Can Evolution and Christianity really work as one ideology?

no

I think it’s possible – plenty of Christians can still believe that their God created this world but that evolution is how the world turns…because, after all, evolution is not about the beginning of the world.

Evolution is not an ideology. It has no agenda. It’s simply a term used to describe biological changes over a period of time.

I think most Christians can find that it doesn’t really challenge a nuanced interpretation of the Bible. And if your understanding of the Bible leaves no room for nuance, you’re probably beyond hope anyway and we should all hope you’re not reproducing.

@Mamradpivo
Your saying that in christianity you may interpret the bible as you wish and when it says things like woman came from the rib of a man, you can just interpret that to mean something metaphorical?

and from that sense who is to say if jesus ever even existed or if that was just metaphorical.

@jangles: Id say most modern Christians take much of the old testament as metaphor. And while there’s a good chance that “Jesus” the man existed, his divinity is what Christians believe in.

Anyway, can’t we just agree that Adam and Eve were apes* and just move on?

yes I know we didn’t evolve from apes per se, I’m just simplifying.

No.

@cprevite
I would be very surprised if there could be a majority of Christians, that thought that Adam and Eve were apes.

@jangles: Pretty much. The beauty of religion is that it doesn’t need to be fact-based. So one can absolutely interpret the Bible as they like. Aren’t most myths metaphors/parables for situations that arise in life?

@Mamradpivo
one can interpret anything as they like, it still doesnt make it true.
and are you saying the beauty of religion is that it can still be seen as true but lack any real evidence?

Yep.

That’s what separates religion from science. Science had rules and is based on empiricism. Scientific observation has to be replicable by others attempting the same observation. Religion just needs to be somewhat internally consistent.

The Pope seems to think so.

I am an agnostic, but well schooled in the theology of Christianity. All one needs to do to reconcile Evolution with the Bible is quit insisting that the creation myth is a literal description of what happened in a span of six ‘days’ as in rotations of the earth.

Amazingly, the same geniuses who insist that Genesis MUST be read literally also insist that Daniel’s prophecies of the advent of the Messiah MUST be recognized as not literal, because if Days, Weeks and Months mean the same thing in the Book of Daniel as these bright boys insist they do in Genesis, then Christ was born hundreds of years too late to fulfill Daniel’s prophecy.

@Mamradpivo
well i guess you can believe that truth is more of a personal opinion than an universal
constant.

@ETpro
but how is one to go about what to take literally in the bible and what not to?

@jangles Like most great works of literature, that is open to debate. But did Christ teach his parables because he wanted us to know that once upon a time there was a man who had a prodigal son. Are we supposed to accpet that as the literal story of one particular man, and think it has nothing whatsoever to do with us today? I certainly do not think so.

Truly studying a religion is not a matter of memorizing a few rote rules. It is a matter of contemplating what is to be learned from it, of meditating on it, and of making it yours.

@ETpro
but christs story is set up as a parable and taught that way
so no one thinks of it as a literal story
where as the entire old testament used to be taken quite literally

As I have been at great pains to say for many years, there is no essential conflict between Christianity and science, including evolution. This is a problem only for die-hard fundamentalists who think that the book of Genesis should be taken literally.

@ETpro Thank you for making the point that I was wanting to make, but couldn’t formulate in words.

@jangles So when did the Book of Daniel fast forward to the New Testament. Why shouldn’t it too be taken literally? The simple answer is that if it is taken literally, then Christianity must be a false religion and Jesus Christ must be a false Messiah. For 2,000 years Christians have been deciding what parts of the Bible to see as literal and what to interpret as allegory or coded message.
@Mamradpivo You’re most welcome.

I must have gone to a different Sunday School from yours, @jangles. According to my pastor, Christians believe that Christ died for our sins: a summary of orthodox Christian belief is to be found in the Apostles’ Creed. What has evolution got to do with that?

@CaptainHarley
but suspose science could proove that god didnt exist (hypothtical of course you can not dis proove the existance of anything)
wouldnt this be an essential conflict between sceince and christianity?
would religion then say
“well god is just a metaphor for everything that exists ”

the point i mean is that, science is prooving these religious ideas and absoluts wrong
and when they do religion just says
“well we have changed our minds, or its a metaphor”

That’s right, the Pope does think so.
And so does C.S. Lewis.
A prominent spokesman today is Francis Collins (head of the human genome project in 2000)
Pick up his book, The Language of God

@jangles I do not think you need fear science proving God doesn’t exist. You might hope for the opposite, though I doubt that will happen either. Science is an excellent tool to prove what is. It is an abysmally poor tool when used to prove what isn’t, or could not possibly be.

@ETpro
i dont think any of it should be taken literally
even in the new testiment the set up for the birth of christ is historically inaccurate
it says that Julius Caesar called for the men of Isreal to return their “hometowns” or “tribes”
for tax purposes and since Joseph is a descendent of David he must return to Bethlehem
(forgive me i cannot recall the exact wording for the reasoning but thats not whats important)
However, tax reccords are usually quite historically accruate, so in looking into it you will discover that Juluis Ceasar gave no such order, it was the governer of Syria and he gave the order 4 years after christ was already dead.

But Christ must be born in Bethlehem to fulfill the old testament prophecy
and so clearly, there was a great effort to make sure to provide reason for him to be born there instead of Nazareth, even if that reason is not true.

@jangles Yes, I know. I wasn’t going to get into that, as it is not the topic of the question and I am not here to disabuse anyone of their faith if it works for them. I just wanted to answer the question at hand.

@jangles – “In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world.” —> Caesar Augustus and Julius Caesar are different.

Anyway, I’ve heard it said that “religion explains WHY, and science explains HOW.” I’m not sure I buy that personally, but, like others have said, taking religious stories as metaphor helps a lot.

@ETpro
it does have to do with the question at hand, because science has dis-prooves things that religion claims (like what is said above and evolution)
and yet religion answers to nothing
but it seems they just brush it off and make it seem like its something totally different

and why? i honestly do not know
but in speculating i think that people just need to believe
even if they are clearly shown that its inconsistent and doesn’t really make sense
they go on believing anyway, and its not that they believe that bothers me
but that they put others down that dont believe
and have reason not to believe
far greater (in my opinion) than there is reason to believe
and they act as though, the people who are trying to be objective and open to the truth
are the ones that are ignorant.

I love a nice poem.

@laureth
your correct, it is Ceasar Augustus that the bible refers to, and in the bible it does refer to the entire Roman world. (i mixed up the actual event with the biblical one and i mixed up Julius Ceasar with Ceasar Agustus)
however, historically this never happened
it was the governor of Syria, his name was Quirinius and it was a local census
also it was 6 years after christ died not 4 (sorry for the many mistakes i should have had the information on hand, then trying to phrase it from memory)

@jangles It would be history, not science that in this case disputes the Advent story. But while the historical record raises doubt, I would say from a scientific point of view it falls far short of disproving the Biblical account. It is entirely possible that Augustus did, for some strange reason, order everyone to return to their ancestral home for a census and tax; but that the record of that event simply wasn’t recorded or was lost in history.

@ETpro
Indeed possible (even though it wouldn’t make sense to have another local census 38 something years after Augustus)
but more possible is that it was Luke and his desire to fulfill the prophecy of Micah
or whom ever wrote the book of luke

NO! ... It’s a fool’s gameLOL!

I know this isn’t how it’s viewed, but just an idea to throw around (keep in mind, I am agnostic and believe in evolution)…

Maybe God created the universe, and it was his will to sit back and let the creatures evolve on their own?

@stemnyjones That point of view, known as Deism, was the predominant view of our Founding Fathers in the US.

@stemnyjones
Yes well that makes perfect sense
but I’m just remarking on the basic religious contractions that Christianity and evolution have.
I see no contradiction in believing in god and evolution.

