How can you accept evolution and still have a spiritual reality, and/or a God faith

[rrobs]

He has a tendency to say the same things over and over.
One size fits all.

Like "you do not understand what evidence is; i could teach you"

"you do not debate properly"
and
"that is rude".

I kinda got that. I didn't know this forum followed Robert's Rules for debating.

As for quoting scrip as a response to anything other than
a question about scrip tho-
I'd say, just do not bother. It will have nothing but a
negative effect on whatever you are trying to demonstrate.

Then the evolutionists can't use their science books to argue for evolution? We all might as well just go home if that's the case.

 

[Audie]

I kinda got that. I didn't know this forum followed Robert's Rules for debating.

Then the evolutionists can't use their science books to argue for evolution? We all might as well just go home if that's the case.

You certainly have some odd ways of interpreting.

 

[Audie]

All Christians see things as black and white? That's not looking at things as black and white at all!

I know neither of you really think that way, but it sure looks like that's what you said. Probably just a momentary lapse in thinking. We all do it from time to time.

ALL Christians? You could only get that by making it up.
That is not what was said.

As noted a moment ago, you have the oddest ways of
interpreting.

So much so that it has the look of deliberate misrepresentation.

"Roberts Rules" or not, I dont find that to be honourable
behaviour.

There are not a whole lot of words for you to get lost in them.

see this..characteristic of fundamentalists. ?

If you had a momentary lapse in reading comprehension,
fine. Dont make it someone else's mistake.

You didnt need to hop into someone else's discusison
and start acting like that.

Show some sense and self respect.

 

[rrobs]

Of course the morality of people who lived thousands of years ago was different from our current version of morality. Which makes it pretty obvious to me that morality and religion are man-made and not inspired by any deities.

I wasn't talking about morality. You asked me what good meant in the Bible and I specifically said it had nothing to do with morality. You wonder why I don't answer some of our questions. Now you know. You don't seem interested in answers, unless they agree with your thinking which mine obviously doesn't.

 

[rrobs]

You certainly have some odd ways of interpreting.

I see where I mixed up Christian with Fundamentalist. Makes all the difference in the world. For a moment I thought you and Jose were down on Christianity.

I'm rather new to forums. I didn't know it was rude to break into someone else's conversation. I thought we were all talking about the same topic, so it was more of a round robin kind of thing than private conversations. I'll be more careful in the future.

 

[Jose Fly]

All Christians see things as black and white? That's not looking at things as black and white at all!

No one said that. Rather, I noted that black/white thinking is a tendency of fundamentalists (hint: not all Christians are fundamentalists).

 

[Jose Fly]

Me too. I was contemplating doing it yet again, but then decided against such an act of futility.

Good call.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I wasn't talking about morality. You asked me what good meant in the Bible and I specifically said it had nothing to do with morality. You wonder why I don't answer some of our questions. Now you know. You don't seem interested in answers, unless they agree with your thinking which mine obviously doesn't.

You talked about how different Biblical culture was from our current culture. Then you went on about good/bad, evil and freewill. I guess I missed something if you say you weren't talking about that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

ALL Christians? You could only get that by making it up.
That is not what was said.

As noted a moment ago, you have the oddest ways of
interpreting.

So much so that it has the look of deliberate misrepresentation.

"Roberts Rules" or not, I dont find that to be honourable
behaviour.

There are not a whole lot of words for you to get lost in them.

see this..characteristic of fundamentalists. ?

If you had a momentary lapse in reading comprehension,
fine. Dont make it someone else's mistake.

You didnt need to hop into someone else's discusison
and start acting like that.

Show some sense and self respect.

Some Christians, and fundamentalists more than others, think that Christians that disagree with them are not "real Christians" . Therefore in their rather twisted logic an attack on their beliefs is an attack on all of Christianity.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I knew you'd say something like that, but Rude? Really? That bad, huh?

You seem to be a pretty sensitive guy. Maybe try not to take people who you think are idiots (like me apparently) so seriously.

You were complaining about my behavior and simply explained how you after in the same manner at first.

Did I say or even imply that you were an idiot? Your conscience may be trying to tell you something about your behavior.

 

[Jose Fly]

Then the evolutionists can't use their science books to argue for evolution? We all might as well just go home if that's the case.

Well that depends. In these debates, the reason non-Christians object when Christians quote scripture to them is because non-Christians don't recognize the Bible as a valid source of scientific information. So if you want to draw an equivalency to "evolutionists" citing science to you, that would mean that you don't recognize science books as a valid source of scientific information.

 

[Subduction Zone]

He has a tendency to say the same things over and over.
One size fits all.

Like "you do not understand what evidence is; i could teach you"

"you do not debate properly"
and
"that is rude".

As for quoting scrip as a response to anything other than
a question about scrip tho-
I'd say, just do not bother. It will have nothing but a
negative effect on whatever you are trying to demonstrate.

This is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black. You to have some variations of stock replies. The problem is that creationists are guilty of those "crimes". Creationists tend to make the same arguments ad nauseum as a result the responses will be the same after a while.

And when it comes to his rudeness in using Bible quotes inappropriately I was neither the first nor the last to point that out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I see where I mixed up Christian with Fundamentalist. Makes all the difference in the world. For a moment I thought you and Jose were down on Christianity.

I'm rather new to forums. I didn't know it was rude to break into someone else's conversation. I thought we were all talking about the same topic, so it was more of a round robin kind of thing than private conversations. I'll be more careful in the future.

I am impressed. There may be some hope here.

 

[rrobs]

You talked about how different Biblical culture was from our current culture. Then you went on about good/bad, evil and freewill. I guess I missed something if you say you weren't talking about that.

I'm not sure, but I think you did in fact misunderstand what I said about good and evil. I say that because it looked like your remark related good and evil to morality. Here's what you wrote:

"Of course the morality of people who lived thousands of years ago was different from our current version of morality"​

In my original remark I explained that good (Hebrew ra) meant something that worked properly or was functional, something that made life better. I said it had nothing to do with morality. So when you brought up morality in your reply, I took it to mean you didn't understand what I said. But maybe I misunderstand you. Maybe you weren't actually thinking of morality when you wrote it in your remark. How was I supposed to know?

 

[LuisDantas]

Rude? That bad, huh? I would think that's being a bit over sensitive, but if you feel it's rude, I wouldn't want to take it away from you. I understand everybody has different tolerance levels.

Why in the world would you would intimate that I am not a thinking human being? It actually intimates you don't think, which I know is not really true. I'm sure you do think and come up with many good ideas. But you leave yourself open to criticism by making such sweeping and unfounded claims.

Getting to the point, the original post is entitled Evolution vs Creationism. If I can't quote from the book that defines creationism, wouldn't it be fair that evolutionist couldn't use their science books?

Would you get into the boxing ring with both hands tied behind your back? Would that classify as a thinking human being in your book? If so, I'd be super glad to go a few rounds (actually a few seconds) with you for the prize money. I don't really think about fighting anybody, just illustrating how lopsided your thinking really is in this matter.

To be fair, the whole exercise is terribly asymmetrical in nature.

Still, the end result is still that research and findings support evolution, while there is only dogma to attempt to support its denial.

 

[Audie]

This is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black. You to have some variations of stock replies. The problem is that creationists are guilty of those "crimes". Creationists tend to make the same arguments ad nauseum as a result the responses will be the same after a while.

And when it comes to his rudeness in using Bible quotes inappropriately I was neither the first nor the last to point that out.

oh

 

[rrobs]

I am impressed. There may be some hope here.

Whoa guy! You just broke into a private conversation between myself and Audie. Not that I personally mind, but she told me that shouldn't be done here. I'm just kidding. Like I said, it's fine with me.

Hope for me? Yes, there is hope for me. But I have to quote a scripture to show you.

Col 1:27,

To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:​

You can quote something from a science book to get back at me if you want.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I kinda got that. I didn't know this forum followed Robert's Rules for debating.

Rudeness tends to increase in a discussion. I like to nip it in the bud quickly.

Then the evolutionists can't use their science books to argue for evolution? We all might as well just go home if that's the case.

Our arguments are based upon peer reviewed science. That means someone was sure enough about his findings that he had it published in a well respected professional peer reviewed journal. In that process experts in the field first check for obvious errors and once published anyone in the world is free to test it.

Regardless of the science, if someone purposefully avoids peer review it is usually because they are afraid that they are wrong.

 

[Audie]

I see where I mixed up Christian with Fundamentalist. Makes all the difference in the world. For a moment I thought you and Jose were down on Christianity.

I'm rather new to forums. I didn't know it was rude to break into someone else's conversation. I thought we were all talking about the same topic, so it was more of a round robin kind of thing than private conversations. I'll be more careful in the future.

i bust in all the time. feel free

Good that you see where you were mistaken in
your interpretation.

I was being too hard on you. But that is me,
no shades of grey.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Whoa guy! You just broke into a private conversation between myself and Audie. Not that I personally mind, but she told me that shouldn't be done here. I'm just kidding. Like I said, it's fine with me.

Hope for me? Yes, there is hope for me. But I have to quote a scripture to show you.

Col 1:27,

To whom God would make known what [is] the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:​

You can quote something from a science book to get back at me if you want.

Nope, I can't bathe into a private conversation. That is what PM 's are for.

And abusing the Bible is an incorrect action even for a Christian.