Quote:
It's not far-fetched to believe that humans are descended from apes, and that that was God's plan. We don't know that.
The reason that I personally do not believe in being descended from an ape is the verse Genesis 1:26
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.""
So yes, I do believe in evolution for adaption survival of the fittest in the world. I just dont believe that man has evolved. When I read the bible it says that man was created in Gods image and was to rule over all things on earth. Not "God created monkeys who turned into man...but that worked out for the best"
It says God made man from the soil. It doesn't say how.
All things come from the soil now don't they?
It also doesn't say "And God made the fishes of the sea, from previous creatures that were almost fish, that came from other creatures that were more simple that had actually come from single celled organisms that..."
And yet we can see that the mechanism for some life to get to its present state was through evolution. Why would it be any more or less difficult to beleive in the evolution of man. It's pretty obvious that mankind evolvbed from previous homonids so why could they have not evolved from something else?
I don't pretend to know that answers but I recognise what I don't know.
PAX
Levi Morton wrote:Quote:
It's not far-fetched to believe that humans are descended from apes, and that that was God's plan. We don't know that.
The reason that I personally do not believe in being descended from an ape is the verse Genesis 1:26
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground.""
Levi, you're forgeting that the bible was written by men, rewritten from Aramaic into Latin by other men, then rewritten again into English by yet another group of men.
With all those people having their hands in what was written, it's not only possible but likely that there's inaccuracies. And you can't forget that humans have vanity, so it's also possible that man has created the vision of God in man's likeness.
Levi Morton wrote:So yes, I do believe in evolution for adaption survival of the fittest in the world. I just dont believe that man has evolved. When I read the bible it says that man was created in Gods image and was to rule over all things on earth. Not "God created monkeys who turned into man...but that worked out for the best"
If you can understand how other animals have evolved, then you have to face that humans also have evolved. We can trace our history back to a time when we lived in caves, you don't think those people looked just like us, do you?
If you can see the *slight* differences between us and cavemen, then you can take it back further to when cavemen had more hair, less brains and were knuckle dragging primates. From there it's only a short hop on the evolutionary path to primates.
If you're convinced that "because the bible said it" makes it 100% beyond question, you're totally missing out on humanities greatest asset... The ability to think and reason.
John Wilken
2002 Cavalier
2.2 Vin code 4
Auto
For the kazillionth time, the Bible is not re-translated. If the Aramaic exists then it goes Aramaic to Latin, Aramaic to English, Aramaic to French, whatever. Not Aramaic to Latin, Latin to English. That only happens when the original is not available. No originals were ever available for the old Testament so Aramaic and Hebrew are the "source" languages that are used.
There is nothing in the Bible that contadicts anything science has discovered, so far.
PAX
And after reading all of this, I'm still stuck at the same point, there is no way to prove or disprove the existance of a god. For every argument someone can devise a counter argument, or simply enough deny something is a truth.
Despite all the negative comments about the christian religion, has anyone taken into account the number of religions that occurred before/during/after it's establishment? Who is to say that any of these other religions does not have the right idea about a beginning if there is one? Yes there may be overlaps between certain religions of a time period (christianity, judaeism, islam) but there were also overlaps with the multi deity religions that ocurred before the foundations of christianity. Through the analogy of all religions I believe it is impossible to prove the existance of a single god, there are so many social and cultural variables it is impossible to come upon a number of deities even.
God according to BOTH Judeo-christian and Islam, is abeing who is omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), and all-good (righteous, loving, benevolent). He can do anything, knows everything and is the essence of all that is good. Probably my favorite logic against this argument:
"Is this God willing to prevent evil but not able? then he is impotent (not all powerful). Is he able but not willing? then he is malevolent (not all-good). Is he able and willing? whence then is evil (not all knowing)."
"Many true believers when faced with such questions, simply submit to what they think must be the will of God: "We shouldn't ask such questions" they say. "These things are simply beyond our understanding. God moves in mysterious ways, his wonders to perform."" This is their way of dealing with problems of evil." Knowing that humans are fallible was it a wise decision to give us free will...
Whether there is any truth to this following point it has never been determined, nor will it ever be. Say god is infallible, and humans on the other hand are fallible. His word and actions through Jesus are taken down according to man. The scriptures of the bible are written by man, so how are the scriptures infallible? The catholic church claims the bible is the word of god, yet say it is written by man. There is little proof in that for me to believe any word I read, other than it is a great story passed on from generation to generation. It may portray certain events that actually coincided with historical events written by others around the world, but fictional stories also are able to take into them elements which we know as historical events (making them part of the fabric of the story).
Also take into account the fact that religion (as a whole) much like scientific theory is always evolving (don't bother relating this to the argument of human evolution, this is the evolution of human ideological concepts not the evolution of a single concept aka catholicism or islam). How many generations had believed that the earth was flat before the circumference of the globe was travelled? How many generations had believed that there was a god of fire/earth/air/water, or a sun god, or a single deity? The religion suits the culture, or rather in some cases it is born of the culture.
Rather than argue over what is socially acceptable and true, and which religion has more sway depending upon the era, It isn't beyond most humans to agree that certain morals and standards of living can be taken into our own lives. You don't have to believe that adam and eve were created from the earth to accept internally that killing another man is wrong (even though it is proclaimed as a commandment). The church has not always abided by the commandments as one can see in the Just War Doctrine which justified the killing of another man (combatant). Thou shalt not kill literally means, don't kill, even if in self defense which the crusades were not. So in this case I'd have to say the catholic church was wrong.
Just had to take a stab at them catholics after all the recent news of them protecting pedophile priests...
I'd rather believe in the will of decent people and my power to positively affect their lives than blindly put faith in a religion. That is my decision just as Hahahaha has vividly put forth his.
Unfortunately the direct translation is "commit murder" not "kill" and then it does not define murder. Good old Hebrew, tricky stuff.
At any rate that opened the door for racists to proclaim that the non-believers were not even human and therefore killing them is not murder. There is also the problem of where the Bible says that non-believers are "out of God's sight", which is impossible but people assumed that meant God wouldn't be looking...
When the cat's away, the mice will play.
Then there's what I refer to as "the renegade church", there is a period in middle ages where the Papal seat was occupied by known criminals and mobsters (of sorts) who forced their way in for political gains. The Vatican refers to them as the "anti-popes". I believe there were 4, or maybe there were 4 in a row, plus a couple.. I don't remember clearly.
Just remember that the actions of the church in Rome have swayed from the path on a few occasions. That does not mean the religion is flawed, just the people..
PAX
^^^No religion is flawed, per se. it's just what the people that use it to increase their seat of power do with it.
Hence, why I think organized religion should be outlawed. I have no problems with catholicism, or even a lot of the practitioners. It's the people telling me how to live my life that piss me off. If god--whether or not god exists, has a problem with it, then god will take it up with me, not someone in a gold embroidered bedsheet with a funny hat.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaši, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
