Buddhas Hand Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 It disproves the literalist view of the Bible, but the door is still open to allegorical interpretations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Calling someone "ignorant" is different then if they are ignorant to existing knowledge. And no - Common Ancestry does NOT prove the Bible wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Ignoring existing knowledge is why people are generally and specifically in this thread called ignorant. Sure it does.....as VI below also points outs, the literal 'Creation' offering in the divinely inspired writings from your God, have been shown to be completely wrong. Allegory is fine, it's the literalism that concerns me. Allegory can be dismissed for the obvious work of fiction is it. Literalism of myths needs to be shown to be fiction, as evolution does for the Genesis account of creation, in order to differentiate fact from fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 Ignoring existing knowledge is why people are generally and specifically in this thread called ignorant. Sure it does.....as VI below also points outs, the literal 'Creation' offering in the divinely inspired writings from your God, have been shown to be completely wrong. Allegory is fine, it's the literalism that concerns me. Allegory can be dismissed for the obvious work of fiction is it. Literalism of myths needs to be shown to be fiction, as evolution does for the Genesis account of creation, in order to differentiate fact from fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 I don't believe 100% that you're capable of getting yourself dressed in the morning. Prove me wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 So instead of going with the most logical and practical theory (common ancestry), you'd argue in favor of a less logical and more impractical theories (multiple common ancestry, creationism)? Instead of discrediting the best theory, find some viable proof in favor of any other theory. I believe that all the evidence in the world is weighted towards common ancestry. There is a small chance I may be wrong, but it is up to the scientific process to prove it. You asked for evidence, and Sharpshooter gave you evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VICanucksfan5551 Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 What's your point? There isn't 100% definite evidence, so why do you think I have to believe it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobble Posted August 27, 2012 Share Posted August 27, 2012 You just agreed with my statement. You have heard of sex right? If I have an cacausion/black child what do you call it? Is it genetic mutation through different species? Is it a new breed of human? Did I just ruin evolutions million year plan? The only deference is your using this million year scale and I'm using a smaller scale. Both are proof of evolution, just at different rates in time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 You're the only one calling others "ignorant". The "literal" creation is not in the Bible - that's how they (literal creationists) have interpreted it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm only calling those that ignore the evidence, ignorant. So the Bible doesn't say God created human beings? If so, then why do you keep suggesting one did? If not, then there's your religion's creation account....literally. I have no problem with conceding that allegories can contain 'moral truths'. Allegories certainly have been and are part of our social evolution. Obviously, the problem lies in when mythological allegories are claimed to be factual accounting of the natural world in opposition to the supported evidence and understanding of the natural world through the scientific process. There isn't any evidence that you are able to dress yourself in the morning either, so of course I naturally don't believe that you dress yourself in the morning. That's the point. I want 100% conclusive, irrefutable, notarized, corroborated proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 There isn't any evidence that you are able to dress yourself in the morning either, so of course I naturally don't believe that you dress yourself in the morning. That's the point. I want 100% conclusive, irrefutable, notarized, corroborated proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 God created everything. A creator would be disproved if humans were entirely different from all other living things. So...in a way, Common Ancestry is collaborative evidence for God. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Can a Christian explain original sin without the garden of Eden? I wonder when the concept of "literal interpretation" arose in regards to the bible. I mean, that's gotta be a pretty modern concept, and I'd wager one that arose out of inability to peg religion into the reality hole that was being uncovered by science. Heretic would be burned at the stake as a ... heretic during virtually any time in Christian history except now (or the last 150 years or so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Wow, talk about having your cake and eating it too, after moving goal-posts. I got to hand it to people like you. You never miss a chance to prove God exists on the back of the very science you doubt. Allow me to reiterate myself from a few pages ago, " " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Can