The ever changing forked tongue theory of evolution

[River Jordan]

There is a point where science, philosophy, and theology converge...this is the point of creation and a valid topic in this thread. If it is you want to omit theology altogether, then state you are atheistic, otherwise deal with the consequences of your position.

That's not my point. My point is, it's absurd to assign a theological position to "evolutionists", since evolution is a scientific concept, not a theological one. You may as well try and talk about the theology of Los Angeles Lakers fans. Not only that, but "evolutionists" (those who accept the reality of evolution) are most certainly a theologically diverse group and come from all sorts of faith backgrounds.

So then the question begs, in your theory of genesis did God create anything, or is your god not the creator?

Of course God created.

 

[justaname]

That's not my point. My point is, it's absurd to assign a theological position to "evolutionists", since evolution is a scientific concept, not a theological one. You may as well try and talk about the theology of Los Angeles Lakers fans. Not only that, but "evolutionists" (those who accept the reality of evolution) are most certainly a theologically diverse group and come from all sorts of faith backgrounds.


Of course God created.

I am uncertain if you are catching your own inconsistency here...you claim to be a believer in evolution...you claim to be a believer in creationism...then you say I shouldn't mix theology with science??? Wow!

 

[River Jordan]

It's pretty simple. Evolution, being science, has no theological requirements. You can be an "evolutionist" and be a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, or whatever. OTOH, being a Christian pretty much requires one to believe in creation by God, because it is a theological belief, by definition.

 

[justaname]

It is interesting because in a sense you are stating that truly a scientist cannot be a Christian, because to look through the worldview of science God cannot come into the picture. IOW all scientists must don an atheistic worldview otherwise it is not science because it is absurd to assign any theology to science.
Yes but your theory of evolution has a theological requirement, because there is a creator.
Rather inconsistent.

 

[River Jordan]

It is interesting because in a sense you are stating that truly a scientist cannot be a Christian, because to look through the worldview of science God cannot come into the picture.

??????????? I just posted, "You can be an "evolutionist" and be a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, or whatever." So how you got the exact opposite out of that is a mystery.

IOW all scientists must don an atheistic worldview otherwise it is not science because it is absurd to assign any theology to science.
Yes but your theory of evolution has a theological requirement, because there is a creator.
Rather inconsistent.

I'm sorry, but I don't know how else to explain this to you.

 

[justaname]

Your point is it is absurd to assign a theological position to "evolutionists". Then you say "evolutionists" can be "fill in the religion". Is that not then "assigning a theological position"?

Again if you as an evolutionist adopt the notin of a creator, then you have assigned a theological position to your theory of evolution.
Hmmm...so then I can gather you are not an evolutionist in the strictest sense. You reject the working model of creation in the biblical account, and you reject the working model of evolution from the scientific community, and create your own personal hybrid of the genesis...so you are a crevolutionist.

 

[River Jordan]

Your point is it is absurd to assign a theological position to "evolutionists".

Right. There is no single theological position required of, or common to, all "evolutionists". Like I said, we may as well be talking about the "theological position of soccer fans". It doesn't make sense.

Then you say "evolutionists" can be "fill in the religion". Is that not then "assigning a theological position"?

Soccer fans can be of any religious faith, or none at all. Soccer is a sport, not a religion.

People who recognize the reality of evolution can be of any religious faith, or none at all. Evolution is a science, not a religion.

Make sense?

Again if you as an evolutionist adopt the notin of a creator, then you have assigned a theological position to your theory of evolution.

Yes, but that is only relevant to me. It has no bearing on anyone else, just like the soccer fan standing next to me can be a Muslim and it has no bearing on me, my faith, or my lover for soccer.

 

[justaname]

And here is the kicker of it all, you say I am the one jumping back and fourth between science and theology...!

In all fairness we never took the time to define our terms, all in good fun my friend. I gather your concept behind your point.

From my consideration of "evolutionists" the term is loaded with overtones and conceptions that perhaps you may not even consider. Much the same way in certain countries the term Christian has many connotations.

Words only take on meaning within their context. Language is indeed a barrier in communication.

 

[KingJ]

Soccer fans can be of any religious faith, or none at all. Soccer is a sport, not a religion.

People who recognize the reality of evolution can be of any religious faith, or none at all. Evolution is a science, not a religion.

Make sense?

Convenient how you choose ...soccer..... and not the film or cartoon industry that mocked Muhammad... as the parallel to evolution.

''Acting is acting and not religion'' / '''drawing is drawing and not religion'' How dare you get that wrong Muslims!!!

 

[lforrest]

?????????believe just posted, "You can be an "evolutionist" and be a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, atheist, or whatever." So how you got the exact opposite out of that is a mystery.



I'm sorry, but I don't know how else to explain this to you.

Can I assume you believe the theory of evolution is true, and personally believe that God created the process of evolution?

 

[River Jordan]

In all fairness we never took the time to define our terms, all in good fun my friend. I gather your concept behind your point.

From my consideration of "evolutionists" the term is loaded with overtones and conceptions that perhaps you may not even consider. Much the same way in certain countries the term Christian has many connotations.

Words only take on meaning within their context. Language is indeed a barrier in communication.

Agreed. :)

Convenient how you choose ...soccer..... and not the film or cartoon industry that mocked Muhammad... as the parallel to evolution.

Because evolution doesn't mock anything, just like soccer.

Can I assume you believe the theory of evolution is true, and personally believe that God created the process of evolution?

Yep.

 

[KingJ]

Because evolution doesn't mock anything, just like soccer.

So....

1. you don't see thousands of years of missing scripture from God to mankind as a problem?
2. Natural selection is not evil?
3. Jesus dying for mankind at various stages of evolution is not a joke?

Evolution is better paralleled with Hitler deceiving people into gas chambers ;).

 

[River Jordan]

Godwin's Law. You lose.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

 

[StanJ]

SNAP!

How long ya been holding that card River?

 

[River Jordan]

He kinda walked right into it. I didn't have to do anything.

 

[StanJ]

Well you had to know this little tidbit... I've never heard of it but yeh he walked into it. Never a good idea to play the Hitler card.

 

[KingJ]

Godwin's Law. You lose.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

1. You have the memory of a fish. We discussed Godwins law on the other site.
2. You don't know the history and widely accepted scope / appropriate application of Godwins law. Did you know it was a joke? Did you know the actual point of it these days is to expose those that make ridiculous / overbearing accusations of Hitler and nazis? Did you know that Godwin himself said it is fine to make a legitimate statement of Hitler at any point in a debate? I am thinking you think Godwins law forbids all reference to Hitler and Nazis.... ...
3. Hitler and prominent / well known figures like him are sorely needed when talking to fools.
4. Once more you somehow think a childish reply alleviates you from the questions raised. Lame x 1000!

Well you had to know this little tidbit... I've never heard of it but yeh he walked into it. Never a good idea to play the Hitler card.

I could not disagree more. Godwins law is idiotic.

Just like Stalin, Napoleon and Nero. Quoting any of them helps a point lay a smackdown.

 

[StanJ]

I could not disagree more. Godwins law is idiotic.

Just like Stalin, Napoleon and Nero. Quoting any of them helps a point lay a smackdown.

Nah sorry, it's dishonest IMO to use Hitler/Nazi/Fascism and the accompanying total lack of any moral fibre/integrity, and assign it to other's motives or values, especially on a Christian website. I don't really know if Goodwin's law is realistic or not, but I agree with it's premise.

 

[aspen]

Nothing about the Big Bang discounts God.

 

[StanJ]

Nothing about the Big Bang discounts God.

Sure it does...as it is assumed to have come from nothing, not God.