|
5 registered members (Petra, AndrewAMD, VoroneTZ, 2 invisible),
822
guests, and 5
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: padrino]
#138218
07/02/07 21:02
07/02/07 21:02
|
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010
analysis paralysis
NITRO777
Expert
|
Expert
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,010
analysis paralysis
|
Quote:
show me where jesus himself says that there is no evolution
Jesus
Quote:
Mar 13:19 For those days shall be tribulation, such as there hath not been the like from the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never shall be.
John
Quote:
Rev 10:6 and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created the heaven and the things that are therein, and the earth and the things that are therein, and the sea and the things that are therein, that there shall be delay no longer:
Paul
Quote:
Col 1:16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;
Peter's thoughts on angels, Noah, and Sodom and Gomorrah
Quote:
2Pe 2:4 For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment;
2Pe 2:5 and spared not the ancient world, but preserved Noah with seven others, a preacher of righteousness, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;
2Pe 2:6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, having made them an example unto those that should live ungodly;
Those were the four central figures of the early church, clearly they believed in creation. I honestly feel that the question of whether Jesus and the early fathers believed in evolution is a little ridiculous, but I provided references nevertheless.
These I drug up with a simple keyword search of the king james Bible:"creation"
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: Robotronic]
#138219
07/02/07 22:19
07/02/07 22:19
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
Try to imagine, youīre a prophet and live in 900 BC and all your tribesmen have just escaped from the stone-age, you probably will not discuss with them about the latest divine trends, such as equal rights for chickens, you will start to tell them, that eventually they do not need to murder themselves all the time and such stuff.
An elegant solution is: Thou shall not kill! - because it leaves room for future updates and maybe one day even chickens will be included in the divine covenant.
All the more evidence for the fact that the content of the bible isn't divine in origin at all. It's also pretty evident that the content has evolved and changed over time too, which is somewhat ironic in a way.
Besides, when I'm thinking about it, what's divine for cultures from the past is not what we think of as divine in most cases. For example the Faraos of Egypt, the Emperor of China, Emperor of Japan and also Kings in certain other countries once were believed to be real Gods. I really think that whole concept has simply changed to something more abstract.
The bible seems to have been written using a clever psychological formula which leaves just enough room for discussion for it to be either 'always right because of the vagueness and room for different interpretations' or 'God did it and you can't prove he did not, thus we're still right'.
I'm sure religious people know of the following line; "If God is almighty, then can he make a rock so big and heavy that even he can't lift it anymore?".
Well, it's rather obvious that if God cán do that, that he isn't almighty, since otherwise he would have been able to lift the rock, on the other hand if he can't make it, he's not almighty either.
My point is, the bible is full of these kind of psychological and philosophical traps, but far less obvious than the stone example and off course in favor of God instead of against it.
Quote:
And btw: If I assume, that God is the Spirit of everything, it is only logical to assume, that such a Spirit is big and not easy to discover or understand.
You're making assumptions based upon assumptions, in my book that's not the right way of using logic when it comes to truth. Who knows, maybe God is a little child in terms of physical shape and intelligence? Think of it, there's a lot people assume simply because they have always assumed. (Gods have supernatural powers, Gods are almighty, etc. etc. eventhough there's no proof of such attributes linked to God(s) )
Quote:
I believe, that God was gradually discovered by REAL human beings at a REAL time and space.
What makes you think so? Also, isn't it a bit strange that we can't see, feel or hear God or any results of God's actions if there even are any?
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: PHeMoX]
#138220
07/03/07 10:28
07/03/07 10:28
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
Robotronic
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
|
You made a lot of interesting points, my answers unfortunately canīt be simple and short.  Quote:
All the more evidence for the fact that the content of the bible isn't divine in origin at all.
Why? I just acknowledged something, that every historic and archaeologist will tell you too: that there was an evolution in human cultures. Evolution means: a gradual change.
It is only logical, to assume, that priests and prophets had to take into account the existing moral framework of a REAL human society in a REAL time at least to some extent.
You canīt change everything immediately , like in a fairytale, you can only work for gradual improvements.
A prophet is like a link between the relative worldly world and the absolute divine world.
He has to take into account both, the real situation and the absolute divine messages, that he receives.
Now this doesnīt mean, that he becomes a hypocrite, who compromises on the divine message and tells the people, what they want to hear. The prophets, that are mentioned in the Bible were often not really popular at their time, for the reason, that they told people the inconvenient truth.
Quote:
It's also pretty evident that the content has evolved and changed over time too, which is somewhat ironic in a way.
It is only realistic and logical. The Bible has a lot of different authors, who lived at different times, had different functions.
It is very important to keep in mind the historic context and at least try to see the stories through the eyes of the people who lived at ancient times.
King David for example had very different responsibilities than Jesus. God, at king Davids time was more or less accepted as a special God of Israel, the other tribes had their own Gods or idols.
But the universalist idea, that God is the God of everyone, who believes in him or even the God of all mankind was already mentioned in the story of Abraham.
Quote:
Besides, when I'm thinking about it, what's divine for cultures from the past is not what we think of as divine in most cases. For example the Faraos of Egypt, the Emperor of China, Emperor of Japan and also Kings in certain other countries once were believed to be real Gods. I really think that whole concept has simply changed to something more abstract.
Itīs certainly linked. The concept of an abstract, invisible monotheistic God just does acknowledge, that nothing in this world is perfect, especially politicians sometimes turn out to be dumb and evil, so it doesnīt make sense to worship them.
Quote:
The bible seems to have been written using a clever psychological formula which leaves just enough room for discussion for it to be either 'always right because of the vagueness and room for different interpretations' or 'God did it and you can't prove he did not, thus we're still right'.
I see it as a variety of attempts to understand the most difficult thing, that one can imagine. These attempts are described in the Bible and other religious books.
These attempts still continue.
If you take a simple all-or-nothing or true-false approach like in programming, the living God will always remain a mystery.
But would we reject modern medicine, just because the methods of some doctors in ancient time turned out to be wrong or even dangerous to health?
Quote:
My point is, the bible is full of these kind of psychological and philosophical traps, but far less obvious than the stone example and off course in favor of God instead of against it.
It is an attempt to understand everything, also the tragic stuff, the injustice ...
Of course the basic message is: if youīre a good guy and worship God, everything will be fine, but the Bible is filled with very serious reflections.
Just look at the story of Job for example, there is a "happy end", but it doesnīt sound very credible, more like the sugar, that you give to the bitter medicine.
I agree with Nitro, when he said, that our sense of justice is different than Gods sense of justice.
Usually, simply because we are selfish or tribalists, but God is the God of the "other" too and I think sometimes He has to restore the balance, if human beings get it (once again) terribly wrong.
Quote:
You're making assumptions based upon assumptions, in my book that's not the right way of using logic when it comes to truth.
You need everything, logical thinking - like in philosophy - is important, but just a part of it.
Wisdom, associative thinking and a general awareness, based on experience is more important.
The most basic and important thing is: Love in a spiritual sense.
This is the basic mystic experience: that you feel linked and connected with everything and everyone, that you become aware of the beauty and the infinite value of life ...
And about the "assumptions based upon assumptions" aspect: itīs called "inner logic" 
But concerning pure logic: Evil can appear very logical too.
Martin Heidegger for example, a very smart German philosopher was for some time attracted by the Nazi ideology.
Quote:
Who knows, maybe God is a little child in terms of physical shape and intelligence?
This is, how the mystics and artists might experience Him.
Moments of inspiration, which are so important for artists have nothing to do with logic or consciousness, but they have very much to do with awareness, being open, being open also for something crazy, something new ...
The mystic condition is very similar to this.
I mean, some people imagine a "message of God" still as something, where God appears in a thunderstorm with lots of lightnings, and in the end a stone falls from the sky with the ten commandments.
Such descriptions are there for the worldly minded, and for those, who need special FX in order to be impressed. But in a metaphorical sense, they are often true.
One should keep in mind, that our language was not so abstract in ancient times, the people simply had no words for complicated psychological or spiritual stuff and they also wanted, that normal people could understand them.
Somewhere in the Bible Jesus also says something like this and a famous quote by Picasso comes to my mind:
"When I was a child, I could draw like Raphael, but it took me a lifetime to learn to draw like a child."
Henri Matisse, another painter, put it like this: "Creation begins with vision. The artist has to look at everything as though seeing it for the first time, like a child".
I think, the soul is in many ways, what we start with (spiritually), then we learn to separate and define ourselves, develop an "Ego", cosciousness, attitudes, opinions, theories ...
Mystics and prophets believe, that opinions and most theories and ideologies are more or less reflections of worldly desires or intellectual games and in order to become aware of the absolute, divine truth one needs a mystic experience, which then is like an absolute "point of reference".
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: Robotronic]
#138221
07/03/07 15:53
07/03/07 15:53
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
Why? I just acknowledged something, that every historic and archaeologist will tell you too: that there was an evolution in human cultures. Evolution means: a gradual change.
Off course, but why don't you see that at first people believed in 'nature' Gods, then after that some cultures began to believe in a whole pantheon of Gods (like in Greece or Egypt) and now it's just one God. Who's right? Even if this evolution of culture is normal (and I don't disagree with that btw), all can't be right and you can't distinguish the faulty from the correct either, because there's no reference... Basically these prophets and priest simply wrote down what they thought, not what necessarily was right, that's what you've more or less admitted.
Quote:
It is only logical, to assume, that priests and prophets had to take into account the existing moral framework of a REAL human society in a REAL time at least to some extent.
All the more reason for me to assume they did it only for power, not for giving people the truth. Otherwise they would have said "okey, you're not going to like it, but this is how it is", if indeed it was a 'inconvenient truth', because looking at the bible I think it's not very inconvenient at all actually (heaven, eternal life, prayers, all in all big promises etc.).
Quote:
You canīt change everything immediately , like in a fairytale, you can only work for gradual improvements.
A prophet is like a link between the relative worldly world and the absolute divine world.
Problem is that there's no proof of such a link at all. Prophets claim these things in order to be able to convince people, again for power and influence. It's clever talk to keep the masses' attention.
Quote:
He has to take into account both, the real situation and the absolute divine messages, that he receives.
Sure, if he wants to have any influence at all, he has to, still this doesn't justify any 'messing with the divine messages' and then I'm off course assuming they had any.
Quote:
Now this doesnīt mean, that he becomes a hypocrite, who compromises on the divine message and tells the people, what they want to hear.
I don't get this. Prophets are allowed to convince people of anything they like? Come on, that's downright silly if you claim they're actually telling 'truths' and give us 'divine messages'. *shakes head*
Quote:
The prophets, that are mentioned in the Bible were often not really popular at their time, for the reason, that they told people the inconvenient truth.
This makes sense, but probably not because of 'inconvenient truths', archeology has already shown that the image of overly barbaric people is wrong. Perhaps the people from back then already thought Jesus was a magician and other prophets were frauds too? Churches (and imho one may assume also the earlier prophets) have a long long record of exploiting people's faith for their own benefit.
If you want to control people, best thing to do is nót to tell them everything and keep some knowledge so you can constantly outsmart them or give them more if they do not listen to you anymore ... It's simple psychology,
Quote:
But would we reject modern medicine, just because the methods of some doctors in ancient time turned out to be wrong or even dangerous to health?
Wooah, wait a minute, both are obviously not comparable, because modern medicine really 'works', you can't say that of God...
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: PHeMoX]
#138222
07/04/07 00:05
07/04/07 00:05
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
Robotronic
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
|
Quote:
Wooah, wait a minute, both are obviously not comparable, because modern medicine really 'works', you can't say that of God...
Thatīs a little bit black & white, isnīt it?
Of course many mistakes are made in modern medicine, just ask grandma, she can tell you lots of stories, where she had a specific problem, contacted a doctor, and he made a wrong diagnosis, then she turned to the next doctor who told her, that the first doctor was wrong ...
Most of your arguments about God are based on the assumption, that if the Bible or certain preachers, prophets are not 100 percent infallible, there canīt be God.
But if you apply the same standard to medicine, you would have to reach the conclusion, that Medicine wouldnīt make sense, which would be obvious nonsense.
But, when it comes to religion, you only see the negative examples, while medicine "really works".
The truth about medicine: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work.
The truth about religion: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work.
Itīs not all black & white, especially not, when we deal with complex systems.
The Bible does explicitly acknowledge, that there can be false prophets, that people can believe in a wrong way etc.
Quote:
Problem is that there's no proof of such a link at all.
No there is no proof. It is up to the audience of the prophet, to decide if they want to believe him. The normal thing seems to be, that people believe in the false prophets and crucify or throw stones at the true prophets.
Quote:
Prophets claim these things in order to be able to convince people, again for power and influence. It's clever talk to keep the masses' attention.
Actually the descriptions in the Bible and elsewhere show a very different picture. The prophets usually appear as social outsiders, their message is not one, that the people would want to hear. I could give you countless examples.
People, who want power and influence usually make arrangements with existing powers, tell the people nice things.
Believe it or not, but true prophets were usually not popular.
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: Robotronic]
#138223
07/04/07 02:35
07/04/07 02:35
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
The truth about medicine: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work.
The truth about religion: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work.
When someone lies on the operation table having a life-threatening problem and you prevent the doctors from doing their job and you start praying to your God then that person will die. Simple. If doctors do their job correctly and the person at the operation table had a chance to survive to begin with, then modern medicine turns out to be much much much more effective than praying to God. Really, it's the modern medicine saving lives, not some God and it's not just my opinion, because like I said, simply prevent the doctors from doing their job and that person will die... It's more black and white than you think, because no modern medicine means an extremely decreased chance of survival, depending on the injury or operation needed the person will die in about 99.5% of all cases. Well, I don't suppose you'll claim that some God is responsible for the survival of this 0.5% that might survive not being treated at all ... Like I said before, that's no proof of divine intervention, but more so pure 'chance'.
Quote:
The normal thing seems to be, that people believe in the false prophets and crucify or throw stones at the true prophets.
This is an assumption of course, because perhaps people were right about Jesus in being a false prophet. It's merely the fact that you've more or less decided to determine Jesus as being a true prophet that this *would be true*. Simply put, you're biased. That's okey, but it's not proof for Jesus being a true prophet. (eventhough I have to admit he did say some very clever and true things,... that is, if he really even said those things..)
Quote:
Believe it or not, but true prophets were usually not popular.
They were not popular in the eyes of the rulers at that time, because they simply tried to get a piece of the pie in terms of power.
I think Jesus wasn't a threat because he preached differently, he was a threat because apparently so many people started to rebel against the rulers, he basically caused an uprising and had to pay for it with his life. (In fact I believe the only way how Jesus could function as a powerful key figure in the religion started by him later on would be to a.) declare him 'the Son of God' (there was a vote on this) and b.) they had to invent the whole 'risen from the grave' story and perhaps they also needed the miracle stories too to enforce point a., but then again perhaps these miracles happened, but in reality were magician tricks.)
Quote:
People, who want power and influence usually make arrangements with existing powers, tell the people nice things.
Okey, then what about the countless of promises Jesus made about heaven? What about the things he said about equal rights for the poor, hookers and what more? What about his claim that 'God loves all'? I can give you a pretty long list about things that are pretty nice for certain people. If you want to control the masses, try to get the biggest group behind you. That's usually the poor... again reason for me to suspect that Jesus was a power-greedy guy. You don't do tell people those kind of things "by accident", I just don't buy that, sorry...
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: PHeMoX]
#138224
07/04/07 10:01
07/04/07 10:01
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
Robotronic
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
|
Quote:
When someone lies on the operation table having a life-threatening problem and you prevent the doctors from doing their job and you start praying to your God then that person will die.
Phemox, why do you twist my arguments ???
My argument was simply:
"The truth about medicine: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work."
This is a simple observation of REALITY.
Ask your local doctor, if you donīt believe me here.
And please do not invent arguments, that I didnīt make:
I did not say, that - in case of illness - it is better to pray, instead of visiting a doctor.
Let us please stick to the facts:
We both realise, that there are passages in the Bible, that are unacceptable, that there is the possibility, that someone, who claims to be a prophet isnīt telling the truth ...
For you - at least your arguments seem to imply this - this is reason enough, to question religion as a whole, or even God.
For me it is a simple and logical consequence of the difficult area, that religion deals with. Human beings are not infallible. Therefore it is only natural and logical, that there have been different attempts, opinions, attitudes etc.
And this was the reason, why I brought up the analogy with medicine:
There are also different opinions, attempts, attitudes etc.
But for me this does NOT mean, that I start to loose my basic trust in medicine.
I mean, this is really something, that should not be denied, and if I simply acknowledge reality, for example, that operations sometimes donīt work, that a diagnosis may be wrong, this does NOT mean, that Iīm an opponent of medicine as a whole.
Now, why did I bring up this analogy?
Because most of your arguments - when it comes to religion - are following this logic: if I can find some mistakes, or different points of view, or a gradual development: The whole system must be wrong and God canīt exist.
But this is obviously a false logical conclusion, because in all areas of human research there is development, people are making mistakes, people try to improve, people have different opinions.
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: Robotronic]
#138225
07/04/07 13:38
07/04/07 13:38
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
Phemox, why do you twist my arguments ???
My argument was simply:
"The truth about medicine: sometimes it works, sometimes it doesnīt work."
I didn't twist anything, I just said what it would mean in practice.
Quote:
This is a simple observation of REALITY.
Ask your local doctor, if you donīt believe me here.
And please do not invent arguments, that I didnīt make:
I did not say, that - in case of illness - it is better to pray, instead of visiting a doctor.
I was pointing out the effects in reality. You can't prove that praying to your God helps, where modern medicine does help. I didn't twist you argument at all, I just commented on it.
Quote:
Let us please stick to the facts:
We both realise, that there are passages in the Bible, that are unacceptable, that there is the possibility, that someone, who claims to be a prophet isnīt telling the truth ...
For you - at least your arguments seem to imply this - this is reason enough, to question religion as a whole, or even God.
For me it is a simple and logical consequence of the difficult area, that religion deals with. Human beings are not infallible. Therefore it is only natural and logical, that there have been different attempts, opinions, attitudes etc.
And this was the reason, why I brought up the analogy with medicine:
There are also different opinions, attempts, attitudes etc.
But for me this does NOT mean, that I start to loose my basic trust in medicine.
I understand, but I just wondered where your faith is based upon.
Quote:
I mean, this is really something, that should not be denied, and if I simply acknowledge reality, for example, that operations sometimes donīt work, that a diagnosis may be wrong, this does NOT mean, that Iīm an opponent of medicine as a whole.
Off course, but there's no way you can tell íf a prayer can work, where modern medicine has clear results. If modern medicine fails, it's either a wrong diagnose or other human error, lack of knowledge for a 'perfect' treatment or perhaps like I said the person didn't have a chance despite the technological level of modern medicine (aka operating takes time).
Quote:
Now, why did I bring up this analogy?
Because most of your arguments - when it comes to religion - are following this logic: if I can find some mistakes, or different points of view, or a gradual development: The whole system must be wrong and God canīt exist.
But this is obviously a false logical conclusion, because in all areas of human research there is development, people are making mistakes, people try to improve, people have different opinions.
Okey, then it's back to my previous comment about knowing whether or not the praying was wrong, God said 'no, not this time' or if praying even works at all, in other words if there's no visible effect why would there be a God??
Perhaps you believe in 'instant healings' by mediums or something, but I sure do not, especially those with a show are simply frauds... If modern medicine fails it can be explained why it failed and we mostly learn from our mistakes. That whole process of development and knowledge gathering is indeed something that will go by trial and error at times with casualties as result, but it's 100% different from noticing no effects from prayers ... I don't quite understand why you don't get that point.
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: PHeMoX]
#138226
07/04/07 21:58
07/04/07 21:58
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
Robotronic
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 414
Munich, Germany
|
Quote:
Perhaps you believe in 'instant healings' by mediums or something ...
No.
I was just making an analogy between two different subjects: medicine and religion.
My impression is, that you are confusing me with someone else
I donīt think itīs a good idea to pray, when something is wrong with the body, and so it wasnīt necessary to convince me of this.
It is however funny, that the variety of opinions, errors, mistakes in religion are reasons for you, to say: God canīt exist!
For me the contradictions etc. just tell me something about the difficulty of the subject or the shortcomings of people, who did not have the same knowledge, that we have.
But in medicine you would accept mistakes (and I agree with you here!), because you know, that the system as a whole nevertheless makes sense!
Now for me it is not so different with religion: Despite the mistakes, that people have made throughout history, I am still able to find some very important stuff and confirmation for a theory, that makes sense, but probably only if you understand it as a whole.
So in the end you might need some basic interest in order to start searching.
The more you understand, the more it might make sense.
Quote:
I understand, but I just wondered where your faith is based upon.
This is difficult to explain, mostly, because I do not follow a particular faith-system. Today I could say: Itīs based upon e v e r y t h i n g.
I had a very long mystic experience, which made me curious. I wasnīt religious before this and I only gradually accepted the idea of God.
Initially I even rejected the idea, I was running away from this, did all kind of worldly stuff. It didnīt work.
It was like the sudden revelation of something unknown, something absolute, like an absolute, indestructible point of reference, like a spiritual key.
|
|
|
Re: Kann es Evolution geben?????
[Re: Robotronic]
#138227
07/05/07 15:33
07/05/07 15:33
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
But in medicine you would accept mistakes (and I agree with you here!), because you know, that the system as a whole nevertheless makes sense!
No, that's not what I meant. It's not about the mistakes at all, it's about the noticeable effects of modern medicine, it actually works, where as for example prayers or whatever 'effective' aspect of religion, you just can't say íf it works at all. Why pray or believe when the effect is unknown? It's what totally makes the entire belief in religion irrelevant.
Quote:
The more you understand, the more it might make sense.
'Might' indeed, because well, definitely not when it comes to religion.
The more I know about religions and especially about their origins and the changes throughout history (as far as it's possible to find out about), the less it all makes sense and really the less likely it's content has any real historical value.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