@ETpro @Mamradpivo @ @bea2345 @elizabethmae etc:
As a Kinesiologist, I undertook a 10 year, formal, groundbreaking study which ultimate discovery supported that the Adam and Eve account of the Holy Bible was quite literal in accuracy of its report.
This was concluded as we discovered that homo sapiens [man] and the groundsnake presented as Precise ‘opposites’ in terms of their Functional anatomy and psycho-social behaviour.
The irony was that it has only recently been realized that the famed, JK Rowling, author of the Harry Potter series, had innately hinted at the same about the same time our study commenced in the release of her 2nd book, “Harry Potter and the Chamber of the Secrets”, where in one scene, Harry uses the opposite behaviour of what one might expect to use with a human when dealing with a snake!!
We found that quite ironic – almost eery, in fact, in its coincidental timingLOL!

@denidowi Off your meds, hon?

@denidowi
So your saying that the account of Adam and Eve is true because snakes and humans are so incredibly different?

@pdworkin Well look at me, I could have just invented Deism myself.

You use the word, “different”.
Did you directly intend it that way??
I used the word “opposites”.
That is what our 10 year investigation found. Yes.

@denidowi
Just off the top of the mind there are similarities between snakes and humans
Like mouths, eyes, a brain, so there not really entirely opposite

But i feel like that misses the point
Assuming that I’m entirely wrong and that they are directly opposite in every way
How does the fact that a snake and a human are opposite,
proove that the account of Adam and Eve is a literal account?

Excuse me, but is this really the discourse the OP intended to stimulate? Can this be taken to the new Bellvue Chatroom?

@pdworkin
Forgive me, im rather new to this web site
what is an OP?
and what is the Bellvue Chatroom?

The OP is the Original Post or Poster, Bellevue is a psychiatric hospital in Manhattan, and a chat room is, well, a chatroom.

@pdworkin
Oh, so you were making a joke then.
ha.
I feel rather silly now.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to make you feel silly. I was just making the point that this discussion about snakes and Biblical Proof is both way off topic, and kind of whack.

@denidowi
im affraid it is of little intrest whether or not humans and snakes are oppsite in their Functional anatomy and psycho-social behaviour, and as i stated before wasnt what i was asking.
so i will ask you again

how does humans and snakes being oppisite in their Functional anatomy and psycho-social behaviour proof that the story of adam and eve was a literal one?

I don’t believe so. To be Christian is to accept the creative power of God. You can’t pick and choose which parts of Scripture you will believe, and be consistent.

What the pope thinks is not relevant. He speaks for Catholics, but not all Christians. He certainly doesn’t speak for me.

So, @Harold, eaten any lobster lately? Stoned any adulterers? Sacrificed any lambs?

Your other Q was about the applicability of this discovery to Adam and Eve and, indeed, to evolution:
Holy writ states that it was the serpent who “beguiled” Eve to Oppose God’s instruction to Adam. The serpent used Eve against Man. It was the serpent who caused, through Adam and Eve’s adherence to it, the terrible Fall of man and all thigns that you and I suffer now. In other words, it was the serpent through whom satan [a spirit] was able to entice man to oppose God – because of Adam’s ignorance at the time, therefore, the serpent opposed man.
If you continue to read the account, it then says that God, therefore, cursed the serpent and man as well. Holy writ goes on to describe just 2 or 3 changes that God made to the snake as a result of His severe curse upon it.
What the study shows is that those changes God made were such as to symbolically represent thie very opposition the serpent showed to man at this most crucial event in the history of man’s sojourn upon the earth.

Do you follow now??

Wait. Biologists have an agenda? Wow.

@pdworkin – You do have a very simplistic view, my friend. Just because some actions were historically appropriate, it does not mean that we should do them now! Jesus showed the best reaction to adultery, by offering forgiveness. That is my attitude.

By the way, I don’t like seafood. Feel free to disagree with me- that is your right.

@denidowi
that doesnt proove that it was a literal event
it only suggests that a detail in the story makes sense.

I like the way you use words craftily: ” a detail“LOL!!??
Good oneLOL!
Why don’t you read your Bible and you will see the entire “Centrality” – a better word. Ha Ha!

@denidowi
the snake is only a part of the story
and the snake being evil and cursed is a detail in the story
it is the correct word im affraid

@Harold – I hope you are taking note of this discussion and the Pro-Biblical scientific discovery that has recently been madeLOL!

@denidowi
What Pro-Biblical scientific discovery?

Mt BoJangles, indeed, ye do errLOL!
The battle between Satan [the snake being his physical weapon in this case] and Man and God, on the other hand, is the Most Central point and battle of Mankind.
It is the entire meaning of the Bible.
You are indeed, a Crafty one, Jangles

@denidowi – I know that there have been many pro-biblical scientific discoveries. I also know that I will be derided for saying this (perhaps not by you..), but don’t really care.

Indeed, and interesting discussion!

@denidowi
you are making far to big of a deal of this
it says that in the pre-existance satan was a dragon
and also i believe there is a scriputre about evil spirts possesing pigs
and those in genral have to do with the battle of Mankind in some way or other
but there only small parts of it or details if you will.

but even so your story doesnt proove that the story of Adam and Eve ever happened

Certainly not “proof” in the direct, more explicit sense – that is given, Jangles… but there is not the least doubt that, on the other hand, the discovery does, very much, tend to give a significant possible credence to the Adam and Eve account.
And certainly as I say, the direct battle between God and Satan… and Man and Satan… and between good and evil IS the very testimony and point of all of holy writ itself.

Just to give you even the slightest appreciation for just how CENTRAL this very event in the history of Man was, it states, in Corinthians, “As in Adam all men die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.”
These 2 events, the Fall of Man and its cause, and the Salvation of Man, and its cause, are the only 2 real events in the entire existenceof Man that really countLOL!!!!!!!...
That is, other than the fact that God made Man in the first place.
There is NOTHING that is more important to any one of us… for we are ALL now born into this “dying” state and corrpt condition, but through Christ, we shall ALL be made alive again – Physically resurrected! :)

@denidowi
just because you say things
and just because you read them out of the bible
doesn’t make them true.
I admire your conviction but personally i think its poorly placed

but now that we have clearly come to terms with that fact that you cannot prove that the story of Adam and Eve is a literal one
I believe this discussion has come to an end

Well, Jangles, I think the point has been made… fortunately, others will both agree and disagree on both sides, but nevertheless, the Discovery is there for all to see.
Those who really DO know much about the actual Biblical account will realize the Significance and applicability of this discovery to the validity of the early parts of the Bible: those on the other hand, who have taught themselves to believe only what is currently standing in front of them will not believe and will certainly not be familiar enough with holy writ and the specific words it uses, the placement of its verses and its concepts in its descriptions of things to draw any genuine favourable conclusion.
Like everything else in life, that is the matter of it: one has either done the work and laid down the appropriate foundation and background for oneself to build upon, or one hasn’t. Hence the parable of the Wise man and the foolish man.
Thank you for your time.
May you take a look at it some day. :)

Have you heard of Francis Collins?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins_%28geneticist%29

So. How about that ole Christianity? Can it work with Evolution as one ideology?

@pdworkin – I believe that is precisely what this Discovery is answeringLOL!

NO! They certainly cannot work together. ;)
... for this discovery also Disproves evolution of the speciesLOL!

When one considers that @random nature of evolution, trying to marry up finding 2 creatures as complex as homo sapiens and the snake that present as entire OPPOSITES of one another is just not a viable option!Lol

The only conclusion one can draw from this discovery is that some Absolute Mastermind crafted these ‘animals’ such.

@Harold – I hope you’ve thoroughly enjoyed the discussion ;) Ha Ha!

I still say no.

And I’m still an atheist. Maybe even more so now.

@Denidow It’s all coming back to me now. We had this discussion long ago and in another forum. You haven’t recovered a bit of your sanity since. And I know very well from prior experience that we should just agree to disagree on this issue.

@jangles

We can play “what if” until the cows come home. That still isn’t going to alter my opinion.

Looks like I came in a bit late to this conversation. Christianity and evolution can’t work together as one ideology, they contradict each other very well. Evolution says we have evolved over billions of years.

