Question for Christians.

[smooth]

On the other hand, scientists aren't afraid to say "We don't know, but we are working on answering that question."

I'm not sure where you are in your education, but once or if you spend a lot of time around scientists you'll find they aren't so endearing or transparent as it seems. I don't know if people just assume scientists are fact driven and let the facts speak for themselves, but they don't and are often more zealous than even the most fervent religious fanatics I've encountered.

At best you might find someone honest to point out that science never proves, merely disproves, perhaps in a methodology course, but elsewhere people believe and act as if their discipline has the answers and that the person him or herself is the expert to listen to.

I'm not here to cause e-battles that aren't going to go anywhere, especially when claims on here seem to open windows for people to take shots at each other.

It's a strange interaction when people ask for your opinion and then personally insult you when you give it.

[Fourbanger]

You could have a billion-sided die, you roll it and it just so happens that 498,238,191 is rolled. Does that side credit some omnipotent rolling force for allowing it be the chosen side? Of course it does not, the odds were against it yes but one side HAD to come up. The by-products of that are not special, they are simply the end result of a force which had already occurred. We're also comprised solely of the exact same elements which have been around for billions of years, billions of years for those elements to interact, change and formulate more complex arrangements. Any arrangement possible was equally unlikely and if came into existence would be in shock and awe at the unlikliness of it's existence....but again, it's just the end result of a process which had to occur due to forces in the past.

Very nicely put

[Fusion]

I'm more interested in why religion can't acknowledge that it can't answer certain things.
A typical religious answer is "If you have to ask that question, you're not worthy of the answer, because if you were, you'd know the answer."
On the other hand, scientists aren't afraid to say "We don't know, but we are working on answering that question."

The funny thing is that a religious answer like that is a deadly sin

In almost every list, pride (Latin, superbia), or hubris, is considered the original and most serious of the seven deadly sins, and the source of the others. It is identified as a desire to be more important or attractive than others, failing to acknowledge the good work of others, and excessive love of self (especially holding self out of proper position toward God).

[devon.818]

So who do you think started all that?

who started it? uhm i dont think it was "started" really, i am talking about evolution, kinda rules out a devine creator of sorts.
but thats just what i choose to believe in.

i respect everyone's views, as i feel people respect mine.

that said, doesn't the bible speak of adam and eve? so if you belive "god" created the world and people evolved, how does adam and eve fit in? and who did adam or eve tell that was able to right all this down?

[cmybimmer]

Someone throw me a life vest, I'm drowning in ignorance with this post.

Implying that the complex arrangements found in our bodies happened from thin air or even in a short period of time reassures me in my assumption that you are wilfully ignorant to science and evolution.

Not at all, I love science. I see it as a way to demonstrate God's might..

I'm not here to cause e-battles that aren't going to go anywhere, especially when claims on here seem to open windows for people to take shots at each other.

[FunfGan]

thanks for calling us creations, my mom and dad did a lot of humping to create me :)

anyway, saying that we are so complex we should believe in god or you think it was an accident, is pretty...well yeah ignorant. we are this complex because it works, it didn't happen over night, the right mixture of vital systems came into play and over millenia merged together, advancing and getting better to become human. accident? no no no, everything is this way because it HAS TO BE.

So who do you think started all that?

[devon.818]

We don't have to be physically the best creation (which is also a big miracle itself... The complexity/functioning of our bodies are enough to believe in Gods presence. To think we just happened to shape into our bodies from thin air is ignorance in my opinion), but like mentioned before we are valued as a creation for our worship to God on our own free will. Angels for example are created ONLY for the worship of God, with no other purpose for their lives..

And yes, physically we may be lacking amongst other creations, but you don't see dogs prostrating to God such as (some) humans. That's why we are labeled the best of creation.. If you're not impressed, then by all means, one-up Him.

thanks for calling us creations, my mom and dad did a lot of humping to create me :)

anyway, saying that we are so complex we should believe in god or you think it was an accident, is pretty...well yeah ignorant. we are this complex because it works, it didn't happen over night, the right mixture of vital systems came into play and over millenia merged together, advancing and getting better to become human. accident? no no no, everything is this way because it HAS TO BE.

[cale]

We don't have to be physically the best creation (which is also a big miracle itself... The complexity/functioning of our bodies are enough to believe in Gods presence. To think we just happened to shape into our bodies from thin air is ignorance in my opinion), but like mentioned before we are valued as a creation for our worship to God on our own free will. Angels for example are created ONLY for the worship of God, with no other purpose for their lives..

Someone throw me a life vest, I'm drowning in ignorance with this post.

Implying that the complex arrangements found in our bodies happened from thin air or even in a short period of time reassures me in my assumption that you are wilfully ignorant to science and evolution.

And yes, physically we may be lacking amongst other creations, but you don't see dogs prostrating to God such as (some) humans. That's why we are labeled the best of creation.. If you're not impressed, then by all means, one-up Him.

Really, that's your argument....that our level of intelligence is proof of a deity? With that "sound" logic should we not say that the higher than average intelligence found in dolphins and chimpanzee's is proof of a slightly less competent god than that which created us? This is similar to the argument that our existence in such a inhospitable universe is proof of creation, but it's not.

You could have a billion-sided die, you roll it and it just so happens that 498,238,191 is rolled. Does that side credit some omnipotent rolling force for allowing it be the chosen side? Of course it does not, the odds were against it yes but one side HAD to come up. The by-products of that are not special, they are simply the end result of a force which had already occurred. We're also comprised solely of the exact same elements which have been around for billions of years, billions of years for those elements to interact, change and formulate more complex arrangements. Any arrangement possible was equally unlikely and if came into existence would be in shock and awe at the unlikliness of it's existence....but again, it's just the end result of a process which had to occur due to forces in the past.

[Fusion]

It is becoming a known fact that we knew the world was round way before Galilei or any other modern astronomers, proven ie. by the Great Pyramid. Science, maths, physics were obviously known way before the bible was written. Problem is that ancient history today is taught to "accomodate" the bible in certain ways. Therefor, if major historical truths were shifted by new facts, religions would be asked to explain. Since religion cannot shift historical events (because otherwise they'd be proven to be false), religion shuns science, genetic engineering etc.
Science is a threat to religion in that it could undermine it, whereas religion can only attempt to undermine science. Science is a threat because one scientific answer leads to many questions. Concrete questions are not welcome in religion, because the founding books don't allow them to be answered. Only psychological questions are happily answered, because they can be answered very generally and vaguely.

[Lodsin]

The time modern humans have been on Earth account for mere fractions of a spec of dust on the global time line. Life has been said to have started from over 3 billion years ago. Ignorance is not being humbled by those statistics and the fact that our complexity could of come from something simplistic (and still pretty complex in its own rights).

Then again never mind because you, as a subscriber to religion, can't believe in what I'm telling you. At least this is to the other people.

This.

Anddd

I'll admit that I don't have a full understanding of the science behind evolution. But the reason I trust in science over religion is because it can become outdated. Science constantly changes as we learn more about our world. We wouldn't look back to 2000 year old scientific documents and attempt to apply them directly to today's world without at least taking a critical and objective look at them.

People say things like "it's just a theory" or "we used to think the world was flat" when trying to discredit science, but this actually strengthens my belief in it. We don't claim to know everything with 100% certainty, and when new information comes to light we integrate it with what we already know.

I'm a pastafarian, my god is a flying ball of spaghetti.

[cmybimmer]

You're saying here that God put us into existence so we could worship him?

"And I did not create the jinn [jinni] and humans except that they worship Me." (Holy Quran 51:56)

Yes, and Allah is saying this as well.

[Fourbanger]

I'll admit that I don't have a full understanding of the science behind evolution. But the reason I trust in science over religion is because it can become outdated. Science constantly changes as we learn more about our world. We wouldn't look back to 2000 year old scientific documents and attempt to apply them directly to today's world without at least taking a critical and objective look at them.

People say things like "it's just a theory" or "we used to think the world was flat" when trying to discredit science, but this actually strengthens my belief in it. We don't claim to know everything with 100% certainty, and when new information comes to light we integrate it with what we already know.

[Fusion]

There are many problems with Darwin's evolution theory. Not saying it's false, it is a much more reasonable answer, but it seems outdated due to what we know today vs. almost 200 years ago.

[Fourbanger]

The complexity/functioning of our bodies are enough to believe in Gods presence. To think we just happened to shape into our bodies from thin air is ignorance in my opinion

Sure, because God creating humans from thin air is a much more reasonable explanation than, say, evolution. But since that's what people believe they wont make any effort to learn about evolution, but instead just reduce it to "I did not come from an ape!"

I think it's funny that we're nearly identical to other animals in terms of our complex body systems and such, yet many religious believers don't even put us in the same category as animals.

but like mentioned before we are valued as a creation for our worship to God on our own free will. Angels for example are created ONLY for the worship of God, with no other purpose for their lives..

You're saying here that God put us into existence so we could worship him?

[Dozyproductions]

We don't have to be physically the best creation (which is also a big miracle itself... The complexity/functioning of our bodies are enough to believe in Gods presence. To think we just happened to shape into our bodies from thin air is ignorance in my opinion)

The time modern humans have been on Earth account for mere fractions of a spec of dust on the global time line. Life has been said to have started from over 3 billion years ago. Ignorance is not being humbled by those statistics and the fact that our complexity could of come from something simplistic (and still pretty complex in its own rights).

Then again never mind because you, as a subscriber to religion, can't believe in what I'm telling you. At least this is to the other people.