a Christian explain original sin without the garden of Eden? I wonder when the concept of "literal interpretation" arose in regards to the bible. I mean, that's gotta be a pretty modern concept, and I'd wager one that arose out of inability to peg religion into the reality hole that was being uncovered by science. Heretic would be burned at the stake as a ... heretic during virtually any time in Christian history except now (or the last 150 years or so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Then go to his house and watch him dress himself (or attempt to). While I don't agree with BUREV on his stance about evolution, I can understand where he is coming from. The current theory of evolution is by no means a fact, it is just the most logical explanation that we can conceive right now. People had evidence that the Sun revolved around the Earth, and that the Earth was flat, those theories made the most sense and were described as "facts" for hundreds of years, before new evidence came along. What we know of evolution right now is not a 100% certainty, so while you cannot right it off based solely on the fact we aren't certain, you also can't go and criticize others for having a different opinion since it is not an irrefutable fact. Will we find a better explanation for evolution? Maybe, maybe not. Point is, none of us know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Then go to his house and watch him dress himself (or attempt to). While I don't agree with BUREV on his stance about evolution, I can understand where he is coming from. The current theory of evolution is by no means a fact, it is just the most logical explanation that we can conceive right now. People had evidence that the Sun revolved around the Earth, and that the Earth was flat, those theories made the most sense and were described as "facts" for hundreds of years, before new evidence came along. What we know of evolution right now is not a 100% certainty, so while you cannot right it off based solely on the fact we aren't certain, you also can't go and criticize others for having a different opinion since it is not an irrefutable fact. Will we find a better explanation for evolution? Maybe, maybe not. Point is, none of us know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 There is just so much wrong with this post. Again, like I said to BUREV, just because YOU don't understand evolution, doesn't mean that it has massive holes as a theory (it doesn't even have very small holes, it's damn near airtight!). People get falsely hung up on the word "theory", for one thing. Gravity is also, currently, a theory. Would you ever expect to drop an apple and have it float upwards? So let's not get silly with this "well, it's not completely inconclusive just yet" line of thinking, it's absurd. And your analogy is so far off base that I really have to question your critical thinking skills. There is heaps and heaps of evidence that support evolution to such a strong extent that it is not even vaguely in the same realm as a flat Earth. Let me use your own analogy against you, just to show you how ridiculous it is: at the moment, our best working theory is that the Earth is round. BUT, who knows, right? Maybe one day we will have new evidence that proves the Earth is not round after all, but actually a disc that rests on top of an infinite stack of turtles. That's plausible under your logic. What I'm seeing a LOT of in this thread, is the idea that "if I'm not an expert on it, it hasn't been proven". The evidence exists, and it's overwhelming. You are, I assume, not a doctor. Does that mean that you doubt the virility and effectiveness of antibiotics? Or would you rather take an expert's (not saying that's me ... although I'm clearly better informed on this issue) opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'll go as soon as he goes to an 'Introduction To Anthropology' class located any of our fine colleges or universities here in beautiful British Columbia. If you don't believe that the Theory of Evolution is a 'fact' then I urge you to go to class with BUREV, because you're just as under-educated as he is and you clearly don't understand the evidence being presented to you. You don't even get how hilarious it is when you illogically say that the TOE is the "most logical explanation that we can conceive right now.", when you skip over the parts that make the TOE logical in the first place. I don't believe you understand what 'logic' is or how it actually works either. And people didn't have 'evidence' that the Sun revolved around the earth. It was a belief propagated by the religious dogma(Bible) of the Christan Church of the time, or early Roman Catholic Church, and that was taken from the Ptolemaic Geocentric Model, which only further shows how the Bible and Christians ripped off earlier knowledge, since even that model was based on assumptions. The current TOE does not work on assumptions. If it's not a irrefutable fact, then by all means, present one fact that directly refutes it. I've asked you a few times to provide this, so go on, and provide one refutable fact that's based on credible evidence. Otherwise, don't suggest it's refutable if you can't refute it or provide a refutation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Hey Sharp, if I could think of one lesson from the bible that applies, it would be Mathew 7:6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.