Christianity says we came from a guy named Adam and a girl named Eve. You can try all you want to mix them together, but it does not work. Two completely different sides of the argument.

@denidowi Those ‘biologists’ and their reign of terror sure do scare me.

No offense sir, but the reviews I’ve found of your book online don’t make me want to purchase it.

Again, you ‘fall’ for seeking the uneducated opinions of others, M.
Of course they don’t know or understand about this: it is too new – #1… and #2: ALL are already well-indoctrinated by the reigning powers that be – who also know nothing of thisLOL!

You need to break free of this shackle that binds your progress due to the uneducated opinions around you, and discover for yourself.

There’s really no argument about this: there are a lot of Christians who believe that evolution is God’s way of creation. So obviously, they can be put together. Whether you think it is a good worldview is a different argument.

Christianity and science evolved totally separately from one another; so no, there is no need and no way that they should be intertwined or used to explain each other, or whatever.

@denidowi I know it’s pointles to debate this with you, but for the sake of others reading this, I don’t feel it is good to let your statements discrediting much of modern science in favor of your work stand.

You dedicated 10 years of your life to use what you had learned about science in an effort to ‘prove’ something you already firmly believed, not to explore what might explain things where you held no ideological views. It is no surprise, therefore, that you came up with the ‘proof’ you so fervently sought, or that your proof would fall to tatters if ever subjected to peer review.

You speak of “opposites” as something that only you can define. If you say it is opposite, it is because you said so. No matter how different, other things aren’t opposite because you say they aren’t.

When we debated this in the past, I gave you numerous instances of life forms with kinesiology more “opposite” than snakes and man, but each one you dismissed with arm waving, not science. I see only one area where you are firmly in command of what an opposite is, and that is your work versus the scientific method.

@Janka
Obviously anyone could put anything together and believe it.
But the question is does it make sense as one wholesome ideology?

@denidowi

Two quick points, then I’ll leave you alone. My wife and most of our friends are evolutionary biologists or ecologists. I’m not relying on totally random people to ‘indoctrinate’ me with their replicable scientific observations

Second, if you can’t convince the people who read your book that it’s not full of crap, you’ve failed.

@Mamradpivo do you try to convince Teabaggers to support Obamacare, too?

@Mamradpivo – I DO agree with you, very much, in the sense that if I cannot convince others of the reality of these “opposites” between these two living things, then, certainly, you are right – that I have Publicly failed. That is true. and upon the historical altars of science lie the ashes of the countless unrecognized – many of them – even, were geniuses… but for whatever reason, their work and achievements were just not recognized fully, or were quashed in the overwhelming opposition of their day.
I am becoming more and more certain that except for a few individuals this latter will probably be the path that this accomplishment will take.
But even Galileo nearly suffered this fate… sometimes, it is only just the one small thread of something that someone in the right place, etc turns the whole match around!
But history will show that these are the ‘Rarities’, when the current establishment is all against it.
Privately, however, the victory can never be taken from me.
But thank you for your very open comments.

BTW, the work as it currently stands, really needs quite some work on clarification and specification, which would, indeed, make quite some difference to the overal validity and credibility of the work… but these are things I have only learned over the past 3 years – since its publication.
Nevertheless, in essence, certainly most of the Observation work itself, is sound, although I now have quite some more that could be entered… but of course, life is one big ongoing learning process.

@jangles We do not ask that question of most religions, so why would we ask it of a religion that contains evolution?

@Janka
I ask the question of all religions that believe to understand how life came about and then completely disregard that understanding for evolution.
I felt that most people that are on this website were christian and so i specified in that way.

@pdworkin Sometimes I do. I’m not proud, I’m just saying…

Evolution is not an ideology. It’s part of science and accepted by almost all modern Christians capable of critical thinking including myself. Why does accepting evolution deny some of the core basis of religion?

There are atheist fundamentalists who have an opinion about religion, but don’t know the difference between a myth or a parable and a historical event. There are also religious fundamentalists who have an opinion about science, but don’t know the difference between a myth or a parable and a science textbook. Both are an unfortunate phenomenon of human psyche.

Michael Shermer once wrote: “Myths are about the human struggle to deal with the great passages of time and life—birth, death, marriage, the transitions from childhood to adulthood to old age. They meet a need in the psychological or spiritual nature of humans that has absolutely nothing to do with science. To try to turn a myth into a science, or a science into a myth, is an insult to myths, an insult to religion, and an insult to science. In attempting to do this, young-earth creationists have missed the significance, meaning, and sublime nature of myths.”

This says it all. Evolution and Christianity are very compatible.

“Evolution of the Species” is Adult Fairytale – call it “myth”, if you wish.
...and in this 21st Century, the cult has certainly reached beyond the point of being mere “ideology”. It has now become a [brainwashed] ‘derivative’ of all thinking that drives modern society.

In this sense it has gone even beyond ‘religion’.
It has become dangerous!

Fortunately, my Kinesiologically-based, ‘snake discovery’ has disproved it.

It’s crackers to slip a rozzer he dropsy in snide, ain’t it, @denidowi?

Snide ‘n’slip, KeenanLOL! @pdworkin
... oos ‘ad too many now ;)?? OR was that ?? ;)

@mattbrowne
Except that Christianity believes in the Garden of Eden.
It explains the process of how life began in an entirely different way than Evolution does.
But im sure as you seem like a somewhat irritated theologian, you will protest that we dont take the book of Genesis literally any more. But that’s my whole point. We pick and choose which bits of scripture to believe, which bits is a matter of personal decision, just as much, or as little as the atheists decision to follow without an absolute foundation. If one of these ‘morality flying by the seat of its pants’, then so is there other.

And yes evolution by itself is not an ideology but when Christianity adopts it as its own and accepts it as a part of how god made everything, I think the two together become a wholesome ideology.

But whats the point, really? You will just protest with non-sense like every other religious fanatic here. I had one person argue that the truth was a personal opinion, not a universal absolute.

But here is where i think you have it wrong, its not about science vs religion. Its about reason and rationality vs. being emotional and some what delusional (thats an opinion of course). Arguments for religion are crumbling one by one and yet it will change nothing. People will go on believing passionately, dying, killing, praising, and damning whatever they are told.

But totally, to hell with it, i say lets go back to the dark ages!
Have some more crusades sounds swell too!
Who needs reason and thinking for anything?
Look at all the wonderful things religion has done over a couple of thousands of years.
Poor, poor science has done nothing for anyone in the past 500.

After listening to all this doubt and the total confusion of the masses in such matters and considerable confusion and ‘theorists’ only of ‘the world’ you might say, I sure am glad that for those not already so brainwashed AND willing to properly investigate, I sure have found a way to virtually validate the early accounts of holy writ via a process of direct observation in natureLOL!! :)
... so that in true nature, and in genuine, Observable” science, there is NO real conflict between Genuine proven science and genuine forthright interpretations of the scriptures.
Truth is truth.
ALL REAL TRUTH MARRIES HARMONIOUSLY

But evolution of the Species, on the other hand, is built upon ‘engineered’ observation or interpretation of those observations: there is too much story ‘built in’ – could not Possibly mostly be accurate: it’s impossible to s[eculate so heavily on what might have been and even be at the right end of the footy ground; much of it’s Blind.
Fortuantely the observations on Opposition between Man and snake can be readily observed: one just needs to read the connection in the Bible: it is all there.

Pssst…@denidowi. Take your meds sir.

@jangles – There’s nothing wrong with Christianity believing in the Garden of Eden as a myth or parable. Because our real world is not a paradise. When we seek knowledge, we will also discover the ugly parts.

A modern variation of the biblical parable is part of ‘The Time Machine’ by H.G. Wells. The Eloi live in a (temporary) kind of paradise. To remain in this paradise they show no interest in knowledge at all. The time traveler discovers that none of the books in the old library has ever been opened. He wants them to pursue knowledge, but this means they will have to leave the paradise. And they will find ugliness. As Michael Shermer pointed out myths are about the human struggle to deal with the great passages of time and life—birth, death, marriage, the transitions from childhood to adulthood to old age. Adam and Eve could also been seen as children who are growing up. We don’t tell toddlers about atrocities. But teenagers will want to know.

