Wouldn't that mean that God lied to him? Could it be that God was testing his love for his son, or his love for his God?
No on both accounts, you see God was testing Abraham’s faith by reason of the absurd.
That being that Abraham must believe that he WILL kill his son, and that his son WILL populate the kingdoms of the earth simultaneously.
This is basically one of the many philosophies postulated by Kierkegaard:
That there are three stages that all people experience, or categories that they belong to.
The three stages are Aesthetic, Ethical and Religious. For a person in the Aesthetic stage, life is only a series of sensory experiences such as animalistic lust. This individual is enthralled by temporal society, where in television and music may be a lifestyle, regardless of this persons actions, life experiences are to serve the whims of the individual. Life is simply broken down into boring and interesting.
For someone in the Ethical stage all actions are done publicly to serve the common good. All of their actions are for the betterment of the whole, and can be thought of as the highest form of life that can be understood. However a person in this stage may in the face of grand decision, make decisions that serve only the ethical purpose, without faith.
The highest of the three is Religious; this is where the individual has a private relationship with God. This is where Faith can be truly understood by reason of the absurd. That being that two complete opposites can coexist harmoniously through the grace of God.
...Like divinity and science I might add.
Go sign my Guest Book, http://www.geocities.com/thisbrownhouse
Then download Serenity, http://homepage.mac.com/rocketplane/FileSharing8.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:This pretty much ignores other religions that are populated by multiple gods (and goddesses) who are powerful but still limited and flawed. Someone needs to do more research on comparative and ancient religions. www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst80a/lectures/lec1.htm
Consider the divine, and let us bypass ignorance, as the divine does consists of separate deities, to separate faiths. The singular absolute truth amongst faiths is that God is absolute that being omnipotent, omnipresent.
l
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
The theists would point out that it contradicts Genesis which very clearly states six days to create the world and everything on it.
I believe that the universe is right around 14 billion years old, that the earth is about 4 billion years old, that life has existed on the planet in some form for about a billion years, and intelligent life for right around 50,000-75,000 years.
I believe that the universe began with a big bang and that the whole thing has been expanding ever since.
I believe that over the course of the last billion years, there's been a dramatic increase in the number and complexity of species.
I believe it all because science has shown it to be true.
And I'm a theist follower of Christ who believes that the Bible is truth. The only point that I quibble with science on is whether the increasing number and complexity of species can be explained naturalistically.
Theology is the interpretation of scripture, and science is the interpretation of nature, but God is the author of both. If theology and science contradict one another at some point or other, then either the interpretation of scripture is faulty, or the interpretation of nature is faulty. The task at that point is to re-evaluate the interpretations critically to find the error and correct it.
I say all this because I'm sick and gorram tired of Christians being portrayed in the light of the strict 24-hour literal day creationists. Not all Christians (or theists for that matter--there is a difference) believe in 24-hour day creationism.
______________________________________________________________
Edited to add: all figures above are approximate--don't feel like digging through my library for all the specifics.
_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:This pretty much ignores other religions that are populated by multiple gods (and goddesses) who are powerful but still limited and flawed. Someone needs to do more research on comparative and ancient religions. www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst80a/lectures/lec1.htm
Consider the divine, and let us bypass ignorance, as the divine does consists of separate deities, to separate faiths. The singular absolute truth amongst faiths is that God is absolute that being omnipotent, omnipresent.
l
Let's not be silly, your borderline rude postulation defies the fact that i am speaking about contemporary religion. I must apparently add that those who believe in polythestic religions foster an "absoulte" that each diety comprises an absolute knowlege and power that has been segmanted into varies entities.
Go sign my Guest Book, http://www.geocities.com/thisbrownhouse
Then download Serenity, http://homepage.mac.com/rocketplane/FileSharing8.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ImEarly:Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:This pretty much ignores other religions that are populated by multiple gods (and goddesses) who are powerful but still limited and flawed. Someone needs to do more research on comparative and ancient religions. www.religion.ucsb.edu/faculty/thomas/classes/rgst80a/lectures/lec1.htm
Consider the divine, and let us bypass ignorance, as the divine does consists of separate deities, to separate faiths. The singular absolute truth amongst faiths is that God is absolute that being omnipotent, omnipresent.
l
Let's not be silly, your borderline rude postulation defies the fact that i am speaking about contemporary religion. I must apparently add that those who believe in polythestic religions foster an "absoulte" that each diety comprises an absolute knowlege and power that has been segmanted into varies entities.
