What are your religious beliefs?

[VeggieLifterGal]

Originally posted by Cogar

As I mentioned earlier, this has been addressed in numerous books, like the one I cited earlier (Darwin On Trial by Phillip E. Johnson). Others include:

Evolution: A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton
The Collapse of Evolution by Scott M. Huse
DARWINS BLACK BOX: THE BIOCHEMICAL CHALLENGE TO EVOLUTION by Michael J. Behe

My question was not which books have you read on the matter, my question was, what are the supposed kinks in the theory? If you've read the books, you should be able to answer that question.

[Cogar]

Originally posted by VeggieLifterGal
My question was not which books have you read on the matter, my question was, what are the supposed kinks in the theory? If you've read the books, you should be able to answer that question.

OK. The biggest kink is abiogenesis. No one has been able to prove it is even possible to generate life from non-life. (And please spare me the creation of amino acids in the laboratory. Not only is that not life, they are both left-handed and right handed forms.)

[VeggieLifterGal]

This problem of abiogenesis could lead you postulate a god to spark the process of evolution, which is an interesting idea, but does not in any way disprove evolution itself. Evolution does not postulate there is no god in the beginning - that's for theology to work out. Evolution just says that animals, including people, evolved from other species over a l o n g period of time.

Btw I just looked at a summary of the black box book - Behe's argument is tha living things are very complicated, so complicated that he thinks there need be a intelligent designer/creator to think it up. That's...pretty unconvincing. If you're interested, check out Richard Dawkins' book called The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design.

[VeggieLifterGal]

I also looked at Darwin on Trial on Amazon.com and the reviews described it as a well written and interesting book by an author who is a lawyer rather than a scientist. Because it was published in 1991, scientifically-minded reviewers said the science was outdated. It's greatest flaw is its inadequacy in addressing molecular evolution.

[nightmare]

wow this is a really cool discussion. i myself am a devoted christian and think it is awesome that people are searching. i firmly believe that if you look at all the evidence you really can't deny Christ. Just wondering have any of yall read the case for christ? it is a really awesome book that presents a lot of great material. also i want yall to know if any of yall want to talk about religion i am willing to engage in conversations and will do my best to answer q's if you have any. Keep up the good fight the world needs people with strong moral convictions especially these days.

[Primal Instinct]

Originally posted by Doom
Born and raised cathloic, and now see no point in religion. Why base ur life on a belief, that you cant proove? Ive seen too much pain and hurt in my life to believe that if there were a higher power, he wouldnt let what he has created destroy itself slowly.

I just believe in myself, and the people around me, they are what I know truly exists, and are who can actually help save me if the time ever comes

That is the nature of religion- if it was proven, everyone would be accepting of it, bar none. If it was totally discredited, no one would have the belief in it and this conversation would not even be taking place. However, until a theory has been proven or disproven, it is neither right nor wrong- it is a theory. Physicists have developed a mechanism to help deal with such uncertainties presented to us in the real and theoretical world. It is called Quantum Mechanics. This underlying discussion- the existence of God- actually can be based on the Quantum Theory of Superposition is best illustrated by
Schrodinger's Cat Basically, until proven or disproven, God (like Schrodinger's Cat) is neither alive nor dead but a part of each. It is only upon actual observation that one fate or the other can be assessed.

[Primal Instinct]

Here is an interesting dilemma: People throughout the centuries from all over the world have a religious belief or faith in a higher power- one who is more knowledgeable and benevolent than we, as humans are. What actually qualifies GOD? Is GOD some ideal with purpose that we can seek consolation with in times of need or celebration and thanks in our times of joy? Is it perhaps an actual physical or ethereal being who created the Earth and the Universe or could GOD be just a higher state of consciousness within ourselves? It is in this aspect that we can argue that there is and isn't an existence of GOD.

If you subscribe to the belief that GOD is all powerful and the creator of all we know, our environment and all species here on Earth and in outer space then there is in fact a dilemma. You see, man has duplicated many feats formerly only attributed to GOD, such as the creation of life via in vitro fertilization of egg by sperm or bringing the dead back to life (granted, the time frame is limited to only minutes) using cardiopulmonary resuscitation or the electric defibrillator. Man has actually cloned animals albeit not a perfect process yet. It is my personal belief that cloning complete organisms is an ethical question in itself. Humans have created artificial light to chase away the dark nights, and have created lightning in laboratories. Man has brought about changes in global weather patterns and has developed communications so that our voices may reach anywhere in the world. Many religions speak of visitations from a seemingly extraterrestrial source such as seeing Jesus, the Holy Spirit, aliens, all kinds of stuff. In fact, there are even ancient Mayan artifacts- dated to more than 400 years ago- made of gold which look almost identical to the NASA space shuttles' delta wing aircraft. Who's to say what's true and what's not? People laugh when someone mentions space aliens. Consider this fact: Man has stepped foot on the moon and returned to Earth unharmed. We currently have unmanned vehicles roaming (akin to flying saucers) the surface of Mars as we read this. Who can argue that man hasn't already played the role of an alien? Our technology may seem advanced to us now but where will we be 100 years from now? What if there are more advanced civilizations in the universe that have come to Earth and imparted knowledge to humans? Is that such a foreign concept if one believes in the existence of GOD? Centuries ago, if a magician or fakir were to perform a slight of hand or an illusion of some sort, or a little known medicinal cure, he was considered to have supernatural powers. Maybe not quite worshiped as a deity but certainly above the typical attributes of an average person. If through space exploration, we were to come to a similar world with a similar type of human-like species but they were less technologically developed than us, would we be worshiped as GODS? Even more challenging is the question- would we be able to not abuse that advantage over them? I doubt it.