Not everything written in the bible is a myth. While the circumstances of Jesus’ birth most likely are a myth (symbolizing he wasn’t the son of a rich or influential family), his crucifixion is most likely a historical event. When you look at the Old Testament you’ll also find historical elements like the Kingdom being split into the Kingdom of Judah and the Kingdom of Israel around 950 BC. Babylonian and Persian rules are confirmed by other historical sources.

Modern theology isn’t about picking and choosing based on personal gut feeling. I know that intolerant atheists like to depict it that way. My brother is a theologian and we are always having endless discussions. Still I’m not an expert. I’m just a computer scientist. But I’m interested in theological approaches like

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_criticism and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_hermeneutics

When modern Christianity adopts evolution, it remains a science. God made everything can mean he made the natural laws of the cosmos. Evolution is a consequence of this and God doesn’t have to intervene. I like to think of our universe as a place which is bursting with evolutionary possibilities. And evolution can be seen as creation in progress.

You said that I will just protest with non-sense like every other religious fanatic here. Well, this choice of words is a telltale sign of people running out of arguments. Cynicism about returning to the dark ages fits into this picture. I’m headed for the next decades of the 21st century, if you decide to go elsewhere it’s your choice. I know that American young-earth creationists are also headed for the dark ages. One of them has actually posted some comments in this thread, probably not realizing how foolish this looks to educated folks. I’ve tried to undo the brainwashing they seemed to have received and have failed in all cases. It can’t be done. We can only hope a new generation of children will leave the path of their creationist parents.

Matt, that’s because you’re already ‘sold’ / Brainwashed on Accepting evolution throughout your years,
But the reality is that Evolution is mere Adult Fairtytale – fantasy – it is many Huge stories… fables built around evidence ‘engineered’ and stretched into Unrealistic
story form

So it is I say: After listening to all this Wonder and doubt of the masses and the total confusion out there in such matters… and confusing ‘theorists’ – only of ‘the world’ you might say, I sure am glad that for those not already so obviously brainwashed BUT who are willing to properly investigate, I sure have found a way to virtually validate the early accounts of holy writ via a process of direct observation in nature todayLOL!! :)
... so that Thus it is that in TRUE nature, in genuine, Observable”, science, there is NO real conflict between Genuine proven science and genuine forthright interpretations of the scriptures at all.
Truth is truth – regardless of ‘field’.
ALL REAL TRUTH MARRIES HARMONIOUSLY

But evolution of the Species, on the other hand, is built upon ‘engineered’ observation or interpretation of those observations: there is too much invented storyline ‘built in’ – could not Possibly mostly be accurate: it’s impossible to speculate so heavily on what might have been and even be at the right end of the footy ground; much of it’s shooting Blind.
Fortunately the observations made by my 10 year investigation on the complete Opposition between Man and snake can be readily observed: one just needs to read the connection in the Bible to see applicability adn pertinence: it is all there.

@denidowi – My dear Christian fellow, I recommend that you read this book

http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501

and then I’m willing to continue our discussion. It’s a really good book. There are 141 customer reviews most with an above average positive Amazon rating. Here’s an example:

“This book is a ‘must read’ for anyone interested in a thoughtful analysis both of the most popular approaches for defending a belief in creation and also for those that oppose a belief in creation in light of the findings of modern science.

One of the greatest dangers of a God of the gaps argument, Miller notes, is that each time science succeeds in filling one of these alleged gaps its success is misconstrued by atheistic scientists as proof that God must not exist.

In the end Miller affirms the wisdom of resting one’s faith in a God who is the God of the stuff in between the gaps – whose handiwork is best seen in facts and qualities of the universe which are well known to science, rather than in those which are as yet undiscovered. Although he strongly affirms evolution, natural law, and chance, he sees these as means which God used for accoplishing His creative intention and safeguarding the genuine freedom and independence of His Creation. Miller affirms that the existence of the universe is not self-explanatory. Although he recognizes that the convictions of faith cannot be proven absolutely, he considers faith in the Creator to be reasonable and supported by such evidences as the anthropic principle. He also favors the possibility that God may utilize quantum indeterminacy and chaos as subtle means for interacting with His creation.”

@mattbrowne You are wasting your time using any evidence to argue with @denidowi Matt. He invested 10 years of his life concocting what he feels is a ‘proof’ that the Adam and Eve account is a literal statement of creation, not an allegory. As Upton Sinclair rightly observed, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” Imagine if not just his salary but a decade of his labor is tied up in his belief system. Small wonder he has so much ego involved in insisting his conclusions are right, and anyone who dares debate them is simply deluded.

@mattbrowne
Are you really saying that Adam, the supposed perpetrator of the original sin, never existed in the first place? So Jesus, had himself tortured and executed, in vicarious punishment for a symbolic sin committed by a non-existent individual?

And in trying to compare religion with mythology, you have almost combined the two. They, in present time, exist in entirely different contexts. We can look at Greek mythology and say that some one that treats that as the religion (as it basically was 2500 something years ago) cannot accept a science like evolution, for in Greek mythology all people came from clay, which was sculpted by the gods. In that example, one might argue as you have, that it isn’t a literal story and a myth and therefore can’t be taken seriously as “actually happening” but then they wouldn’t really be a part of the real religion the Greeks believed. Just as a Christian that believes in the bible, cannot accept evolution, because it goes against fundamental ideas in the bible.

You can cut out whatever you like and still call it Christianity but that doesn’t really mean that it is. And about 60% of Americans that agree with that. (I’m not saying that this any proof but that most Christians would agree, that accepting evolution undermines quite a bit of the foundation of Christianity itself.)

Also I didn’t say that modern theologians based their picking and choosing on gut feeling. I said that by the means that they do so (mostly rationality) is the same means in which atheists decide that god does not exist. So it isn’t really divinely inspired of you, its simply a matter of personal choice, which if that is all Christianity is, then I guess ill start being an atheist and a Christian.

I can just ignore all the parts of the bible i don’t like and call them myths and metaphors (like god, Adam and eve, Noah, Jesus Christ’s divinity, his resurrection) in fact ill just ignore everything except the fundamental part of his teaching that i like. Then, by your standers ill still be a Christian, right?

@ETpro – Your 2 problems are that you listened to too many also-ran ninnies with their negs around you for the substance of your own beliefs AND that you, therefore, short-circuited the system of gaining true knowledge by not searching the actual record for yourself.
You learn most and Best in life via your own personal research and investigations into matters.

Why… I’ll bet you did not even read one page of the text despite your non-sensical comments, let alone [the mandatory] all 207 pages.

@denidowi
“also-ran ninnies with their negs” ?
haha this slang is like something one might read of “A Clockwork Orange”

@denidowi “As a Kinesiologist, I undertook a 10 year, formal, groundbreaking study which ultimate discovery supported that the Adam and Eve account of the Holy Bible was quite literal in accuracy ”

This is very interesting. Can you please post the study protocol so I may look through it and see exactly how it was conducted, who designed it, who sponsored it, who conducted the overview during the study, exactly how it was conducted, the results and how they were arrived at? Please do not just post the abstract. Post the complete protocol with the conclusions.

Oh, and I am very, very interested in how knowledge of kinesiology is helpful in a formal, groundbreaking study of this kind.

@mattbrowne – you are very wrong that almost all of Christianity accepts evolution. Have you surveyed eveybody? I would have thought that someone who supposedly bases his ideas on proof would need proof of this too!

