Richard Dawkins: The state needs to ‘protect’ children from religion…

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I think the problem comes when people think their interpretation of the Bible is right and they start believing whatever they came up with in their heads as fact, even if they might be mistaken. Not that I blame them. Certain parts of the Bible are a bit nebulous, and I can see how some people might interpret it in different ways. But everyone should stay open and not start imagining that they have the absolute and unchanging truth. Again, how are they NOT compatible when tons of Christians accept it? I'm not just talking Catholics (the pope even agrees it's true), but Francis Collins who is evangelical. Ken Miller is another brilliant scientist who happens to be Catholic and Christian but still teaches evolutionary theory. Clearly it must be compatible, or are you suggesting that they are mendacious?

I don't know anything about Hindu Brahmin teachings, but I'll look into it. Even without knowing anything about Hinduism, I can still confidently comment on something you said about it though. Evolution is NOT a philosophy. Now, upon learning it, some people might come to some profound philosophical conclusions, like for example they might turn atheistic which has happened. But again, it certainly doesn't have to happen. And that is a big stretch too, because just because we know something about how animals adapted to their environment and give the illusion of special creation, does not say ANYTHING about the origin of life itself or abiogenesis. Evolution does not/should not kill any belief in God. There are a lot of great perspectives about Genesis and what Genesis must mean in light of evolution. No need to remain ignorant when the science is unequivocal. Genesis must have other meanings than what people original thought it had, that's all. Nothing more. Back to what you said about Hinduism though, I'm assuming that the religion has some vague statements or mythologies about how animals and people came to be that might sound a bit similar to what evolutionists say now? I can assure you that most evolutionary biologists are not Hindu's! lol If that religion said anything that might sound something similar to what evolutionists say now, it's surely a coincidence. They didn't have access to dna, they couldn't isolate genes, they couldn't study embryology and knew nothing about vestigial organs or geographic distribution. Again, I'll try to look into it because I'm curious, but I'm dubious to what you're saying about Hinduism. Again, there should be no certain philosophical message that comes along with learning evolution. It's a science, not a philosophy. But I can see how learning it might lead the individual to different philosophies. If you have any information you could link me to the Hindu Brahmin teachings from 1200BC, that would be stellar! I will definitely read it and appreciate it! Thank you!
 
Kisses1990 said:
Sorry, wasn't able to edit my above post, so please allow me to make a succinct caveat to my above post: Also, Richard Dawkins happens to be an amazing writer on the subject of evolution. I'm not going to comment on his atheistic God Delusion book, but if you actually read works like The Selfish Gene or The Ancestors Tale, I can't imagine how someone couldn't not only be impressed by the skillful manner in which he writes (almost poetic), but also be persuaded into accepting evolutionary theory. Those that don't accept it, I'm just curious where you got your PHD in evolutionary biology? You may THINK you understand it, but do you really? A great book to start with would actually be Dawkins' "The Greatest Show On Earth" which is a guide through the evidence and the reason why 99.999% of biologists accept it as fact. He shows his masterful teacher skills by raising questions and letting you come to your own conclusions, not by telling you how to think. A great companion piece is Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution Is True". Those books, among many others, changed my life. And I really hope none of these words come across as invidious. Thank you.
Click to expand...

Jesus is Lord, and evolution doesn't threaten me, but that said, I can't for the life of me figure out why a worm wanted to evolve into a worm. Doesn't say much for evolution.
 
^^this this just demonstrates the prodigious misunderstanding of evolution that I anticipated was the problem. Worms didn't decide they wanted to be worms.... it just doesn't work that way at all. It's a mindless, unguided process that natural selection shapes into the great species we have today that weren't always here, and won't be the same either in the blink of an eye.
 
Kisses1990 said:
Sorry, wasn't able to edit my above post, so please allow me to make a succinct caveat to my above post: Also, Richard Dawkins happens to be an amazing writer on the subject of evolution. I'm not going to comment on his atheistic God Delusion book, but if you actually read works like The Selfish Gene or The Ancestors Tale, I can't imagine how someone couldn't not only be impressed by the skillful manner in which he writes (almost poetic), but also be persuaded into accepting evolutionary theory. Those that don't accept it, I'm just curious where you got your PHD in evolutionary biology? You may THINK you understand it, but do you really? A great book to start with would actually be Dawkins' "The Greatest Show On Earth" which is a guide through the evidence and the reason why 99.999% of biologists accept it as fact. He shows his masterful teacher skills by raising questions and letting you come to your own conclusions, not by telling you how to think. A great companion piece is Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution Is True". Those books, among many others, changed my life. And I really hope none of these words come across as invidious. Thank you.
Click to expand...
Science disproves evolution....it doesn't matter how many believe it, using that as an argument would be a fallacy. The science behind evolution is propped up on assumptions that can not be proven....
 
Science most definitely proves evolution! I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but it's one of the most tested and proven theories that we have. It's pretty amazing, really. I don't know of any flat out "assumptions". There might be some extrapolations, but even then, it's still supported by mountains and mountains of evidence. I'm not sure you know what you're talking about lol. It even has predictive power. It's the basis of modern biology, and many medicines and vaccinations are made through our knowledge of evolution. Really, try to read some legitimate books on it and come back to me. Be very careful of your source, there are a lot of disinformation about it... For the record, I'm not an evolutionist merely because it's got scientific consensus. I've seen and studied the evidence and it is vast. The reason I mentioned consensus was just that I figured if someone doesn't know anything at all about a subject, they probably should embrace the modern consensus...it is a consensus for a reason. Until you have studied it from legit sources, not from Ken Ham or Kent Hovind, you really have nothing to say about it. I mentioned vestigial organs, geographic distribution, embryology, so-called "bad design", fossil record, dating methods putting everything in precisely where we'd predict it anyway, other predictive power like the discover of Tiktaalik. This is not something to fight about. I'm just saying maybe instead of thinking you understand Genesis better than other people, maybe sometimes everyone should look in the mirror and re-evaluate why they believe what they believe. I know that's hard to do...I used to be a young earther as well.
 
Kisses1990 said:
It's a mindless, unguided process
Click to expand...

There's no problem with me. Again, I'm not threatened by any theory that's not mentioned in Scripture. God is not locked in a book or a box, and if evolution is reality, then it is ordained by God.

That said, I'm interested in how some people are so passionate about a mindless, unguided process. Sounds like liberals walking into a voting booth.
 
I never said it wasn't ordained by God. That is probably the case. I'm just passionate about the truth. It really is a mindless, unguided process that is shaped from mutations and pressures in the ecosystem that builds bodies into being most adaptive to it's surroundings. This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism, or any other political ideology.
 
Kisses1990 said:
Science most definitely proves evolution! I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but it's one of the most tested and proven theories that we have. It's pretty amazing, really. I don't know of any flat out "assumptions". There might be some extrapolations, but even then, it's still supported by mountains and mountains of evidence. I'm not sure you know what you're talking about lol. It even has predictive power. It's the basis of modern biology, and many medicines and vaccinations are made through our knowledge of evolution. Really, try to read some legitimate books on it and come back to me. Be very careful of your source, there are a lot of disinformation about it... For the record, I'm not an evolutionist merely because it's got scientific consensus. I've seen and studied the evidence and it is vast. The reason I mentioned consensus was just that I figured if someone doesn't know anything at all about a subject, they probably should embrace the modern consensus...it is a consensus for a reason. Until you have studied it from legit sources, not from Ken Ham or Kent Hovind, you really have nothing to say about it. I mentioned vestigial organs, geographic distribution, embryology, so-called "bad design", fossil record, dating methods putting everything in precisely where we'd predict it anyway, other predictive power like the discover of Tiktaalik. This is not something to fight about. I'm just saying maybe instead of thinking you understand Genesis better than other people, maybe sometimes everyone should look in the mirror and re-evaluate why they believe what they believe. I know that's hard to do...I used to be a young earther as well.
Click to expand...
You are assuming that I didn't study through legitimate sources....I did...I still don't believe it.
I have done research.....alpha according to peer reviewed research, which is a very important and fundamental constant may have been measured to be different millions of years ago....multiple studies have found this...many were peer reviewed. A change in alpha would mean the earth could not exist, elements interact differently, and decay rates were different...
 
^^ Now you bring up decay rates and the 'young earth" hypothesis. This is largely off topic, so I won't go into it. And I'm certainly not a geology expert by any means. But I'm told by trustworthy scientists that the earth is indeed old and there are great explanations for anomalies found that are thought to contradict the old earth theory, which all happen to be specious. The fact of evolution is not dependent on the earth being young or old. We are all mutants, speciation happens, we can have so much evidence for all this. I think it's pretty clear the earth is old, however, but it doesn't really matter. In fact, I believe the earth is turning out to be slightly older than even previously thought. I don't really care one way or another. It's pretty obvious the earth isn't 6000 years old though. It's definitely older than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back