cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Dawkins last night - the end of his God does not exist series.
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
zooloo BR wrote:
I remember reading that ALL of us can be traced back to 4 people via DNA profiling according to the latest genetic science.

That could mean that the "Adam and Eve" version of events may not be as far fetched as the evolutionists sometimes think.

I do believe that there is Evolution - but our own existence right now and our ability to clone etc shows that "creation" is possible.

I believe in God as I have pointed out before - and though I find organised religion flawed I do believe that the "heart" of religions is a spiritual truth and Jesus teaching is probably the best way to live a life - with forgiveness - no judgement and with love.

I have no problem with people who choose to believe in nothing - whenever I hear a great song or go to a great gig which moves me I believe a little more that we are part of creation and a bigger plan.

Jesus was certainly judgemental, he condemned many people for the way they lived.

He was also quite clear some people are assigned to Hell and if that isn't being judgemental I don't know what is. His outburst of violence would undermine a claim to unsullied love.

Why do you believe Jesus' teaching lead to a better way to live than, say, Buddha's?

...oh ...evolution and abiogenesis are quite different things and ought to be discussed separately.
BR I remember reading that ALL of us can be traced back to 4 people via DNA profiling according to the latest genetic science.

That could mean that the "Adam and Eve" version of events may not be as far fetched as the evolutionists sometimes think.

I do believe that there is Evolution - but our own existence right now and our ability to clone etc shows that "creation" is possible.

I believe in God as I have pointed out before - and though I find organised religion flawed I do believe that the "heart" of religions is a spiritual truth and Jesus teaching is probably the best way to live a life - with forgiveness - no judgement and with love.

I have no problem with people who choose to believe in nothing - whenever I hear a great song or go to a great gig which moves me I believe a little more that we are part of creation and a bigger plan.
zooloo Blondini wrote:
I agree with JK- at least the Archbishop can open his mind to accomodate other views. Not all Christians think Adam and Eve as written in the Bible is literal fact. Some- like me- believe it is allegorical. Dawkins blank refusal to accept any other way of thinking is infuriating. But of course he can only base his thinking on facts, not theories, because he's a scientist- that's his job. Which just makes me think he's wasting his time debating with religious types.
Not everything in life can be proved, not everything is cold hard fact. Faith is more than just wishful thinking. More than just our genes.

At the risk of appearing pedantic there are some important subtleties here.

Proof only exists in mathematics.

Theory is fact, for example gravity is a theory. It's often misused to mean hypothesis

God/gods is/are a hypothesis which is why it has no place in a discussion on, for example, evolution.

It's not a science vs religion thing it is simply a hypothesis cannot be used to refute a theory.
Anthony Blondini wrote:
Dawkins blank refusal to accept any other way of thinking is infuriating.
I bet Dawkins blankly refuses to accept the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too. Disgraceful.
Blondini I agree with JK- at least the Archbishop can open his mind to accomodate other views. Not all Christians think Adam and Eve as written in the Bible is literal fact. Some- like me- believe it is allegorical. Dawkins blank refusal to accept any other way of thinking is infuriating. But of course he can only base his thinking on facts, not theories, because he's a scientist- that's his job. Which just makes me think he's wasting his time debating with religious types.
Not everything in life can be proved, not everything is cold hard fact. Faith is more than just wishful thinking. More than just our genes.