@denidowi You say that you “undertook” a formal, groundbreaking ten year study. Something of such importance would have a protocol and those who were involved should be extremely proud to exhibit such a protocol method and conclusions that once and for all supports the literal accuracy of the Holy Bible account of the Adam and Eve story. Something of this historic sociological, religious and scientific importance must be easily available on the net. Give me some identifiers so that I might find it, a protocol title perhaps or possibly an institutional index number or a website link? Ten years is a long time to put into something that can have such an enormous impact upon mankind. It would not make much sense to guard this knowledge jealously and deprive us of this as it could change so many lives so drastically for the better—and the fact that it was conducted by someone trained in such an austere science as kinesiology lends this study an undeniable credibility. It would be a tragedy if an opus such as this would go unnoticed by the rest of mankind simply because the herald of such an endeavour refused to divulge the details. It would answer so many questions. The salvation of mankind may be at stake here.

@jangles – Do you really think that educated Christians believe that Adam was the first homo sapiens with no biological father? And Eve was made from his rib? Again, to try to turn a myth into a science, or a science into a myth, is an insult to myths, an insult to religion, and an insult to science. Period.

@Harold – There are around 2 billion Christians on this planet. Evolution deniers are a minority although they seem to make a lot of foolish noise. Unlike the US, evolution deniers are a very small minority in Europe. I’m not sure about Australia. Out of the 2 billion there are around 1.1 billion Catholics. The Catholic church supports the big bang and evolution.

@denidowi – I don’t read books with only 1 lousy Amazon review

http://www.amazon.com/TWO-BIRDS-ONE-STONE-Denis-Towers/dp/1600348998/

“Apologists for religion may seek justification for their views. They will not find such in this book, which is scientifically silly and logically invalid. Save your money.”

Please suggest another book.

@ETpro – I fear you might be right.

its not mythology, people still take the religion literally. and i already proved my point, you unfortunately just repeated yourself.

@mattbrowne – Are you familiar with the fate of scientists such as Galileo??
Perhaps, if not, you night know something of the story of Karl Benz.
The ‘also-rans’ all around these people scoffed and scorned.
Would you bank your life on the review of one person… in all possibility, one who is just another ‘also-ran’, without understanding or vision??

@Espiritus_Corvus – As YOU seem ONE of the very, very few who has so far, realized, just in some small measure the all-encompassing significance of this discovery, may I ask if you would Bank, as I asked @mattbrowne – above, your Life or salvation on the review of one man, lacking the same recognition of significance that you have??
Would you bank your entire outlook upon this 10 yr work on the few words of another – far less meritus I would expect, than yourself??
Ask yourself these questions.

Now there IS no other Work on this subject: I did not dare send it like a lamb to the Slaughter of the Wolves who run naturalistic science-biology today!
In fact, I would not bother.
I have had well enough experience with the staidness of dead atheistic academia quite many times before!
The book is available in soft back
If you do the work and make the sacrifice, I’m sure you will be far more open to learn from it.
Its value is NOT on the Net.

@jangles – When some people still take the religion literally, parts in the bible still remain myths. Sorry, your conclusion it’s not mythology makes no sense to me whatsoever. We need to apply critical thinking here. Myths do have certain universal characteristics. So do parables. I recommend the following two articles which explain about myths and mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_myth

I’m sorry. Maybe I didn’t make myself clear. I’ll try again. It would not be helpful to me in understanding how you and the others arrived at the study’s conclusions by reading about the formal, groundbreaking study in Ma. Tower’s book, nor would it improve my comprehension of the study’s details by reading a critique of the book which may or may not allow me to “find the Bulk of what you ‘required’ in there.”

The Bulk of what I want is in the protocol, the data that was collected, how it was collated, who supervised, designed and carried out the study, whether or not there were ethics and other oversight committees and who they were, from which institutions of learning, etc., and everything else that I have previously stated.

In order to give your statement that the study’s conclusion supported the literal accuracy of the Biblical Adam and Eve story, I want to read the study protocol itself, and not be biased the least bit by Ms Towers or her critics. I’m sure you understand. Anything short of a good, thorough reading of the study protocol would be grossly unfair to all those good, dedicated people who conducted the study—including yourself. I am on your side, please help me help you. I find your recalcitrance both baffling and bizarre. Please, for the sake of all our souls, Post the Protocol.

@denidowi – Well, if there is no other book with better reviews you can recommend, I will conclude that your claims do not have much merit and I will end this discussion. As @ETpro had hinted it’s a waste of time. Sorry.

@Espiritus_Corvus – I am sorry, but there is no separate, self-contained “protocol”.
ALL things are contained Entirely within the work itself… and the original files, I’m afraid, were lost to Computer viruses over the years.
Sorry.
All we have now are copies of the final work in its entirety and all mine have been given away or sold.
The Publishing company, in order that we received fair treatment [We say that following previous experiences re other studies…}, was the Christian, American-based company, Xulon Press… the study itself was undertaken here in Australia, but our work received no interest or sympathy here… Infact, when herpetologists and others who could have loaned out lab facilities and aided in other measures we needed to undertake found out what we were doing, they shut down communication.
You can well imagine that our funds ebbed away to nigh on zero by the end.
So, we have had no financial power to achieve anything of any weight at all.
Sorry.

I am sorry as well. I am in shock and dismayed at the news of the missing protocol. And let me add that I am also very disappointed and distraught at the news that nobody involved in this ten year, formal, groundbreaking study thought to keep their copy of the protocol and that only the conclusions of the study now exist, and not how the conclusions were arrived at, including all the related data and how it was handled.

This is a horrific tragedy on the scale of the burning of the libraries at Alexandria, as a study such as this would provide even more important answers than that esteemed depot of knowledge. Without your strong Christian faith, I could imagine a catastrophe like this could tempt one to suicide. I can only imagine how difficult it is for you to defend your statements, especially in public forum, without the proof which was provided by this academically grueling, decade-long effort.

For the sake of your personal feelings, I will say no more on the subject. Please accept my apology for causing you to recall such a traumatic, depressing time in your life as it must have been when it was discovered that there was not one copy of the protocol left that describes the formal, groundbreaking study which you undertook and which supported the literal account of the Adam and Eve story in the Holy Bible. Say no more.

Well, I wouldn’t take it that hard, EspiritusLOL!
Sometimes, tragedy has to be met withHumour… humour is often the only way to handle tragedy: so let’s not get lost in any Depression.
Perhaps, God left it that Man MUST apply ‘Faith’, despite the discoveries showing the way outside of that Parameter.
Despite its 10 years, the work still requires, further work anyway… we have now learned much more that would enhance and specify more clearly over the 3 years since.
So, who knows that maybe one day, God-willing, we shall create a revised version.
It is in the hands of the Gods – but, Espiritus, we are not so young as in our past [ ;) ], and we would not even attempt the fight that we would meet on all sides of the atheistic powers that govern current csience and, specifically, biology, today.
As i say, nevertheless, the work itself, contains all those types of things [Method, observations, etc] you were requiring, as we did not even attempt using academic circles in our undertaking; and there were only a couple of us involved in it

@mattbrowne
Right, but by what right have you to decide which part of christianity is defined as mythology and which part is purly defined as historical and literal?

We must apply science here, not for the sake of whether or not a myth needs to make sense in reality. But whether or not it makes sense to disregard Genesis (the basis for the entire bible) as a myth (meaning that it did not literally happen) and if doing so would make the bible either a myth in its entirety (including the new testament) or if it would still make sense as a part myth, part literal account.

An example of how it would not make sense is, that the bible gives an account of the genealogical line leading from Adam all the way to Christ. Is this line mythological important or profound in some way? No, it’s meant to be literal; there is not a hint or even room for interpretation.

We need to apply critical thinking here? Well here is a bit, just because miraculous things happen in the old testament, does not mean that they didn’t happen, a miracle by definition is outside the realms of scientific reason. So if something does not make sense (like parting the red sea or bringing down a city’s wall just by walking around them) doesn’t mean they can be disregarded or pass off as myth. They are, from a religious stand point, miracles and are so fundamentally apart of the Christian faith.

