Evolution and Relativism

[lemondiesel]

Of course we can all choose to live how we want. The Church doesn’t deny anyone that. It will not force anyone to go to Church. In the case of Catholics who miss Mass, a priest will not be pounding on their door to ask why they didn’t go.

Who do you trust? Why do you trust tem? Do you believe wisdom or knowledge or enlightenment poured into anyone’s head the moment the calendar changed from the 20th to the 21st Century?

Peace,
Ed

They dont need to force you or go door to door with todays media. All they have to say is People who dont keep the Sabbath Day holy or who have sex before marriage and the word is spread. Yes they dont make you but they sure do want to make you feel bad for not lol

 

[Areopagite]

No i do not think its evil corrupt or anything of the sort, i am just against it but thats because thats what i was taught to believe over my years going up.

What do you mean that you are against it, though (even if that’s what you were taught to believe)? How can you be against something and yet not be against it? I would encourage you to one side or the other, because either side would be better than being neither this nor that. If you firmly disagree with how you were taught, then … why are you still kind of agreeing with it? It’s just something to think about.

People should be supported because personally can you say that you are a homosexual? If you personally can’t fit into their shoes then why judge them and make them believe they are evil for doing it?

Couple things: I’m not judging them in the sense of thinking “THEY’RE GOING TO HELL!!!” but I’m judging their actions by saying, “What they’re doing is evil!” But I reserve in my mind that they may not be responsible for their actions, but that doesn’t mean what they’re doing is okay. Psychotic rapists might not be in control of themselves, so I don’t judge them either. But their actions are still bad and unhealthy.

I personally dont know but i am assuming revenge in the church is very bad? but i mean You personally could say you would never kill someone in the heat of passion but once again Have you ever been pushed over the limit? I agree with everything you say but most people havent been put into a bad situation.

Indeed, I could murder someone in a moment of passion, perhaps. However, that should still be against the law and condemned. Also, oftentimes, even in those instances, people still could have restrained themselves … and thus they have responsibility. Even if I kill someone like that, I still deserve punishment. Or, at least, people shouldn’t look at the action and say, “That’s okay. He couldn’t help it. It’s all good.”

Not at all i am actually a huge Democrat and am a Political Science Government Major (keep your political comments to yourselves lol) It is just a personal belief i have haha dont really have much else i just dont want you to think i dont believe in government haha

I don’t know what you mean by “personal belief” here.

In any case, if you believe government’s okay, why is it not permissible for the Church to have a governing structure?

I just say that because if its taught in all religions, How do you know which one to follow?

Fair enough. Honestly, the answer is faith. Christianity cannot be proven like a math formula. It comes by way of mystical experience with Jesus. It most ordinarily comes by way of subtle experiences, but sometimes not always. That’s the short answer to the question.

 

[lemondiesel]

I dont really have a strong stand on it because it is not my problem. If someone wants to be happy by being homosexual or murderer or rapist its not my problem. I am focusing on my life and the certain things i chose to be in my life. I am not going to be a doctor to help “sick in the mind” people or anything of the sort. I understand every one of your points though now and thank you for sharing everything with me.

 

[Areopagite]

I dont really have a strong stand on it because it is not my problem. If someone wants to be happy by being homosexual or murderer or rapist its not my problem. I am focusing on my life and the certain things i chose to be in my life. I am not going to be a doctor to help “sick in the mind” people or anything of the sort. I understand every one of your points though now and thank you for sharing everything with me.

You’re welcome.

I’ll just say, though, that you would agree that the government should try and prevent murder and rape, right? When people do evil actions, it has an effect on society in general, and thus can be everyone’s problem.

 

[lemondiesel]

You’re welcome.

I’ll just say, though, that you would agree that the government should try and prevent murder and rape, right? When people do evil actions, it has an effect on society in general, and thus can be everyone’s problem.

yes they should prevent it but i look at it similar to the ban on marijuana in the United States, as much as its illegal and no matter how hard the government tries there will always be problems. there is only so much government can do on that issue. i just think there are bigger concerns for todays population because murder (not killing due to war or anything like that) and rape will not be the reason our world goes down, i just believe theres bigger issues than local rape and murders.

PS: i dont really know how to explain myself very well in words so i hope that kind of makes sense haha

 

[severntofall]

Thank you. Families and neighborhoods had a heart. It was not perfect, but it tended to be kind and caring.

Religion was more respected.

Peace,
Ed

And you can add that nations with lower percentages of theists also tend to have far lower crime rates (particularly violent crime). Don’t forget that theists make up 99.7% of the USA’s prison population.

 

[buffalo]

I just think times have changed from what the church has been teaching people for thousands of years. In no way do i support gay marriage but still, it should come down to individual freedom. it is PEOPLES choices to chose how they live their lives because in fact we werent there when Jesus walked the earth. We must go on written documents that may or may not be true. I believe there is God, but religions just seem more like a form of government. They just seem to controlling on what believers should follow. If God loves all, we can live good lives and not worship him daily . . . Also, most religions have had a man die for there sins and raise from the dead (<—actually taught in my college World Religions class)

I think its just hard for people to listen to the pope when in fact there are new scientific discoveries. It is the year 2009, we are bound for change . . .

What you are advocating is license not freedom.

Sources? about most religions having a man die for their sins.

And if you are following current science you will find that more and more these discoveries support Revelation.

 

[buffalo]

you still cant look at people differently just because they dont believe the same things you do. i am just saying you may live to closed minded. I know people follow church teachings but you also have to experience life in whatever way you decide to. Wouldnt God want everyone to be happy?

Exactly - God indeed wants everyone to be happy in eternity. Earth is the trial to get there, the dues paid so to speak.

God is all loving, all merciful and just. Most people forget the just part.

 

[buffalo]

A) I just say that because if its taught in all religions, How do you know which one to follow?

A fantastic question - how does one go about figuring that out?

Most religions have some truths that all agree on. Some are internally inconsistent.

Keep searching and asking sincere questions and you soon find that many cannot pass the test. At the end of the day you will realize Catholicism contains the “fullness of truth”.

 

[buffalo]

I dont really have a strong stand on it because it is not my problem. If someone wants to be happy by being homosexual or murderer or rapist its not my problem. I am focusing on my life and the certain things i chose to be in my life. I am not going to be a doctor to help “sick in the mind” people or anything of the sort. I understand every one of your points though now and thank you for sharing everything with me.

Since we are all related Catholics desire that all our brothers and sisters enjoy eternity.

 

[edwest2]

And you can add that nations with lower percentages of theists also tend to have far lower crime rates (particularly violent crime). Don’t forget that theists make up 99.7% of the USA’s prison population.

Can you cite a reputable source for that figure?

So non-theists are immune from performing criminal acts?

Peace,
Ed

 

[liquidpele]

Can you cite a reputable source for that figure?

So non-theists are immune from performing criminal acts?

Peace,
Ed

The source is from the Federal Bureau of Prisons, compiled from up-to-the-day figures on March 5th, 1997:

freethoughtpedia.com/wiki/Percentage_of_atheists#1997_Federal_Bureau_of_Prisons_Statistics

That said… it only really counts if these percents differ from the general population. In this case, there are somewhere between about 3-15% of the population in America being atheists (depending on how you ask the question), so while it seems atheists comprise less of a general prison population as one might expect given their numbers in society, there are two major problems with this comparison still:

1. People “find Jesus” a lot in prison, it would be far more interesting to find out what they thought of themselves when their crimes were committed.
2. Surveys are notoriously hard to not make biased, especially when it comes to theological questions.

 

[tjm190]

No. The goal here, and elsewhere, is that Catholics and All Christians must accept the purely mechanical, mindless, non-goal oriented, biology textbook version of evolution.

The goal here is no more to attack then it was when the geocentric model was discredited.

Why? So that they can make parts of the Bible impossible according to Science.

Or to gain a better understanding of the world.

The Dictatorship of Science must attack the Word of God. Not with truth, but with a nonsensical theory that can be shot full of holes, grossly revised, discredited and survive other, numerous, logical assaults by the sheer insistence argument.

The arguments against evolution always boil down to “but you don’t have 100% of the information and you never will, so you can never be sure right? So I just believe what I want? Awesome. Oh by the way, you have to teach what I believe in schools.” If you randomly decided you didn’t accept relativity, you could poke as many holes in it as you wanted to (I threw a baseball really fast and it didn’t look any heavier, so mass does not increase with velocity), but that wouldn’t make the theory invalid.

The formula is simple: No Matter How Much Is Discredited, The Theory Is Infinitely Flexible and Infinitely Explainable, without limit.

If by this you mean science adapts to new knowledge, then yes.

 

[edwest2]

The goal here is no more to attack then it was when the geocentric model was discredited.
Or to gain a better understanding of the world.
The arguments against evolution always boil down to “but you don’t have 100% of the information and you never will, so you can never be sure right? So I just believe what I want? Awesome. Oh by the way, you have to teach what I believe in schools.” If you randomly decided you didn’t accept relativity, you could poke as many holes in it as you wanted to (I threw a baseball really fast and it didn’t look any heavier, so mass does not increase with velocity), but that wouldn’t make the theory invalid.

If by this you mean science adapts to new knowledge, then yes.

This was never about science. It has always been about keeping God out of public schools. Second, evolution as described in the biology textbook is wrong. Period. What is being presented here is an ideology labeled evolution, and while it is loosely based on a few scientific ideas, that is not why it’s important. It’s only real value is for billboards that read: Praise Darwin. Evolve beyond Belief.

Peace,
Ed

 

[pzona]

Ed, could you describe what exactly you mean by the evolution taught in textbooks? Also, how does this differ from your understanding of evolution?

 

[tjm190]

This was never about science. It has always been about keeping God out of public schools. Second, evolution as described in the biology textbook is wrong. Period. What is being presented here is an ideology labeled evolution, and while it is loosely based on a few scientific ideas, that is not why it’s important. It’s only real value is for billboards that read: Praise Darwin. Evolve beyond Belief.

Peace,
Ed

Right, because everyone who believes something different from you do is out to get you- the fact that a group of atheists used evolution to counter religion is a clear indicator that evolution can only be used to fight religion. I’ll dig up my old biology text book and get back to you.

 

[liquidpele]

This was never about science. It has always been about keeping God out of public schools. Second, evolution as described in the biology textbook is wrong. Period. What is being presented here is an ideology labeled evolution, and while it is loosely based on a few scientific ideas, that is not why it’s important. It’s only real value is for billboards that read: Praise Darwin. Evolve beyond Belief.

Peace,
Ed

Oh, well if the great Ed proclaims it to be false then I suppose we must reject it! Do you also believe the earth is flat?
You keep trying to attach atheism to evolution. Atheists like the Red Cross too, but I don’t see you attacking it, so please stop with the stupid correlations as evidence BS. You think evolution is not true, and you think that it’s an atheist conspiracy, but these are your opinions and not ones that the huge majority of educated people hold… may I suggest you keep them to yourself?

 

[tjm190]

I’ll right, the high school biology book has been unearthed and is ready to be debunked- where exactly do you suppose i’ll encounter an error?

 

[edwest2]

I’ll right, the high school biology book has been unearthed and is ready to be debunked- where exactly do you suppose i’ll encounter an error?

We can see this in current biology textbooks:

“[E]volution works without either plan or purpose — Evolution is random and undirected.”
(Biology, by Kenneth R. Miller & Joseph S. Levine (1st ed., Prentice Hall, 1991), pg. 658; (3rd ed., Prentice Hall, 1995), pg. 658; (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998), pg. 658; emphasis in original.)

“Humans represent just one tiny, largely fortuitous, and late-arising twig on the enormously arborescent bush of life.”
(Stephen J Gould quoted in Biology, by Peter H Raven & George B Johnson (5th ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pg 15; (6th ed., McGraw Hill, 2000), pg. 16.)

“By coupling **undirected, purposeless **variation to the **blind, uncaring **process of natural selection, Darwin made theological or spiritual explanations of the life processes superfluous.”
(Evolutionary Biology, by Douglas J. Futuyma (3rd ed., Sinauer Associates Inc., 1998), p. 5.)

“Darwin knew that accepting his theory required believing in philosophical materialism, the conviction that **matter is the stuff of all existence **and that all mental and spiritual phenomena are its by-products. Darwinian evolution was not only purposeless but also heartless–a process in which the rigors of nature ruthlessly eliminate the unfit. Suddenly, humanity was reduced to just one more species in a world that cared nothing for us. The great human mind was no more than a mass of evolving neurons. Worst of all, there was no divine plan to guide us.”
(Biology: Discovering Life by Joseph S. Levine & Kenneth R. Miller (1st ed., D.C. Heath and Co., 1992), pg. 152; (2nd ed… D.C. Heath and Co., 1994), p. 161; emphases in original.)

“Adopting this view of the world means accepting not only the processes of evolution, but also the view that the living world is constantly evolving, and that evolutionary change occurs without any goals.’ The idea that **evolution is not directed **towards a final goal state has been more difficult for many people to accept than the process of evolution itself.”
(Life: The Science of Biology by William K. Purves, David Sadava, Gordon H. Orians, & H. Craig Keller, (6th ed., Sinauer; W.H. Freeman and Co., 2001), pg. 3.)

“The ‘blind’ watchmaker is natural selection. **Natural selection is totally blind **to the future. “**Humans are fundamentally not exceptional **because we came from the same evolutionary source as every other species. It is natural selection of selfish genes that has given us our bodies and brains “Natural selection is a bewilderingly simple idea. And yet what it explains is the whole of life, the diversity of life, the apparent design of life.”
(Richard Dawkins quoted in *Biology *by Neil A. Campbell, Jane B. Reese. & Lawrence G. Mitchell (5th ed., Addison Wesley Longman, 1999), pgs. 412-413.)

“Of course, no species has 'chosen’ a strategy. Rather, its ancestors ‘little by little, generation after generation’ merely wandered into a successful way of life through the action of random evolutionary forces. Once pointed in a certain direction, a line of evolution survives only if the cosmic dice continues to roll in its favor. “[J]ust by chance, a wonderful diversity of life has developed during the billions of years in which organisms have been evolving on earth.
(Biology by Burton S. Guttman (1st ed., McGraw Hill, 1999), pgs. 36-37.)

“It is difficult to avoid the speculation that Darwin, as has been the case with others, found the implications of his theory difficult to confront. “The real difficulty in accepting Darwins theory has always been that it seems to diminish our significance. Earlier, astronomy had made it clear that the earth is not the center of the solar universe, or even of our own solar system. Now the new biology asked us to accept the proposition that, like all other organisms, we too are the products of a random process that, as far as science can show, we are not created for any special purpose or as part of any universal design.”
(Invitation to Biology, by Helena Curtis & N. Sue Barnes(3rd ed., Worth, 1981), pgs. 474-475.)

Peace,
Ed

 

[Matthias123]

The worst is this is not part of the modern evolutionary synthesis – this is ideology that is piggy backing on it.