Creation vs. Evolution

[shakeybrainsurgeon]

It is 'across' the line when the State overides the wishes of the parents in any area period.

I agree that the State (capital S? Rather Orwellian) should be kept out of parenting as much as possible, but "in any area, period?" So the woman in Pennsylvania who used her infant today to beat her boyfriend should not answer to the state? What if the parent "wishes" to have, lets say, an inappropriate relationship with a child? Or, as was the case in my neighborhood growing up, the parents decide to keep the child in a locked, windowless room with no mattress or toys for years at a time? Can the state never intervene?

Children are not the property of parents to do with as they wish. The ownership of humans in this country ended with the Eamncipation Proclamation.

And yes, there should be limits to human experimentation. This isn't based in religion but the law. The cosmos doesn't need to give permission to be experimented upon, nor do fossils or ribozymes. The legal sanctity of the self and the right to know and consent to experiments on our persons is part of our secular legal code. This code is rooted in ancient English law and can trace its ethical roots to Aristotle and beyond. Contrary to popular belief, people understood ethical behavior centuries before Christ or Buddha came on the scene.

The main difference between science-based reasoning and religious reasoning is that those rooted in science like me will admit 1) I have been wrong before, 2) I may be wrong now; and 3) I will be wrong again. Evolution may be disproved, it may be baloney, it has problems. Much of cosmology is based on general relativity and may be flawed. String theory, the darling of particle physics is collapsing, and medical science has reached a standstill in many areas (as comedian Chris Rock observed, doctors cured polio and then seem to give up). Retrospective analysis of fossil records and the study of distant galaxies are inexact endeavors to be sure. When we finally look under that last rock, we may yet find God. Science is littered with the wreckage of good theories gone bad (phlogiston, alchemy, bloodletting, the ether, psychosurgery). But, in the end, the errors are usually recognized and corrected.

Likewise, I've made many mistakes in my life and, if I was afraid of looking foolish, I wouldn't put on a wetsuit. I like to verbally spar with people, but readily admit I will venture into areas wherein I have inadequate knowledge.

But the deeply religious are NEVER wrong and NEVER in doubt. They know the answers yesterday, today and tomorrow, for themselves and everyone else. And history has shown and will show again that that viewpoint isn't always divine. It can be very, very dangerous.

And with that, I sign off. It's been a fun discussion, but people are set in their opinions and I'm done stirring this soup.

Back to the wordless world under the waves....

 

[H2Andy]

Timothy seems to be saying it does. "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness"

it doesn't say scripture is perfect. it doesn't say it can not make a mistake. it doesn't say scrivener's errors don't creep into it.

it simply doesn't say what so many people read into it

it just says it's inspired by God and it's profitable

i honestly despair that Christians can do a close reading of scripture ourelves, without hearing all the doctrine and theology that has been drilled into us for years and years

we just don't read what's there anymore

(i do not believe in God, and I believe the historical Jesus is far more complex and complicated that it's taught in Sunday School, but i do consider myself a Christian, in that I grew up and was taught the Judeo-Christian traditions, and find much of value in them)

 

[sandjeep]

it doesn't say scripture is perfect. it doesn't say it can not make a mistake. it doesn't say scrivener's errors don't creep into it.

it simply doesn't say what so many people read into it

it just says it's inspired by God and it's profitable

i honestly despair that Christians can do a close reading of scripture ourelves, without hearing all the doctrine and theology that has been drilled into us for years and years

we just don't read what's there anymore.

God is perfect. ergo However, now we'll need to agree on what inspired means in the correct context.

 

[H2Andy]

God is perfect.

your logic is as follows:

God is perfect
God inspired men to write scripture
therefore
Scripture is perfect

is that the same as

God is perfect
God inspired me to write a song
therefore
My song is perfect

?

(by the way, i can prove to you that scripture contains errors, so it's clearly not perfect ... that's not what that verse means)

 

[Kim]

i do not believe in God......<snip>.....but i do consider myself a Christian

Lost me there.........

 

[sandjeep]

I agree that the State (capital S? Rather Orwellian) should be kept out of parenting as much as possible, but "in any area, period?" So the woman in Pennsylvania who used her infant today to beat her boyfriend should not answer to the state? What if the parent "wishes" to have, lets say, an inappropriate relationship with a child? Or, as was the case in my neighborhood growing up, the parents decide to keep the child in a locked, windowless room with no mattress or toys for years at a time? Can the state never intervene?

I'm sorry, I had thought we were talking about education and the teaching of evolution over the rights of parents. If I was unclear in my writing, hopefully this corrects it.

 

[adurso]

I'm sorry, I had thought we were talking about education and the teaching of evolution over the rights of parents. If I was unclear in my writing, hopefully this corrects it.

For the most part parents in general do not have the scientific expertise to determine what should be taught. If parents do not like what is taught, they have the option of home schooling, private schooling, or moving to a system that will accede to their wishes.

 

[photohikedive]

In the Old Testament we see our loving God being blamed for many wars and atrocities. Personally, I cannot believe that a loving God would do such a thing, and so my view on Scriptures.

yet this is the god who wiped out cities, and in one instance, the entire world. not what one would consider a loving action.

if I was to kill a bus load of athiests, I doubt people would say it was because I loved them

 

[sandjeep]

your logic is as follows:

God is perfect
God inspired men to write scripture
therefore
Scripture is perfect

is that the same as

God is perfect
God inspired me to write a song
therefore
My song is perfect

?

(by the way, i can prove to you that scripture contains errors, so it's clearly not perfect ... that's not what that verse means)

Which is why I said that the word 'inspired' must be defined and placed in the proper context. Basically, without digging out the Hebrew, it can be defined as God directed it A course translation, but it is late and I'm off to sleep.

Good Diving to all

 

[photohikedive]

I'm sorry, I had thought we were talking about education and the teaching of evolution over the rights of parents. If I was unclear in my writing, hopefully this corrects it.

I imagine, when creationism can be shown to have any basis in fact, other than the fact a book of (what some would call) myths says happened, then schools would be obligated to teach it.

creationism has as much room in a science class as the myths of creation by any number of religions and cultures.