(July 22, 2013 at 6:49 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: This is so weird seeing this thread because I have heard atheists argue that Christians all must deny evolution to be consistent with their faith.Some atheists on the forum have insisted that the bible can only be interpreted literally, in kind of a reverse fundamentalism.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 12, 2024, 4:40 am
Thread Rating:
Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution
|
RE: Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution
July 23, 2013 at 9:31 am
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2013 at 9:32 am by The Grand Nudger.)
It -can be- and -is- interpreted any which way one wishes.
However-once you begin to stroll away from a literal interpretation some linchpins of the faith begin to fall by the wayside. Try this....interpret this allegorically or metaphorically, for example. "In the beginning, god created the heavens and earth" Which parts of that should I feel comfortable straying away from literally? Are we entirely sure that we're willing to accept the ramifications of just how far I might stray? Want to go down the rabbit hole with me?
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
RE: Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution
July 23, 2013 at 9:44 am
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2013 at 9:46 am by The Grand Nudger.)
That is en entirely falsifiable (and conveniently, falsified) hypothesis. If your intent was to create something that could not be disproven, you failed - for all of the reasons enumerated upon -the first moment you proposed it- in the jokethread associated.
Though, as an attempt to reconcile science with faith it was admirable- as it -did- stick to the rules of the system. Sadly, that's why it is a falsifiable hypothesis. Nothing that "cannot be disproven" can reconcile the two systems. Fundamental fail.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
RE: Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution
July 23, 2013 at 9:52 am
(This post was last modified: July 23, 2013 at 9:53 am by Anomalocaris.)
(July 21, 2013 at 8:36 am)whateverist Wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-d...76345.html If Christianity can be made both internally consistent as well adaptable to any knowledges and discoveries outside the understanding of those yokels who originally propounded it, then it wouldn't have included in the first place any special claim to having special received truth, nor nailed itself to the ridiculous plank of shady god man who fucked his own mother to give himself birth, nor insulted all mankind by insinuating mankind needed "saving" by such as that. (July 23, 2013 at 9:44 am)Rhythm Wrote: That is en entirely falsifiable (and conveniently, falsified) hypothesis. If your intent was to create something that could not be disproven, you failed - for all of the reasons enumerated upon -the first moment you proposed it- in the jokethread associated.I did not post it in a Joke thread. I first posted it on AF.com and then in the Appologetics potion of CF.com and then 2 or 3 times here. Quote:Though, as an attempt to reconcile science with faith it was admirable- as it -did- stick to the rules of the system. Sadly, that's why it is a falsifiable hypothesis. Nothing that "cannot be disproven" can reconcile the two systems. Fundamental fail. So because the post meets the parameters of the challenge, it is automatically disqualified? Sounds as if your line of reasoning is what is flawed. (July 23, 2013 at 9:31 am)Rhythm Wrote: It -can be- and -is- interpreted any which way one wishes.In one sense you are correct two people can look at the same things and come to different conclusions. That does not mean that both conclusions have equal justification. If you find a term used consistently in various places you can reasonably believe they confer the same symbolic meaning. As it so happens "heaven" generally signifies the Divine Order as it is reflected in the inner human mind and "earth" is typically used to signify the spiritual community that receives it. But I know you, Mr. Rythym, do not care to seriously consider the spiritual significance of the text. You only want to see the surface, then you can justify your self-proclaimed hostility. RE: Christian Faith Requires Accepting Evolution
July 24, 2013 at 2:55 am
(This post was last modified: July 24, 2013 at 2:55 am by fr0d0.)
(July 24, 2013 at 4:13 am)genkaus Wrote:(July 24, 2013 at 2:55 am)fr0d0 Wrote: When Ryth says anyway he wishes it suggests that symbolic interpretations can only be the product of whimsy. So if, as Frodo says one is a moron, then you wouldn't undertake such a delicate task with the seriousness required and the results would be inconsistent and fruitless. There is a difference between discerning an authors intent and imposing one's own meaning onto a text. Then again, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. While the certainty of biblical interpretation lacks the clarity of the physical sciences, it remains a useful area of study for people of faith. As it relates the OP, historically the Scriptures serve as a source of knowledge about God's nature and as guide for practicing the faith. These uses pre-date the modern scientific method. As such, I, like many other Christians consider approaching the Bible as a scientific text about cosmology and biology a flawed approach. Personally, I do not see much value in using the Bible to convince anyone of anything unless they are already inclined to receive the message. My motto is to preach the Gospel and sometimes use words. |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 9 Guest(s)