Militant secularisation threat to religion, says Warsi

kedge said:
Don't see you bringing any "facts" mr allegorical :D
Click to expand...

You may want to review the thread you just quoted. In particular:


Castiel said:
Actually what you are doing is basing a theory on an entirely subjective metaphorical scripture and assuming that has the same truth level assigned to it as that of a Scientific Theory based on demonstrable, verified and observable evidence.....

If you actually read the post I opened with, it is clearly referring to the way in which you are assuming equal authority with that of Evolution....and this is simply not possible, even with a literal interpretation of Genesis, from the independent observer Evolution still hold the greater level of evidentiary value and as such the two should not be treated with equal weight.

This is abundantly clear to everyone kedge:

Facts are as follows:

Evolution is the Scientific Theory that all living species are the related descendants of earlier species and that we all ultimately share a common ancestor and that this is driven by a mechanism called Natural Selection

It is not by definition a Religion as where Religion seeks to answer questions of Why, Evolution only seeks to answer questions of How. Neither is in direct competition with the other and can, depending on the individual and their particular interpretation of their particular belief system, complement each other.

Creationism is a theological position based on a largely erroneous and fringe interpretation of Biblical Genesis which attributes a literal historical value to Scripture.

It does not hold the same value as being an established fact. For a definition of what I mean:

A Scientific fact is when you can make a verifiable and objective observation that is repeatable by experimentation and is independent of the observer.

However Scientific fact is also liable to change and as such is not to be considered the same as absolute Truth (as some in this thread seem to think) and is to be considered an established fact...normally by experiment, observation, peer review and most importantly concensus.

Science by it's definition cannot give an objective absolute truth or certainty as the vernacular of fact would imply and is essentially the best guess although that best guess has a truth value applied to it by the experimentation, accreditation, peer review and consensus which implies a level of factual accuracy.

Evolution is a theory whereby various independent scientific facts are associated together to give a scientific theory, as oppposed to the vernacular theory which is more akin to a scientific hypothesis, to give a wider understanding of the relationship within nature of these scientific facts....hence Evolution is both a scientific theory and scientific fact.

In my humble opinion of course......
Click to expand...

And here:

Castiel said:
You clearly do not understand the difference between a philosophical argument based on a stated allegorical set of metaphorical scripture and a scientific argument based on observation, repeatable experiment and empirical data.....

Science doesn't demand that Evolution or any alternative conform to any belief system, only that it is supported by observation, experiment and verifiable empirical data.

More importantly from a religious perspective you are misrepresenting the way in which Genesis is treated in Christianity, Biblical Literalism is a minority and highly contested singular interpretation of how we should view Biblical Scripture...it is not widely accepted, and neither does it offer equal weight to the natural world as Evolution...if we judge the truth value of Evolution directly with that of Creationism then we can clearly see that Creationism has a far lesser value to the objective observer than Creationism and as such far greater weight should be given to Evolution...

Augustine wrote:


"With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation."


This clearly explains that scripture (in this particular instance Genesis) is about faith, it is about the message of God and not about assigning truth to literal word...in other words, the scripture is designed to convey a message that is comprehensible and in context to the time in which is was written...so while the truth as percieved through our god-given rational minds may seem in conflict with that of scripture, it is because the literal truth of the scripture is not in it's literal interpretation of the words, but its subjective interpretation of the message as it pertains to the faith....in simple terms Genesis is a set of allegorical scriptures designed to convey Gods Message of Faith and is not a literal history of Creation.

He expands on this by expaining that as our knowledge of Gods Earth grows so does the message within the Scripture become more clear as the metaphorical nature Genesis in biblical scripture is not designed to infer a literal truth and it complements our increasing understanding of Gods natural world...

"It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation."


So essentially it can be logically argued that by promoting Creationism and dismissing Evolution, you are in fact dismissing the Word of God and as such are to be considered as heretical and acting contrary to the purpose of the Covernant as given by God....
Click to expand...

not to mention the huge amount of evidence given by Nitefly and others.
 
Last edited:
kedge said:
But none of these other self help books you suggest actually work though do they, i mean take a good look at the terrible state of this world, what book other than the Bible can bring true peace and security for the people?.
Click to expand...

But none of these bibles you suggest actually work do they, i mean take a good look at the terrible state of this world.

lol
 
Castiel said:
not to mention the huge amount of evidence given by Nitefly and others.
Click to expand...
Really ? what others showed is that there is an abundance of evidence for a theory. I'll leave you with this thought process, when you have some real evidence let me know eh? :D

[SIZE=+1]THE BOTTOM LINE
on the origin of life

[/SIZE]
  • During all recorded human history, there has never been a substantiated case of a living thing being produced from anything other than another living thing.



  • As yet, Evolutionism has not produced a scientifically credible explanation for the origin of such immense complexities as DNA, the human brain, and many other complex elements of the cosmos.



  • It is highly premature for materialists to claim that all living things evolved into existence, when science has yet to discover how even one protein molecule could actually have come into existence by natural processes.



  • There is no scientific proof that life did (or ever could) evolve into existence from non-living matter. Further, there is substantial evidence that spontaneous generation is impossible. Only DNA is known to produce DNA. No chemical interaction of molecules has even come close to producing this ultra-complex code which is so essential to all known life.


The list is endless. Even though many hate religion - creationists win most if not all arguments against evolutionists on certain subjects with regards to life origins, fact.


:D



ORIGIN OF LIFE
 
Last edited:
steve-h said:
But none of these bibles you suggest actually work do they, i mean take a good look at the terrible state of this world.

lol
Click to expand...
Man causes the problems and most of the suffering of people of this world. have you tried living your day to day life by scripture mate?.
 
Come on kedge... This has been a really interesting thread discussing the place of religion in society, not one of you trying to find microscopic holes in the theory of evolution.

If you want to have this conversation, do so in another thread, please. :o

I love having that debate (or did, the first few times...), but here is not the place.
 
kedge said:
Man causes the problems and most of the suffering of people of this world. have you tried living your day to day life by scripture mate?.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I love reality, freedom, homosexuals and masturbating way too much to consider a life 'by the scripture'.

Have you considered science, logic, evidence and reason instead of blind faith and a predetermined morality?
 
kedge said:
Man causes the problems and most of the suffering of people of this world. have you tried living your day to day life by scripture mate?.
Click to expand...

I don't think I could no wear clothes worn cut from 2 different materials, avoid touching the dead pig of skin, not work on Sundays or sell my children into slavery or force them to marry their rapists.
 
kedge said:
The list is endless. Even though many hate religion creationists win most if not all arguments against evolutionists on certain subjects with regards to life origins, fact.
Click to expand...

All you have just proved is that you do not understand what Evolution is, it deals with a mechanism for how life evolves, not it's origins.

The fact is that the whole basis for literal creationism is based on a largely false interpretation of Scripture as I pointed out in more than one thread with you.

I have no intention of enabling you to hijack this one so that you can rant on about your pet topic yet again. I have posted my initial responses form the latest thread you began on this topic, not for your benefit as you are blind to any other point of view other than your own, but for those who may be interested in what the theological consensus is amongst those who do not ascribe to Biblical Literacy and why it should not be given equal weight as evolution in debate.
 
hurfdurf said:
I don't think I could no wear clothes worn cut from 2 different materials, avoid touching the dead pig of skin, not work on Sundays or sell my children into slavery or force them to marry their rapists.
Click to expand...
I have no idea what you are on about mate, what the....?, i have to lol really :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom