Is 'faith' really a 'great cop-out'?

[Tiberius]

Erm...I'm just going out on a whim here, but maybe because EVOLUTION IS SCIENCE!

Arguably, but isn't it interesting that when archaeology, astronomy, biology, chemistry, genetics, geology, paleontology, physics and technology are called what they are and Evolution has to be - almost constantly reaffirmed as Science!

Only because it goes against scripture, so not many religious people accept it. Of course, it doesn't matter how many people accept it; it's still science, and it's still true.

[allan175]

So what you are saying is that even though the Bible said that the world was spherical 1000 years before science did, and that the Bible - Jehovah God's word - was far more ahead of science on many scientific issues we are without reason until science does catch up with it because you have just dismissed it because you can't explain what God is?

I think you are getting your dating mixed up, the ancient Greeks already knew the Earth was spherical, it was rediscovered by scientists later (apparently during the Middle Ages it was "decided" to be flat).

[Edwardo Piet]

Erm...I'm just going out on a whim here, but maybe because EVOLUTION IS SCIENCE!

Correct me if I'm wrong anyone, but I think evolution is part of biology. Evolution is what Dan Dennett would call a 'crane', its a crane for biology and perhaps one day there will be a crane for physics.
And of course the supernatural is a 'skyhook' and put simply skyhooks are magic spells and they themselves are much more improbable than the explanations they give.

[Kyuuketsuki]

Yeah it is just words. I just think faith is the wrong word to use because its like a more religious version of "trust" and probably even more religious than "believe" at least in my opinion.

Fair enough

Like I said belief is not a matter of policy.

Indeed though the theists seem to think we make a choice to be what we are!

Kyu

[Edwardo Piet]

Yup, its as ridiculous as saying that I "Chose" to be male.

[Kyuuketsuki]

No one can claim they know how we got here. Not evolutionist nor creationist. No one was there and no one can prove it either way. There are only two versions that I am aware of other than creation. Only two scientific possibilities. Both from the movie Expelled. Before you criticise those by simply dismissing them, tell me how we got here.

Or better still ...

Science says that either aliens put us here or life started by riding on the backs of crystals. Educate me.

... why not accept that science DOES NOT claim to know the answer but works on the assumption that there is an answer and that one day we may know it?

When I asked the science minded atheists here where the Bible and science disagree I was given simply "the origin of species" as evidence and the minor disagreement of when birds and reptiles appeared.

Yet curiously, when you (as I recall) asked that elsewhere, many of us gave answers considerably more involved like that.

BTW, the movie "Expelled" is reported as being rubbish by all the reliable sources I know ... I haven't heard a good review yet from an unbiased source.

Kyu

[Edwardo Piet]

No one can claim they know how we got here. Not evolutionist nor creationist. No one was there and no one can prove it either way. There are only two versions that I am aware of other than creation. Only two scientific possibilities. Both from the movie Expelled. Before you criticise those by simply dismissing them, tell me how we got here.

Or better still ...

Science says that either aliens put us here or life started by riding on the backs of crystals. Educate me.

... why not accept that science DOES NOT claim to know the answer but works on the assumption that there is an answer and that one day we may know it?

When I asked the science minded atheists here where the Bible and science disagree I was given simply "the origin of species" as evidence and the minor disagreement of when birds and reptiles appeared.

Yet curiously, when you (as I recall) asked that elsewhere, many of us gave answers considerably more involved like that.

BTW, the movie "Expelled" is reported as being rubbish by all the reliable sources I know ... I haven't heard a good review yet from an unbiased source.

Kyu

I agree Kyu, and btw, Daystar, when you say we cannot claim things you are thinking in absolutes, in gospel! You ignore the matter of probability!
Oh and btw to all who's interested about expelled P.Z myers a biologist and atheist blogger - who was in the movie 'Expelled' - was expelled from a talk about this very movie ('Expelled') that he was in! He was expelled from talking about the movie 'Expelled' when he was in the movie 'Expelled'!
How ironic is that.

[Kyuuketsuki]

Science. Why is it that we lump evolution in with science? Evolution is what we are talking about, not science. Why lump all of science in there with evolution. The faithful often think that people who don't subscribe to their position are in some way beneath them.

Er … because the theory of evolution is a scientific theory, science is not evolution but evolution is science.

On the other hand if I am going to compare what the average atheist knows about the Bible they so sharply criticize, they know very little.

In my experience atheists tend to know a lot more about the bible than the average theist and it seems to me that what you really meant to say was that very few atheist agree with you over how to interpret your scriptures,

Leo - So what exactly did god do, and what modus operandi did god use?

Jehovah God created. The name itself means "He causes to become." Science speculates how that might have been done but where is the real issue with the beliefs of either one of us set aside?

Did you actually answer the question?

I like to imagine what would happen if that were possible.

Imagination is fine. Belief is fine. The problem comes when you try to claim either is real.

Well, if we agree on the inability to be able to really know and prove our theories yours makes as much sense as any. Actually more than evolution, as far as I am concerned because Evolution begs the question of what came first. Where I would say the creator they draw a blank. You can't have a big bang with nothing.

Why not? You can have an open question. You see where you’re going wrong is what is called (I think) the illogic of default … in essence you’re saying "because there is no explanation for this, God is the explanation." In essence you’ve decided that since science does not know and your answer must therefore be right … in point of fact it is entirely possible (even likely) that you are wrong and it is entirely permissible for science to not yet know the answer.

You want me to provide evidence that what you think is a fairy tale exists - but I can't use scripture? Perhaps it would be easier for you to provide some evidence for Origin of species. But you can't use science.

IMO you can use scripture BUT you must prove beyond reasonable doubt why we should give those scriptures (all of them) the credibility you so evidently believe they deserve.

Kyu

[Edwardo Piet]

Well put Kyu.

[Tiberius]

If anyone wants a positive review of Expelled, I wrote one on my blog a few weeks back: http://atheistblogger.com/2008/11/02/my-...e-allowed/