Perhaps the confusion here is that Christians disregard the moral teaching of the Old Testament (only because Christ fulfills them are they allowed to do so) which leads them to think that they can disregard whatever they like out of the Old Testament but the Old Testament was never ment as a mythology, it has always been regaurded (for the most part) as a history of the Hebrew people.

Or more likely the reason you wont ever agree with me on this point, because you obviously are educated and understand how much evidence there is to support evolution. Which means if you did concede you would either have to deny Evolution or Christianity. (or you could i guess work out some way, by which would make less sense, as the Mormons have, by trying to explain how Adam and eve can fit into evolution they must do so because basically, they have defined Adam as the first and literal first prophet of their church)

But then again I don’t know if this is your reasoning as i do not know if you are even Christian.

As the Kinesiological study’s results firmly support much of the early chapters of the Holy Bible – in fact some of those very sections that are Most treated as “mere Myth”, I think that that outcome of this discovery, alone, throws open for strong debate the greatly prevailing practice among most current scientists of treating parts of the Bible as ‘past fancies’ merely to justify their own fancies precisely as they please.
In other words, it re-proposes the possibility that the Bible can be taken far more literally than tends to be the case today.

@mattbrowne – I have to agree with Denidowi on this. There are those who call themselves Christians, but rarely attend a church or read the bible. A real Christian believes what the bible says, and doesn’t try to rationalise the writings of atheistic scientists with Scripture. The facts are that a Christian accepts the creative power of God- it is simply fundamental to the faith and ideology. Every person has the right to deny that, but don’t call yourself a Christian if you do. You still haven’t proven your assertion that most Christians believe in evolution. I know a lot of Catholics, and none of them deny creation. Just because the pope denies the God who made him doesn’t mean that the faithful are sheep who follow him without thought.

You are entitled to your opinion, but please don’t say the majority agree unless you have evidence to support it.

We are going in circles here. I offered articles such as

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher_criticism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_hermeneutics

which show a rational approach on how to interpret various parts of the Bible. And I also said that when modern Christianity adopts evolution, it remains a science. God made everything can mean he made the natural laws of the cosmos. Evolution is a consequence of this and God doesn’t have to intervene. I like to think of our universe as a place which is bursting with evolutionary possibilities. And evolution can be seen as creation in progress.

I’ve also pointed out that there are around 2 billion Christians on this planet. Evolution deniers are a minority although they seem to make a lot of foolish noise. Unlike the US, evolution deniers are a very small minority in Europe. I’m not sure about Australia. @Harold? Out of the 2 billion there are around 1.1 billion Catholics. The Catholic church supports the big bang and evolution and creation in a more general sense. It rejects the literal interpretation of Genesis. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_and_the_Catholic_Church

and I quote

“As in other countries, Catholic schools in the United States teach evolution as part of their science curriculum. They teach the fact that evolution occurs and the modern evolutionary synthesis, which is the scientific theory that explains why evolution occurs. This is the same evolution curriculum that secular schools teach. Bishop DiLorenzo of Richmond, chair of the Committee on Science and Human Values in a December 2004 letter sent to all U.S. bishops: ”...Catholic schools should continue teaching evolution as a scientific theory backed by convincing evidence. At the same time, Catholic parents whose children are in public schools should ensure that their children are also receiving appropriate catechesis at home and in the parish on God as Creator. Students should be able to leave their biology classes, and their courses in religious instruction, with an integrated understanding of the means God chose to make us who we are.”

1.1 billion Catholics plus Protestants in Europe where a foolish movement like young-earth creationism virtually doesn’t exist is a majority. It’s simple math @Harold. And I’d say about half of the Protestants in the US are also capable of critical thinking. Like most Catholics they accept evolution without denying creation, because there is no contradiction. I don’t deny creation. The laws of our cosmos were created. To me God is the reason. He also gave the cosmos meaning and purpose. A contradiction only exists if people take the “7 days” literally which only a minority of the 2 billion Christians seem to do.

No one has to right to call others real or unreal Christians. This is unacceptable. Any more comments like this and I will leave this debate very quickly.

@Harold – a you say, most serious regular Christians maintain theri adherence to holy writ and the power of a God of pure Creation.

The other point I was making to Dr Lawrence was the following:

I entered your topic that ‘God created a changing world’ by showing, quite simply, even if by simple reason alone, why there was NO WAY that God COULD create a changing world, for He is a Forever Being… and existence illustrates along with logic that one performs honestly according to the level of his/her current intelligence and the level of their existential state and per the nature of their being.
God is an all-encompassing, all-intelligent Being … He exists in a state of eternity… and He will live Forever exactly as He is now. Therefore EVERYTHING He does is Forever. His Creations are Forever.
Logically fitting with this natural conclusion concerning Him is, also, the following brief passage from holy writ, “I am the same, yesterday, today and Forever. Endless is my name.”
This is all pure Logic – the Socratesian kind… it is not merely the shooting of Biblical quote upon Biblical quote.

What I DID say, employing the Bible (among other scriptural works as well outside the Bible), was that Genesis clearly explains quite simply, exactly how we came to receive a now changing world from the original Eternal world created by God.
Logically and observantly, I said that it is not, however, the practice of God to force Man to make any decision re that man’s own life… and we never see Him do this [He merely instructs or advises and the rest is entirely up to us re our choices]...
Likewise, when He made the earth for Adam, He gave Adam CHARGE (choice) concerning his own living condition: He provided a way that Adam might Choose the state of this earthly existence: Temporary, or Permanent. and God gave him total “Dominion” [until Christ returns to reclaim His world and make it a Forever world again under God’s Dominion]
By yielding to the persuasions of the snake, however, Adam chose the former.
All very simple, very logical…
Explains things quite aptly…
Further, the Kinesiological study I cited re the opposition of man and the snake tends to verify this very Biblical account – which has also been found in other ancient writings.

@mattbrowne – I am with Harold on this.
Never mind what the misrepresented statistics of [agendard] Humanists running these studies showLOL!
They do not appropriately analyse exactly what they mean by “Christians”, as Harold said.
Those of us who work most of our lives among various Christian groups, including living in Italian communities and the Greek Orthodox communities, etc, know full well that the majority of regulars, who are the most committed and who keep the faith active believe in the literal Creation of God.
Also, being a teacher myself, and having 7 children here in Australia, ley me tell you as I have talked with individual science teachers, many from the state system don’t teach much on evolution at all, because they have more reservations against it than pro itLOL!
You might say, ‘They are not fools’.
Officials who write articles and texts often run a personal agenda – more an atheistic one, and they generally lead the charge on evolution.

@denidowi – If you really are a teacher, then you should have the intellect to read

http://www.amazon.com/Finding-Darwins-God-Scientists-Evolution/dp/0061233501/

and I cannot believe that the majority of Australian biology teachers skip evolution in the curriculum or do have general reservations about it. I think you might misunderstand them. Unexplained doesn’t mean inexplicable. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, but this doesn’t mean all research is complete. The most fascinating area right now is comparative genomics and it does confirm that your and my distant ancestor was a fish. To me this is totally amazing and wonderful. God’s creation is truly awesome. His genius and plan allows that fish over the course of millions of years can evolve into human beings.

Evolution has nothing to do with atheism. In Australia there only seems one case in Queensland where creationism was allowed to become part of the biology curriculum. That’s not really representative. See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation-evolution_controversy#Australia

@denidowi You previously stated that you did not share your vital kinesiological work with any other biologists because they would not support it. This was in Australia, wasn’t it?

You stated that all your research protocols, details of observations, experiments and the like were lost before the end of your work, and that all that survived a computer virus was a popular book published outside scientific press. In other words, your work has never withstood the scientific test of peer review. There are no experiments that can be replicated to test it, It can not be used, as science can, to predict additional observations then test to see if they hold true.

And yet you expect people who understand how science actually works to crumble under the crushing weight of your self-proclaimed observational skills, and accept your claims that to disagree with you means that they are either blind to truth or deluded.

Thanks, but no thanks.

@mattbrowne
Your evidence, (Or sources to Wikipedia) only suggests that there are specific Christian religions and theology that supports viewing Genesis as a mythological story (and most of the old testament for that matter) However this is not sufficient to the point that i made, that it does not make sense as a half mythology, half literal account. In fact its almost evidence in favor of my point and that is that a lot Christians don’t know enough about their own religion to realize the contradictions in excepting evolution as a science.

The irony of this argument is however, that I think that for the most part, the bible in its entirety is mythology. But as I said before you won’t concede to my point because as an educated person, Christian fundamentalism is obviously unreasonable (and so would be denying evolution as a science, without sufficient evidence) and the only other alternative would be to see the entire bible (including the new testament) as mythology, which would almost defeat the whole basis for what Christianity is.

@mattbrowne – Did I use the word, “majority”?? The prob many of you guys have is that you just do not really read the Question… and in this case, ‘the answer’ [signed – teacherLOL!]

Your prob really is that you have an agenda to run… so when people use a socialist ‘trigger’ word, you jump in with your preconceived notions on what they are really sayingLOL!! ;)
Back to school ;)

Likewise, @Etro – per usual you completely misread precisely what I was saying happened.
As you are so screwed up in your overall misunderstanding of most things re this study, I’ll leave you to your a-musingsLOL!! ;)
You’re a Long way back in the field, Mate ;)

@denidowi
The question marks, the examination marks and the smiley faces, (not only the fact that almost everything you say isn’t supported by conclusive evidence at all) makes you sound deplorably mad.

Are you open even to the small possibility that you could be delusional or perhaps even insane to some degree? (I realize that is very insulting but I am not trying to offend you but in light of the things you say, i dont see any other way to point it out to you)

You’re so far out of it, I’ll take the latter, depending on where YOU areLOL!! ;)
REALLY…

Like ALL Yamugs who have had their so-called ‘objections’ to this work, you don’t actually argue ANYTHING specifically that is part of the Work or the case itself.
LIKE ALL OTHER ALSO-RANS, YOU MERELY TALK ABOUT ANOTHER’S SANITY… Nothing of actual meat or substance… You know what I mean??

@denidowi
I understand what you’re saying but I cannot dispute your “actual meat or substance” because you, as i have said, don’t provide the conclusive evidence required so it is just your word, which i would have to somehow trust. This is a poor basis for an educated argument or discussion.

@jangles – That is certainly true in this case, I guess, but you DO have the way, given before you, as to how to access this work and its name.
So if you are serious in your disputations of it, you need to study it first.

@denidowi
But why would i devote some much time to a hypothsis that I’m skeptical of in the first place?
And in this case you sir, you have the burden of proof.

@denidowi (Denis Towers)

In this thread you have been exposed as a scientific fraud with ludicrous excuses to hide behind.
You have gone from website to website promoting your lies and delusions are science.
I have no patience with intellectual dishonesty

You are the author of the book “Two Birds… One Stone” that you have been plugging in everu thread you can as if the author was someone other than yourself

It is published by Xulon Press – essentially a vanity press,
a self-publication described by you as:
Subject: Religion: general
Christian Theology – Cosmology
Science & Religion
Religion / Religion & Science
Religion-Christianity – Theology – Cosmology
General: Disproof of Evolution
Religion
Religion – Socialissues

Your shameless promotion of your pseudoscientific paperback is a combination of promoting your book for profit (SPAM) and promoting your own religious view as if it were science.

Your entitled to believe anything you want but don’t pretend to be a scientist.

I will be watching you as long as you are on fluther and I will expose your dishonesty and fraud whenever you promote your pseudoscience as science.

Feel free to take your lies elsewhere as you have done many times before!

Goodbye Denis!

Please list Your peer-reviewed scientific publications as first author on your research.

If you can’t, then stop pretending to be a scientist.

So… you thought, @Dr_Lawrence – DH for short that you would treat the case as some Sherlock Holmes… Did you??
I know you’re quite a vain man underneath that suave facade – or perhaps the facade itself gives you away.
Er… BTW, pehaps you should try reading other Questions or threads even on Fluther, and you will see that I state in many cases, not all, that I was the Kinesiologist, or that I was part of the team researching… If YOU happened not to pick that up, Please don’t run to me when you are looking for sleuth work: Will you??LOL!!
In instances, I just did not promote or expose that I was, but if you had been following my case with any sort of specific interest, you would have quickly picked up that it was I who was in the research.
Yes.

Sorry once again, to steal your ThunderLOL!!!

You DO try hard though to get that limelight: I will grant you that. ;)

In case you don’t see this thread, I’ll post this on your caseLOL!!
BTW, in actual fact, you DO remind me of the Sherlock Holmes movie, but in the role of the inspector [LOL] – Always well behind Holmes [who might Holmes be then?] Ha Ha Ha!
Oh you’re fun, “Doc”!!

@jangles – The Proverbs part is about advice, not mythology. The Sermon on the Mount is about advice, not mythology. The crucifixion is a historical event, not mythology. In the New Testament there are also many parables which is not the same as myths.

@mattbrowne – may be so… but your whole tone and everything alse, virtually, that you write or say, smacks of a firm belief in Mythology coming out of the Bible, whereas you’re in total denial re the findings of my Kinesiological study – which findings do strongly support the accuracy, for instance, of the Adam and Eve “myth”, as you no doubt call itLOL!

@denidowi Your rant is off topic. Tell us about your unreplicated, study unpublished in peer reviewed journals. Tell us again about you vanity press paperback that ”disproves” evolution.
Or if you have nothing new to add to this interesting topic, then read what others have to say.

@mattbrowne
You’re picking away at small parts that really don’t change the overall point. (I was generalizing mythology, with any kind of event in the bible not taken literally) You either have an argument of why the biblical story genesis can be taken non-literally and still are contestant in accordance to the rest of the bible or you do not. I have listed one of several of why it doesn’t. (Being the genealogical line that begins with Adam and ends with Jesus can’t be interpreted as anything but a literal account)

Also the examples you just gave can all be myths.

Myth
1. a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, esp. one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
2. stories or matter of this kind: realm of myth.
3. any invented story, idea, or concept: His account of the event is pure myth.
4. an imaginary or fictitious thing or person.
5. an unproved or false collective belief that is used to justify a social institution.

@jangles – You DO have to remember that the outcome of this study compels us to conclusions that simply do not sit well with your past belief about life, the Bible and religion.
Therefore, one can well imagine and appreciate your extreme reluctance to accept this discovery as a whole; but by the same token, you cannot expect me to somehow use ‘mythical magic’ and produec the entire work right before your eyes
... and based on what I previously said about your life’s belief and system of things, NOTHING short of reading the Entire work, being so new to everybody and so challenging to current biological thought also, could Possibly suffice.

So even if I tried to reproduce [so-called] ‘main ideas’ or evidences, my efforts would just fall on deaf ears and would not do the work of 10 years justice. It is evidence upon evidence.
You have to be prepared to step outside your comfort zone and grab the book for yourself just to make yourself inwardly committed enough to face the truth when you study it re this kind of scientific discovery.
It goes totally against the grain of most of what you would currently believe.
Therefore, it will take a BIG effort from you, to be able to come to terms with it.
I cannot do that for you.
Depends how Big you are.

@mattbrowne – You are correct that no person has the right to decide if someone else is a Christian or not. However, the simple definition is enough to decide who is and who isn’t, without any person having to make any judgment. A Christian by definition is someone who accepts the bible as the basis of his faith. The bible teaches that God is the Creator, and that is enough for it to be a characteristic of a Christian. That is not me or anyone else deciding, it is just simple definition. I cannot accept that the Catholioc church is the benchmark for what Christians believe. It has strayed so far from Scripture in so many areas, it has no relevance.

I am sorry, but I have no reason to reject that God is a Creator, who can create very quickly, and in infinite detail. I have no reason to accept the potentially flawed research of people who want to prove that they are the highest force in the Universe, and then try and assimilate it with Scripture. We don’t need humanistic higher criticism etc to interpret Scripture. It is just not that hard. Why make a huge scene out of what is simple? God made the world and everything in it. He did it in seven days. Why do we think we need to compromise with supposed science? Call me narrow minded if you will (and I’m sure many will), but I am sure enough of this to stand up to any scientist.