What if a physical being actually arrived on Earth and possessed the all of the attributes of what we would consider GOD? A benevolent being who transcends communication gaps, possess great powers of healing, knowledge in physics and biology far greater than what is known on Earth...One who is seemingly immune to harm and possesses immense patience with the human race? Would you then worship that being as GOD? What is the criteria? Does one need to identify oneself as GOD (or any of the names associated with the many different monotheistic religious beliefs) to be considered GOD. What would we think if this being was not alone but one of many? Would that disqualify it from being GOD or would we believe that there are a collection of them- gods? You see, the point I'm getting at here is that even if we actually came face to face with this being or beings, how would we really ever know for sure? Who's to know that there isn't an even higher power than that being? That is where faith enters the picture.

Faith is something that you either have or don't have. There is really no in between with Faith. If you don't believe, you don't have faith in GOD, as we have been led to understand as GOD exists. However, even if you sort of believe in GOD, you have faith. The strength and conviction of your faith can vary widely with other believers but you still have faith. What is truly important is that you can live with your belief or non-beliefs and that you still can function and interact with others in a positive way on a daily basis.

It is when one becomes intolerant of the other that religion becomes a divisive issue. That is the current problem between people in our world today and always has been in our species since organized religion began. A major point of contention arises when people feel that the way in which other people live, behave and think are too unlike their own religious philosophies and therefore need to either be converted to conform to their beliefs or subjugated to a secondary class of citizen in the region or world, or in extreme cases, even euthanized. So one's faith can be a double-edged sword when taken to the extreme. It all comes down to what you choose to believe and what you choose to tolerate. Just some food for thought...

[Primal Instinct]

Wow, apologies for my dissertation :dunno: It was like my fingers just couldn't stop. LOL. I grew up Catholic- 12 years of schooling- I am not devout nor anti anything. If it works for you and doesn't hurt others than I say more power to you. Anyway, I have said everything I needed to say. Once again, apologies for the long post.

[Puddles]

No need to appologize for your long post, Primal! That's what this thread is for, a sharing of ideas. :)

[Cogar]

Originally posted by Primal Instinct
. . . .You see, man has duplicated many feats formerly only attributed to GOD, such as the creation of life via in vitro fertilization of egg by sperm or bringing the dead back to life (granted, the time frame is limited to only minutes) using cardiopulmonary resuscitation or the electric defibrillator. Man has actually cloned animals albeit not a perfect process yet. . . .

As a clarification, in vitro fertilization is not creation of life. They merely changed the mechanics of how a sperm and egg get together. The life was in them already. It was not created.

The good trick regarding bringing the dead back to life would be to do it with someone who is really dead. Someone whose heart has stopped functioning is dying, not dead. Once they actually die, which as you said may occur in a matter of minutes, the game is over and they cannot be revived.

Regarding the cloning process, all they do is replace the nucleus of a cell with the nucleus from another cell. The DNA, already created in a living species was only changed from one location to another. Although this is a "whiz bang" effect, the reality is that this is not really any closer to the creation of life by mankind than in vitro fertilization.

Good post, btw.

[Shibby]

Ha, this is my first post in this thread :D

[Bouncer]

Ha, this is my first post in this thread :D

YouTube - Carl Sagan - 'A Glorious Dawn' ft Stephen Hawking (Symphony of Science)

[buell]

Ha, this is my first post in this thread :D

as good as you are shib at word play and such and thats not a diss mind ya , u might as well as me view from the sidelines...wow:)

[Shibby]

as good as you are shib at word play and such and thats not a diss mind ya , u might as well as me view from the sidelines...wow:)

Huh?

[buell]

Huh?

sorry the post dates didnt hit me till just a few ago..when i was thinkin where did all these literate and skilled posts come from ..my bad and enjoy your veiws its just these folks were throwin down in 04.