Yes, Signy can be pretty harsh about religion (I still haven't gotten over the "universal imaginary friend" line from a month ago--Signy, that was priceless, seriously funny), but Signy's right. Y'know, you can be pretty rude and a little willfully ignorant yourself, ImEarly. Native American spirituality/shamanism does not play this game you're talking about. The omnipotent/omnipresent fixation is distinctly Euro-American and reflects a cosmology that is authoritarian, absolutist and, to my mind, missleading and counter-intuitive. Power is so completely decentralized in Native American thought that it's almost unrecognizable to the western mind. Consider this, and think of it as religious doctine for a minute: Coyote created humans because he was bored. When he saw them fighting and acting nasty to one another, he threw up his hands and walked away. He comes back every now and then to mess with us. See, you prolly consider that to be folklore or even a joke, but it has serious implications religiously. There is a reason why there is no such thing as a fundamentalist shaman.
I'm sorry. I realize that I'm coming way out of left field here; that people prolly aren't all that interested in my excentric views, but, y'know, it irks me when people go mouthing off about what they consider to be "contemporary religion" and ignore the spiritual perspective of well over a million people in this country (myself included).
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I'm sorry. I realize that I'm coming way out of left field here; that people prolly aren't all that interested in my excentric views,
Don't assume that, HK. While I have no claim to being any kind of expert on Native American culture, I have been to my share of sweat lodges run by Native Americans (thanks to Kathieisall), and I highly respect the faith. (plus, in my last sweat I was one of two, beside the Medicine Man, who stayed for the full-on heat and steam! Maybe he just wanted to see how far we'd go; even the NA dudes bolted at some point!!)
Roasted Buddah-like Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I wasn't "borderline" rude, I WAS rude. Sorry. But when I consider all of the religions that ever existed and currently still exist.... even from my admittedly meagre knowledge... it seems unhelpfully limiting to paint ALL religions with the characteristics of the few that we're familiar/ comfortable with.
HK alludes to an interesting progression of religions. In decentralized societies, religions have many gods. In centralized ones, there is only one, and in fact the histories of Greek and Egyptian beliefs record increasing centralization. In patriarchal societies, the god(s) are male while in matriarchal ones they are female, and in the link I provided the legend records the transition between the two. In more egalitarian societies (which to this date have been primtive) the gods are natural features, while in more "developed" societies they tend to be anthropomorphised. More than anything, religion seems to trace the rise and fall of various powers in society.
But what I find more fascinating than any religious practice, babarity or belief is the set of cities that occupied the Indus valley about 2500 BC. Unlike most ancient cities, they had no fortifications, temples, palaces, or armories. Funerals were simple. The only evidence of a possible religion was a scattering of clay figurines of unknown significance, most often found in trash pits. These cities existed for 500 years. I'll have to look up the names (I read about them in National Geographic). One of them may be Harappa. It provides an indication that people may not always develop or need religion, and societies may not require them as organizing principles.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:WHOA! I don't see evidence of intelligent life- do you???
...that life has existed on the planet in some form for about a billion years, and intelligent life for right around 50,000-75,000 years.
Couldn't resist!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:
I'm sorry. I realize that I'm coming way out of left field here; that people prolly aren't all that interested in my excentric views,
Don't assume that, HK.
I thought for sure I wrote "most." I meant "most." These discussions sure can bring a body down, eh, Chris? all the pessimism and rage people walk around with thinking it's "reality."
Quote:
While I have no claim to being any kind of expert on Native American culture, I have been to my share of sweat lodges run by Native Americans (thanks to Kathieisall), and I highly respect the faith. (plus, in my last sweat I was one of two, beside the Medicine Man, who stayed for the full-on heat and steam! Maybe he just wanted to see how far we'd go; even the NA dudes bolted at some point!!)
Roasted Buddah-like Chrisisall
Ah yes, white man always have something to prove! LOL! Naw, you prolly were carrying more grief than the folks that left before you. Or you had business with the stones nobody knows about but you. How long has it been since your last sweat, my son?
That'll be 3 hail Coyote's and 2 our Grandfather'sHKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:Quote:WHOA! I don't see evidence of intelligent life- do you???
...that life has existed on the planet in some form for about a billion years, and intelligent life for right around 50,000-75,000 years.
Couldn't resist!
Yeah...I wondered if someone might comment on that. I really did expect more comment on the whole "don't paint me as a creationist" thing, but hey--the thread goes where it will.
On an unrelated note--I think we're making progress Signy: we're not screaming at each other any more. My, but does it ever beat the alternatives.
_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME