Is The Theory of Evolution mandatory for the modern worldview

[ricmat]

However we have established that this opinion of yours does not have any empirical support nor is it based on rational theoretical analysis, but, rather, it is based on your personal incredulity or on gut feel. Similar to the basis for a belief in astrology or homoeopathy or geocentrism or the efficacy of rabbits’ feet.

So, although it is very important to you, do you think, given that it is entirely based on your personal prejudice, that it should be of the slightest relevance to anyone else? Why do you keep repeatedly bringing it up as though it can form part of a rational argument (which it obviously cannot)?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

I brought it up because Barbarian asked me to. Look back a few posts.

When you show me a flow chart, or pert chart with all the dependencies, and a verifiable timeline for each step (mutation) of the process from simple life to complex life over 4.5 billion years, I’ll take a look at it.

Otherwise, I’ll repeat what I said to Barbarian: No, I don’t want to do this argument all over again.

Have a nice day!

 

[drpmjhess]

Like I said, more harm has been done to the human race by intellectuals than by humble, faithful folk.

Interesting. Have you any evidence to support this extraordinary claim? At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law, I would say that the humble, anti-intellectual wallpaper-hanger Hitler did more harm for the human race than any intellectual with whom I’m acquainted.

 

[ricmat]

Are you an authority on the entrance fees for heaven? But what has that to do with education?

It seems to lead in many cases to an overabundance of Pride. That’s what keeps you out of heaven.

 

[drpmjhess]

Are you an authority on the entrance fees for heaven? But what has that to do with education?Are you suggesting that we should keep people ignorant, uninformed and stupid for the sake of their souls?Alec
evolutionpages.com

Alec, that’s the basic argument I’ve heard from some – “Be a fool for Christ.”

 

[The_Barbarian]

Like I said, more harm has been done to the human race by intellectuals than by humble, faithful folk.

People who professed to be “humble, faithful folk” burned witches in Massachusetts, and lynched black people in Alabama, for nothing more than wanting to be treated like a human being.

They slaughtered countless numbers of Jews and heretics over the ages. Cromwell, Torquemada, Osama bin Laden… all the same. They considered themselves to be “humble, faithful folk.”

Religious fanaticism by people who claim to be “humble, faithful” folk represents a grevious danger to the United States and the rest of the world.

Any ideology will do, when one is inclined to evil. Religion is as good as anything else.

We can take comfort that atheistic Marxists and religiously-superstitious Nazis killed greater numbers than theists have. But it’s cold comfort.

 

[drpmjhess]

It seems to lead in many cases to an overabundance of Pride. That’s what keeps you out of heaven.

If it’s that easy to be excluded from heaven, two-thirds of Americans – especially in the flyover states – will be going to hell for their gluttony-driven obesity. Whew!

 

[hecd2]

Like I said, more harm has been done to the human race by intellectuals than by humble, faithful folk.

Intellect is what distinguishes humans from other animals more clearly than any other attribute, and what you say is equivalent to claiming that people should celebrate ignorance and credulity and hold their birthright cheap, an appalling view of humanity, and one that I utterly abhor.

Is this vision of Edwin Markham’s what you admire?:

• Bowed by the weight of centuries he leans
  Upon his hoe and gazes on the ground,
  The emptiness of ages in his face,
  And on his back the burden of the world.
  Who made him dead to rapture and despair,
  A thing that grieves not, and that never hopes,
  Stolid and stunned, a brother to the ox?
  Who loosened and let down this brutal jaw?
  Whose was the hand that slanted back this brow?
  Whose breath blew out the light within this brain?

Is this the Thing the Lord God made and gave
To have dominion over sea and land;
To trace the stars and search the heavens for power;
To feel the passion of eternity?
Is this the dream He dreamed who shaped the suns
And marked their ways upon the ancient deep?..*

Alec

 

[reggieM]

Alec, that’s the basic argument I’ve heard from some – “Be a fool for Christ.”

“We are fools on Christ’s account, but you are wise in Christ; we are weak, but you are strong; you are held in honor, but we in disrepute.”

"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in the eyes of God, for it is written: “He catches the wise in their own ruses,”
and again: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.”

“The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.” Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish? For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith.
For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom,
but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.”

 

[reggieM]

Intellect is what distinguishes humans from other animals more clearly than any other attribute, and what you say is equivalent to claiming that people should celebrate ignorance and credulity and hold their birthright cheap, an appalling view of humanity, and one that I utterly abhor.

I’d like to see how this view is reconciled with atheism and evolution. To condemn the holding of one’s birthright as being cheap suggests that one’s “birthright” (I’m not sure how that term has meaning in an evolutionary view) has some kind of ultimate value and that human beings should appreciate this. There is also the notion that since human beings are distinguished from animals more by intelligence than any other feature, then it is “appalling” not to appreciate intelligence.

What is the purpose of this intelligence in evolutionary terms? What value does it have? It distinguishes man from animals, but so does size and brute strength (for example, comparing a man with an elephant).

The only “ultimate” meaning in the nihilistic-evolutionary view is that humanity might be able to survive as a species. But this is not something necessary or even “good”. Evolution (as it is taught) is not directed to a goal which will ultimately favor one species against all the rest. If cockroaches prove to be more adaptive to earth than humans are, then they will survive and humans will not. Do you find this concept “appalling”? If not, then human intelligence is not something that anyone should take any pains to preserve, even as a “birthright”.

I would think also that in evolutionary-atheistic terms, one’s birthright is better replaced by some kind of beneficial mutation that enables the creature to better survive. Intelligence, in those terms, is the function by which the human species is able to survive better than other species. It has no ultimate value and is expendible if it does not contribute to survival and propagation of the species.

That’s the evolutionary view and I find that appalling, myself.

The fact that you point to the value of one’s birthright suggests that you’re missing the most obvious consequence of atheistic-nihilism.

 

[hecd2]

It seems to lead in many cases to an overabundance of Pride. That’s what keeps you out of heaven.

Again, you think you are the gatekeeper to heaven and can discern who will and who will not be saved. If that is not pride, I don’t know what is.

Your prescription for the salvation of souls is to have people avoid the temptation of pride by keeping them ignorant, subservient and afraid of independent questioning (never mind that you yourself are well educated and expect to get to heaven, in spite of your education and intellect).

Well I think that education and knowledge liberate us, and make us more human, that it is the work of scientific and technological and artistic intellectuals who give meaning to life; and I utterly abhor and am contemptuous of any idea that it is somehow better to be ignorant or benighted or foolish, than to be educated and enlightened.

The Church seems to agree with me, given the number of excellent schools and universities that it sponsors.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[hecd2]

I’d like to see how this view is reconciled with atheism and evolution. To condemn the holding of one’s birthright as being cheap suggests that one’s “birthright” (I’m not sure how that term has meaning in an evolutionary view) has some kind of ultimate value and that human beings should appreciate this. There is also the notion that since human beings are distinguished from animals more by intelligence than any other feature, then it is “appalling” not to appreciate intelligence.

What is the purpose of this intelligence in evolutionary terms? What value does it have? It distinguishes man from animals, but so does size and brute strength (for example, comparing a man with an elephant).

The only “ultimate” meaning in the nihilistic-evolutionary view is that humanity might be able to survive as a species. But this is not something necessary or even “good”. Evolution (as it is taught) is not directed to a goal which will ultimately favor one species against all the rest. If cockroaches prove to be more adaptive to earth than humans are, then they will survive and humans will not. Do you find this concept “appalling”? If not, then human intelligence is not something that anyone should take any pains to preserve, even as a “birthright”.

I would think also that in evolutionary-atheistic terms, one’s birthright is better replaced by some kind of beneficial mutation that enables the creature to better survive. Intelligence, in those terms, is the function by which the human species is able to survive better than other species. It has no ultimate value and is expendible if it does not contribute to survival and propagation of the species.

That’s the evolutionary view and I find that appalling, myself.

The fact that you point to the value of one’s birthright suggests that you’re missing the most obvious consequence of atheistic-nihilism.

Do you not think that human intelligence has and has had a huge influence on the survival, spread and growth of humans? Of course human intelligence has value in evolutionary terms.

Do you not think that people’s lives are made richer, happier and more worthwhile by the products of intellect? Of course human intelligence has a value beyond evolutionary survival and propagation benefits for humans.

Your thinking is terribly muddled. It is perfectly possible for the origins of a human attribute to be explained by its survival benefits (and that goes from everything from colour vision and an appreciation of the imaginable to co-operation and altruism) and yet for it to have an enduring value as long as humans are human.

And yes, if a moral sense and human intelligence somehow became an evolutionary handicap in a future world humans would become endangered or extinct, and beetles might survive. That’s the way it is. What’s appalling about the truth?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

 

[edwest2]

People who professed to be “humble, faithful folk” burned witches in Massachusetts, and lynched black people in Alabama, for nothing more than wanting to be treated like a human being.

They slaughtered countless numbers of Jews and heretics over the ages. Cromwell, Torquemada, Osama bin Laden… all the same. They considered themselves to be “humble, faithful folk.”

Religious fanaticism by people who claim to be “humble, faithful” folk represents a grevious danger to the United States and the rest of the world.

Any ideology will do, when one is inclined to evil. Religion is as good as anything else.

We can take comfort that atheistic Marxists and religiously-superstitious Nazis killed greater numbers than theists have. But it’s cold comfort.

It is the common tactic of those who defend evolution to eventually claim that those who deny it are evil and murderous.

I would like to point out that this fervor to defend a theory is not rational or proportional to its claimed value. It should inspire all Christians to ask themselves what is really being defended here? A neutral scientific theory or an ideology? Cardinal Schoenborn made this same observation.

These endless threads that run the spectrum of “please believe in evolution” to “those who don’t are evil, fanatical murderers,” should tell everyone reading this that the investment made here, and in many other internet forums, is not about a neutral, facts are facts, theory but the promotion of an ideology.

God bless,
Ed

 

[The_Barbarian]

It is the common tactic of those who defend evolution to eventually claim that those who deny it are evil and murderous.

More often, it’s creationists who pretend that racism, murder, etc. were all caused by Darwin. However, it remains true that religious fanatics have been, and are, among the most dangerous and evil of people.

And yes, you should accept the Pope’s statment that common descent is “virtually certain” not because it is good, but because it is true.

 

[edwest2]

Do you not think that human intelligence has and has had a huge influence on the survival, spread and growth of humans? Of course human intelligence has value in evolutionary terms.

Do you not think that people’s lives are made richer, happier and more worthwhile by the products of intellect? Of course human intelligence has a value beyond evolutionary survival and propagation benefits for humans.

Your thinking is terribly muddled. It is perfectly possible for the origins of a human attribute to be explained by its survival benefits (and that goes from everything from colour vision and an appreciation of the imaginable to co-operation and altruism) and yet for it to have an enduring value as long as humans are human.

And yes, if a moral sense and human intelligence somehow became an evolutionary handicap in a future world humans would become endangered or extinct, and beetles might survive. That’s the way it is. What’s appalling about the truth?

Alec
evolutionpages.com

The thinking is crystal clear. Morality is unnecessary in the evolution worldview. Individuality is a delusion. Your selfish genes only want you to reproduce. You are just an ambulatory carrier of genetic material; a bag of chemicals. Your genes programmed you. Such ideas are nihilism in a nutshell. There is no right or wrong since your genes are actually in control.

For Christians, there is a foundational being, true man and true God, Jesus Christ. The living God.

God bless,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

More often, it’s creationists who pretend that racism, murder, etc. were all caused by Darwin. However, it remains true that religious fanatics have been, and are, among the most dangerous and evil of people.

And yes, you should accept the Pope’s statment that common descent is “virtually certain” not because it is good, but because it is true.

In a world filled with millions of things and millions of ideas; this should be my focus? “But it is also true that the theory of evolution is not a complete, scientifically proven theory.” - Pope Benedict

I am convinced that only ideology is being discussed here, not science.

Peace,
Ed

 

[wildleafblower]

Again, you think you are the gatekeeper to heaven and can discern who will and who will not be saved. If that is not pride, I don’t know what is.

Your prescription for the salvation of souls is to have people avoid the temptation of pride by keeping them ignorant, subservient and afraid of independent questioning (never mind that you yourself are well educated and expect to get to heaven, in spite of your education and intellect).

Well I think that education and knowledge liberate us, and make us more human, that it is the work of scientific and technological and artistic intellectuals who give meaning to life; and I utterly abhor and am contemptuous of any idea that it is somehow better to be ignorant or benighted or foolish, than to be educated and enlightened.

The Church seems to agree with me, given the number of excellent schools and universities that it sponsors.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Bravo Alec!:clapping: The Church absolutely agrees with you 100% and of course so do I as do many others. You are a wonderful educator whose critical thinking, writing, and teaching helps make learning more interesting and fun. Thank you. FYI, the artist in me burned her hair again. Drats, if only people knew the risks of painting with Fire! Fire alarm went off. Studio full of smoke. Cat escaped harm. At least I captured the smoke on paper. WHAT a DESIGN! Yeah.

 

[ricmat]

Again, you think you are the gatekeeper to heaven and can discern who will and who will not be saved. If that is not pride, I don’t know what is.

Your prescription for the salvation of souls is to have people avoid the temptation of pride by keeping them ignorant, subservient and afraid of independent questioning (never mind that you yourself are well educated and expect to get to heaven, in spite of your education and intellect).

Well I think that education and knowledge liberate us, and make us more human, that it is the work of scientific and technological and artistic intellectuals who give meaning to life; and I utterly abhor and am contemptuous of any idea that it is somehow better to be ignorant or benighted or foolish, than to be educated and enlightened.

The Church seems to agree with me, given the number of excellent schools and universities that it sponsors.

Alec
evolutionpages.com

Please read my posts more carefully. I do not claim to be the gatekeeper of heaven.

Pride is the worst of the 7 deadly sins. Sins keep you out of heaven. This is standard Catholic teaching.

I mentioned nobody in particular in my post. I do not know who in particular will go to heaven, or not. But I know that those with too much pride, whoever they are, will not end up there.

Some people with education can simultaneously be humble. Some people with education have a very tough time being humble. Humility, incidentally, is the opposite of pride from a theological perspective.

I have stated many times here that I believe that knowledge and particularly scientific knowledge (given my background) is a wonderful thing when properly used, particularly when it can be used to enhance one’s appreciation of God and his Creation.

Just because hecd2 believes it doesn’t make it true. I admit the same for ricmat.

I have respect for the opinions of those who don’t agree with me. Some people can’t seem to do that.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Be advised.

The level of charity is notably dropping and if it does not recover immediately and remain at the highest levels, there will be citations issued and this thread will be closed.

MF

 

[reggieM]

Do you not think that human intelligence has and has had a huge influence on the survival, spread and growth of humans?

Yes, I do not think that is what makes human intelligence of greatest value. Considering that the oldest redwood tree is 2200 years old, then a factor other than human intelligence influences that kind of survival also. In my view, survival of the species is not something that inspires much admiration. But that’s the problem with evolution – everything is reduced to survival as the highest value.

Of course human intelligence has value in evolutionary terms.

Again, you’ve measured the value of human intelligence here as having an “influence on the survival” of humans. Evolution does not teach that the survival of humans is some kind of ultimate goal or value. It’s something accidental. There is no reason to care about whether humans survive as a species. Why, in scientific, evolutionary terms should anyone care if humans survive or not in a hundred years? Each individual human will die, and in atheistic terms – cease to know or care about anything. So what good does it do to worry about the survival of this particular species? Again, in evolutionary terms, there is no sense of “should” when it comes to the future.

Do you not think that people’s lives are made richer, happier and more worthwhile by the products of intellect?

The products of the intellect make people poorer, sadder also.

Your thinking is terribly muddled.

“Terribly muddled” sounds a bit frightening.

It is perfectly possible for the origins of a human attribute to be explained by its survival benefits (and that goes from everything from colour vision and an appreciation of the imaginable to co-operation and altruism) and yet for it to have an enduring value as long as humans are human.

You’re saying that intelligence has a higher comparative value and you’re appalled that people don’t agree with that.

And yes, if a moral sense and human intelligence somehow became an evolutionary handicap in a future world humans would become endangered or extinct, and beetles might survive. That’s the way it is. What’s appalling about the truth?

In this view, intelligence does not have an ultimate or permanent value. It’s contingent on it’s capability to provide survival value. As you present it, intelligence is a feature of human life that makes people happier (I would like to see you prove that scientifically) somehow – happier than they would be if they were animals, supposedly.

Intelligence, in this view, is not of more value than speed or strength or the ability to breathe underwater. Is it better to be a human than a jellyfish? In evolutinary terms, the answer is no. Both are merely products of the evolutionary process. Jellyfish are better adapted to living in the ocean. They are “better” than humans in those terms. Their lives have no more or less meaning or ultimate value.

From your responses I don’t think you’re fully consistent with (or convinced of) the atheist-materialist view of life. I find that hopeful and a good thing. As I see it, atheism denies the ultimate and permanent value of human intelligence. But when we talk about truly appreciating humanity (as you rightly seemed to do earlier), one should consider the wealth of human experience and knowledge – a very great amount of which is oriented to the spiritual and enduring nature of the human consciousness and soul.

 

[elt1956]

Here you go again, insinuating you are the only one with faith in GOD. Please get off your high horse and stop telling us what we do or don’t believe. I don’t agree with you on many things especially your attitude. I think your letting all this evolution stuff go to your head and you need a little humility. Like I said before, thats not what will help us get to Heaven, but Trust in God will. Only HE has all the answers.

The Bible is written by men but INSPIRED by God, and HE knows exactly how everything works, HE doesn’t need our vast systems of communication. I ask again, “How much water would it take to float an Ark that is at least as big as the Queen Mary?” I don’t think a ‘local’ flood would do it. For me, faith never ends, until I get to Heaven, which is my greatest hope.

Well Meemaw, I really think an enclosed world of religious belief is possible, so why not an enclosed flood?