Evolution vs Religion

[beew]

Example?

I sometimes envision this particular brand of Leftist as some sort of Freddy Krueger weapon:

They use Postmodernism to create small cracks into the system,
And once the small plants and weeds get in,
they use all kinds of Right Wing "Isms", like a chainsaw, to destroy the old system.

 

[Rightguide]

Too waffling, didn't read.
Can someone give a concise version?

Is that animus I detect?

 

[about_average]

I sometimes envision this particular brand of Leftist as some sort of Freddy Krueger weapon:

They use Postmodernism to create small cracks into the system,
And once the small plants and weeds get in,
they use all kinds of Right Wing "Isms", like a chainsaw, to destroy the old system.

Ok, so you can't provide any examples.
Color me surprised.

 

[BobaFetaCheese]

This thread is almost bizarrely stupid. Science is racist but religion is not is just about the most fucked up wrong ass thing I've read in...well, forever.
I get putting your religion above all else, I really do. I get not wanting to believe in some aspects of science or wanting to prove it wrong because it doesn't fit what we want things to be.
But damn. Just damn.

 

[BobBalouski]

It's always a gas reading someone ascribe their own mental limitations to any one else.

 

[Pookie]

Not surprised that Eyer has gas.

 

[Captainnumnuts]

Too waffling, didn't read.
Can someone give a concise version?

Religion is baffling due to lack of comprehension. Evolution continues as we've gone full circle explaining it away. "Civilized" society is waking up to see it ain't all that, but damned if they'll admit to their role or contributions - such as it seems to be.

 

[Libsam]

If y'all think this thread is stupid, let me introduce you to the Extreme Postmodernist, the Fallist. They believe that math and science is the racist white man's construct that forms the fabric of reality, and that they need to Tear It Down and start over from a non-white and non-racist perspective.

This brutal meme was made after some Fallist in South Africa said that a Witch Doctor who sends lightening to strike down enemies is just as valid as Racist Newton's Law of Gravity.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/182/761/fde.jpg

Here's what's really going on: Non-straight white men are being played by factions who are taking advantage of their jealousy and hatred of the straight white man and using it destroy Western Civilization.

 

[Libsam]

Speaking of South Africa, their water and sewer systems are crumbling.
The new SA president has started seizing the Boers farm land because the failure of SA is of course the white mans fault, ending apartheid wasn't enough apparently.

Also, there is a Media Blackout going on there.

Australia is working on taking refugees. There is talk of white genocide.

 

[beew]

This thread is almost bizarrely stupid. Science is racist but religion is not is just about the most fucked up wrong ass thing I've read in...well, forever.
I get putting your religion above all else, I really do. I get not wanting to believe in some aspects of science or wanting to prove it wrong because it doesn't fit what we want things to be.
But damn. Just damn.

That's what happens when you assume that your adversaries are imbecils.
You make assumptions so -ironically so- YOU get stuck at that concrete low level of discussion.

Of course I, Libsam, Ish or eyer believe that People are the ones who inject racism into disciplines. If you stopped obsessing about superficial words and tried to think about the meaning behind our words, you would have been able to move from the concrete to the abstract level of the debate.

And do I fucking care in the end 'which one of the two is more racist"?
Nope. It was simply an interesting topic.
Something different to do on this board, than the eternal masturbation over what Trump and Hillary tweeted or had for dinner.

 

[coachdb18]

I guess it never occurred to anyone that the book of Genesis is as good an overall description of evolution as I've seen, especially considering it was written with only the knowledge available 2000 plus years ago...

 

[Chancellor_Palpatine]

I guess it never occurred to anyone that the book of Genesis is as good an overall description of evolution as I've seen, especially considering it was written with only the knowledge available 2000 plus years ago...

GodDAMN! There's no way you're a legitimate Mensa member. Or if you are, that just goes to show the worthlessness of IQ testing.

Either way, please don't ever stop posting here.

 

[phrodeau]

GodDAMN! There's no way you're a legitimate Mensa member. Or if you are, that just goes to show the worthlessness of IQ testing.

Either way, please don't ever stop posting here.

He is right. It never occurred to me that Genesis was the best description he has seen.

I now assume that he was home-schooled.

 

[KUJACK]

First explain

Evolution is obvious, using genetics.
However, explain how it all started.
How did something come form nothing.

If opposing forces caused the begininning of something, what caused the opposing forces?
This question can't be answered.

 

[coachdb18]

Lesser minds will take the 'Earth is flat' approach, those who actually view science as our attempts to understand, it's quite impressive that the ancients knew of, and to affair extent understood, evolution.

In the Book of Genesis, God first and most famously creates heaven and earth, but 'without form', and commands: 'Let there be light.' A perfect description of the Big Bang, that founding moment of our universe some 13 billion years ago, an unimaginable explosion of pure energy and matter 'without form' out of nothing - the primordial Biblical 'void'.
He then creates the dry land out of the waters, but it is the water that comes first. As Parker points out, scientists today understand very similarly that water is indeed crucial for life.
When 'astrobiologists' look into space for signs of life on other planets, the first thing they look for is the possible presence of water.
On the third day, we are told: 'God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so."'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...on-life-3-000-years-Darwin.html#ixzz58izMDLUT

 

[Chancellor_Palpatine]

In the Book of Genesis, God first and most famously creates heaven and earth, but 'without form', and commands: 'Let there be light.' A perfect description of the Big Bang, that founding moment of our universe some 13 billion years ago, an unimaginable explosion of pure energy and matter 'without form' out of nothing - the primordial Biblical 'void'.

There's so much wrong with this, it really belongs on the Onion. Oh wait, it was posted on Daily Mail...

 

[bellisarius]

Interesting how 'racism' has some how crept into a thread about evolution v. religion.

When I speak of evolution I'm not speaking of strictly the biological construct that most immediately gravitate towards. More precisely I'm speaking of societal evolution which history teaches us ebbs and flows. Periods of enlightenment punctuated by societal collapse and subsequent dark ages.

Religion is part of this ebb and flow. Invariably you will find some religious belief/practice behind the rise of any great civilization, and conversely you will find that very religion a part and parcel of it's fall. Further you find that some religious beliefs are the very antithesis of cultural advancement. Primarily because until recently religion and the state were inextricably intertwined. The religion was as much a tool of the state as the state was a tool of religion.

That should not be confused as some endorsement of a Godless state. History hasn't been very kind there either. Without some common code of ethics society rapidly falls apart. Any serious look at the worlds great religions (and some of the not so great) will indicate that they all share a large common set of ethics. Whether you believe that these were handed down by some God or not is immaterial. The point is that when you analyze them you find that they all make sense in terms of maintaining an orderly society. You violate these social constructs at your own risk virtually anywhere in the world.

 

[beew]

Religion is part of this ebb and flow. Invariably you will find some religious belief/practice behind the rise of any great civilization, and conversely you will find that very religion a part and parcel of it's fall. Further you find that some religious beliefs are the very antithesis of cultural advancement. Primarily because until recently religion and the state were inextricably intertwined. The religion was as much a tool of the state as the state was a tool of religion..

In which particular cases were practices or Institutions of Faith responsible for the downfall of their originating nation?

I'm not referring to those nations which had other Religions imposed on them (ie by certain Christians or the Ottoman Empire), as part of an Imperialistic or Colonizing attempt.

 

[beew]

With the risk of exposing myself to even more ridicule vis a vis my attempts at pop philosophy:

I see the eb and flow of Religions as being related to two phenomena that occurred at different points in time in different cultures: religious dogmatism and secularization.

In it's original /best form, Religion addressed both the personal (combating man's fall into meaningless self-focus or despair through transcendence) and the public(combating man's selfishness through rules of ethical cohabitation).

When societies become over the top conservative, we see an overemphasis and distortion of the public aspect of religion(over regulating society, devaluing individuals who don't follow rules).
When societies become over the top liberal, we see the descent into selfish individualism and meaningless consumeristic existence.

 

[beew]

I might be mistaken, so I'm open to corrections.
But I came to believe that both radical atheism and 'Islamophobia' manifest differently in 'Western' Christians from Europe and America, versus Eastern or Greek Orthodox Christians from Europe.


Re atheism:

In typical Western Christian countries, Religion was often authoritarian and used as a means of imperialistic or colonial expansion, or of state indoctrination.
Therefore, one is more likely to find discontent, Sam Harris types of fundamentalistic atheists in Western countries.

In countries previously under Ottoman and/or Communist tutelage, Religion was often a means of resistance to oppression through transcendence and solidarity. And having been oppressed itself in the past, the institution hasn't become as authoritarian.
Because of that, even the most die-hard atheists from those countries don't harbor the anger or resentment typical of militant atheists. While acknowledging the faults of the Religious Institution, they respect the Faith.



Re attitudes towards Islam:

Well, most Westerners are sensible and in the middle. But one also sees two extreme, unrealistic positions: Some view Islam as an oppressed religion, the religion of freedom. And one also finds Islamophobes driven by bigotry.

Whereas:
While countries who've historically been under Ottoman occupation are very tolerant of Their Muslim minorities,
One can certainly understand their fear (maybe irrational, maybe not) of having those numbers increased via Brussels. It's not true Islamophobia, it's the memory of having had their identity and authentic development stifled by centuries of occupation.
Nevermind those countries that broke apart due to ethnic clashes engineered by those with vested geopolitical interests.

 

[Antryg_Windrose]

Science tests itself and all around it. Religion fucks itself and all around it. Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings. Pick a god, any god. It's probably a fucking infantile retard, like its followers. You are what you eat. How much shit can you swallow?

 

[bellisarius]

Formal religion is not unlike government, it's all about control. That is not to say that both don't have a place, if they didn't they wouldn't exist.

But religion, formal religion, is not spirituality. One can be spiritual, and ethical, without practicing a formal religion. But studying the various religions can help anyone find their own path.

Science (nor atheists) can explain the 'Big Bang.' How in an instant of time the entire universe as we know it came to be. How can that be differentiated from an act of creation? As a matter of fact the sequence of events as laid out in Genesis is precisely the order in which evolution had to have occurred. We can argue the time line forever, but the sequence is correct.

The point being that science has NOT proven the non-existence of a "Creator." And it never will, negatives can't be proven. This rule goes right down to logic and computer science. A decision based on a negative return is a great big hole to be exploited.

Science has as much to explain that it can't as formal religions have to answer for.

But back to the thesis, we can no more live without government of some sort than we can some formalized set of ethics. The Soviets, and others, have tried to impose ethics by law without any particular success. Religions have tried the same without any better outcome. Both, in their own way, are failures.

So what is the benign middle ground? The Chinese may have hit upon it long ago, albeit they've lost it since. And that is Confucianism. A code of ethics independent of religion. (Confucianism is not a religion even though it's looked at as one.) I am not preaching Confucianism, merely holding it out as a template.

Obviously the flaw in Confucianism is that certain religious beliefs are in conflict with the ethic lesson. ie. making human sacrifices to some God. Other examples abound. And that's where the government comes in. To punish (law prevents NOTHING, it merely punishes the transgressors) human sacrifices and other crimes we can agree on.

 

[phrodeau]

(edited)

As a matter of fact the sequence of events as laid out in Genesis is precisely the order in which evolution had to have occurred. We can argue the time line forever, but the sequence is correct.

Bullshit, totally. There was no water, plants or trees before the sun formed. There were no birds before land animals developed. It is a complete fiction.

 

[Adder4321]

Bullshit, totally. There was no water, plants or trees before the sun formed. There were no birds before land animals developed. It is a complete fiction.

Arguably most of what we know of history is likely fiction and lies.

 

[coachdb18]

In which particular cases were practices or Institutions of Faith responsible for the downfall of their originating nation?

I'm not referring to those nations which had other Religions imposed on them (ie by certain Christians or the Ottoman Empire), as part of an Imperialistic or Colonizing attempt.

Perhaps the best example would be Imperial Japan putting their Bushido code into practice and initiating a suicidal war to the death, requiring nuclear weapons to bring it to heal. German Nazism could be considered a religion in many of its manifestations as well.