Evolution - A Philosophical Belief

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Yes, one group needs to be red pilled like in the Matrix. Although I don't wish this on anyone, including people posting in this thread, a dark side encounter with evil spirits does it for some, if they believed in evolution, they understand there is something beyond that ideology immediately. Where they take it from there, becomes their own spiritual journey.

Why should only the 'others' question their beliefs, and not you ?

a reply to: DustybudzZ

Similarly there is absolutely zero evidence to support there IS a creator. It cuts both ways. You are talking a matter of faith (spiritual knowlege or Gnosis) vs a mater of Intellectual knowledge (eídein).

God can not be shown.

Also speaking as a polytheist. WHICH God is this again you are pushing to have done something?

Even if you consider them both philosophical. One still has practical applications and results. While the other has faith and personal beliefs.

For the record. I'm not saying you can't have both if you want. They are not meant to compare in that way in my opinion.

a reply to: mOjOm

You mean one has evidence and the other is faith based? Because there is a world of difference. Evolution has over 100 years of evidence building, and religion has none, nada, zip, after thousands of years.

a reply to: Noinden

Exactly.

Not just evidence but actual real life results. For example it wasn't God making a spider goat. That was some science.

a reply to: mOjOm

Though depending on your religious leanings, you could claim its all Gods ineffable paln or was it the great plan?

a reply to: Noinden

Once someone starts claiming "God" at all it opens the door to them claiming anything. Depending upon your religious leanings of course.

But that's what happens eventually.

a reply to: Noinden

Lol its ineffable.

I learnt that word watching Good Omens.

a reply to: Skyfox81

I was leaning towards that scene in Good Omens

The point is, even if "God did it" we are not going to know. So lets go with what we can know, and thats the scientific stuff.

You can not compare faith with science..period

Faith means you have zero proof...the more proof you have the less faith you have. Science is just what we know today and it is...pardon the pun..ever evolving. Evolution is the "how" and faith is the "why", so evolution never tries to explain the "why", but faith based people some how feel it is a direct conflict. God could wave a magic wand, OR use the evolution to create man, so that argument is moot. If you want to discuss intelligent design vs random selection then that is a totally different thing.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Faith is the evidence of things unseen.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Skyfox81

I was leaning towards that scene in Good Omens

The point is, even if "God did it" we are not going to know. So lets go with what we can know, and thats the scientific stuff.

Beautifully said digger.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Xtrozero

Faith is the evidence of things unseen.

No. Faith is belief in things not supported by evidence. If it was evidence, the word faith would not be used.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance

Faith is the evidence of things unseen.

That statement has basically zero logic... Faith requires zero evidence and those that have the desire to look for evidence lack faith. If you need proof of God you lack faith period. Also, science is a creation of God, so God doesn't need to wave a magic wand around to get things done, he can use the laws of his own universe to do it. To say God created the Universe 6000 years ago into as it is today where it looks to be aged billions also is zero logic. Whether God made the universe 6000 years ago or 14.5 billion it is still made by God, as also whether God waved a magic wand and humans instantly popped into existence or life started as RNA/Protein/complex molecules and evolved would once again all be God's work either way.

Starting the universe 14.5 billion years ago to have life develop from nothing into what we have today seems to me to be Omnificent compared to a parlor trick.

I feel that those who fight science as something outside of God's work might as well be like humans of old that could not explain nature and so just explained it by making fundamental aspects of nature into a God as the answer. God waved a magic wand and life was formed as we see it today...Boy that fits quite nicely as the same thing, doesn't it?

a reply to: Barcs

Because faith means not supported by evidence, right?

Faith is the evidence of things unseen.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
a reply to: Barcs

Because faith means not supported by evidence, right?

Faith is the evidence of things unseen.

If your faith based premise has nothing in the way of supporting data then you can’t claim this unsupported “feeling” you have is evidence for something else that you can’t quantity or define. The entire notion is ludicrous.

a reply to: peter vlar

What makes you think it's an unsupported feeling?

You don't think I have my reasons to believe in my heart in the Creator?

The evidence life has given me of the existence of God is my faith. It might be rather small, but there is some.

When faith is evidence of things unseen we don't talk about having faith 'in' something, but 'of' something.

I have faith of God. It's just how I grew to be.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

Put some testable evidence on the table neighbour.

a reply to: Noinden

Seems like you aren't aware of the meaning of faith.

a reply to: Out6of9Balance

You can’t just redefine words to make them mean what you want. Nice try.


ETA- I have to wonder if the irony escapes you that you posted a video from a band whose singer has a PhD in molecular biology and has published on micro RNA strands in HIV that code for the virus. Keep up the good work.