Here… here, @Harold
You are entirely correct: there should really be no need to appeal to science for verification of the validity of holy writ, but remember, it does take all kinds to make up the world, and the reson for my effort on research was how hard hit all today’s young are by every wind of doctrine, even upon which they are formally ‘forced’ to write and accept in order to pass their studies – which in turn, are required for ‘good jobs’
THIS has been My big concern – for today’s youth.
They need tools with which to argue against evolution.

@denidowi

You don’t seem to understand the burden of proof.
But even so, the results of the study hardly prove what you’re implying. Just because a human and a snake are opposites, show no implication that the bible is a literal account, nor is it proof that evolution is false (namely because there is so much evidence behind evolution that you would have to disprove first)

You are assuming far too much, it doesn’t directly point to anything except that somehow humans and snakes are different in regards to how they biologically function. The bible does not say that god cursed a snake to be the exact opposite; it says that he cursed the serpent above all cattle, and above every beast of the field and to be on its belly and to eat dirt for the rest of its life.

And even if we did go further to assume that this is what it said (or perhaps somehow implies) it would not be reason enough to discredit evolution or science.

But there is serious evidence which can be proven to disprove Christian fundamentalism. To name a few genetics, carbon dating, dinosaur bones and the limited speed at which light travels. There is no possible means by which the earth can only be 6000 something years old or that god created the earth in 7 days.

And yet you ignore all that and insist it’s false by “proving” that a snake and a human are opposite? That sir, is terrifying hypocritical to start with (namely that your using basic scientific theory (or claim to be), to disprove scientific theory)

What you are really doing in fact, is Christian fundamentalism, guised by what you deem to be a real science, to support your own agenda. You stated it yourself, you concern is not what is true and what isn’t.

“THIS has been My big concern – for today’s youth.
They need tools with which to argue against evolution.”

You will only believe things that you want to believe and that is your real problem.

@jangles – Perhaps I should more accurately have said,
”... tools with which to fight the Falsities of Evolution of the Species”.
So please accept my humble apologies for not being able to put every single world in place that would more explicitly convey my meaning.
As for a genuine seeker of truth:
The reason, or one of them, that I am able to see through the engineerings and agendas of evolution in (probably) most scientists of that persuasion is because I see truth – because I AM a seeker of truth, and practice that so readily that I am not so easily fooled as to simply follow the Crowd!
It is a known fact, ha you asked the most successful men in the world, that the masses are usually wrong – the “professional masses” more accurately.
They are so busy not wanting to offend their mates that they blindly look past evidence and truth for the sake of ‘keeping the professional peace’, you might say… so much so in fact, that their closedness of mind is detrimental to those they ‘profess’ to serve.

NO. I don’t follow the crowd… I remain a free-thinker.
I do not belong to associations – at least, not that have power to manipulate… adn I am very careful about exactly what associations pr interest groups I do spend my time with.
I maintain freedom of thought and expression in all I become engaged with.

BTW, I am very glad you are at least, serious enough in yopur debate on these points that you have bothered to read just a little of the specific scriptural account which I believe this discovery supports.
Certainly, whatever it does, it does do enough to throw open the question once again, of the possible literal accuracy of this type of Biblical account – “myths” that many in the biological world treat as nought.
Yet this discovery fdoes re-open the debate on the early accounts of the Bible.
God does not say that He made them opposites, the serpent had already done this by going Opposite man and God in leading man to oppose God, in whose IMAGE God said that He had made him.
Therefore, I am saying that God depicted this Opposition to Himself [and to man therefore], by making the necessary alterations to the beast.
Further, if you read for a moment the exact specifics in the wording or Concepts in that cursing, more precisely, you will see just in those few mentioned, clear Opposites to the condition of Man.

@denidowi – Tools to fight the falsities of evolution of the species? Are you qualified to create such scientific tools? I said this before, in my opinion deeply religious people like you with a good knowledge of the bible should use their enthusiasm and vitality to help shape a better future. Help fill spiritual voids. Find answers to questions like, how can healthy religion support the effort for peace in this world? How can people get along with each other? How can people achieve fulfilling life direction and well being? There are numerous other important questions.

I see a lot of enthusiasm and vitality in @denidowi comments and I really don’t like saying this because it might hurt his feelings. All the valuable energy is spent on creating the wrong connections. Making the wrong assumptions. One needs to have a good basis knowledge to become seriously engaged in science. One needs to know the difference between thymine and uracil, between DNA and mitochondrial DNA, and things like the citric acid cycle or concepts like proteomics, the difference between archaebacteria and cyanobacteria. And that’s just for starters. It’s a long way before people are able to discuss evolution on a really deep level, let alone trying to refute it, which is a legitimate endeavor of course. I consider myself to be an educated layperson when it comes to chemistry and biology, yet I know that my science knowledge is at least 100 times greater than that of @denidowi and I came to this conclusion by observing several of his recent comments. Throwing in a few words that give the appearance of being scientific terminology does not mean it’s real science. Professional biologists like Neil Shubin or Kenneth Miller have knowledge of evolution which is at least 1000 times greater than mine. I mention this because it should give people a feeling what they are up to.

My advice: don’t pretend to be something you can’t be (at least right now) and be something you can be. For example how religion helps you live a fulfilling life or what turning the other cheek means in real life today. What the metaphor salt of the earth means today. I think you could be very good at that @denidowi. People would respect you, including all the tolerant atheists. We will all appreciate you the way you really are. But please, don’t pretend to be a scientist able to make groundbreaking scientific discoveries and conduct serious scientific research. If you are really interested about science, do the basics first. Start with Chemistry and Biology 101 and work your way up. It will take years. It will require patience and perseverance. Read some of the books I recommended. I’m really trying to help you.

Make your ear attentive to wisdom,
Incline your heart to understanding;
For if you cry for discernment,
Lift your voice for understanding;
If you seek her as silver
And search for her as for hidden treasures;

(Proverbs 2:2–4)

One thing I note about the practices of scientists that seek truth is that they try every way they can think of to prove their favorite hypothesis false, and see if it stands. If, after rigorous testing, trial by fire, and the replication of results by their peers, it hasn’t been thoroughly demolished, it might have some merit.

One thing I note about false “scientists” is that they try every way they can think of to prove their premise true, and claim that any information to the contrary must be someone else’s agenda.

@denidowi – in your research, have you ever attempted to knock down your premise that the Bible is infallible?

@laureth – Yes; of course, my friend.
As I say, to be genuine, you have to play your own devil’s Advocate.

So, of course, I could just pretend, like many others have here, that it is sheer coincidence that of the countless 1000s of “kinds” [word biblically used] of animal life on earth, that the groundsnake and homo sapiens just happen to lie on opposition, functionally. I could just pretend this; Yes.
But, being thoroughl;y versed in that early account, it becomes pretty much undeniable that the two tie intimately together, especially given, if you’ll read your Bible much at all, that God is a Regular in the use of symbolism in virtually all He does… so given this tendency he has for symbolizing key occurrences in the history of Man, there wasreally no denying that that was what He had done when he placed His cursing upon the serpent.
You really couldn’t escape drawing that conclusion @laureth

The two most significant events in the spiritual history of man are the “Fall of Man” [arrived at through the serpent episode with Adam] and the “Redemption of Man” FROM that Fall, through Christ.
If you’ll read the Bible throughout, you will see symbolism pointing to those events throughout.
It is just Impossible, without just lying to yourself, to pretend that this discovery is not locked intrinsically into these 2 Central events in the spiritual history of Man.

Now some might say, “But how can you draw natural conclusions when you mix it with spiritual events??”
I would respond that every test this body and our lives undergo, has spiritual testing and temptation involved.
The Body is intimately tied into the spirit.
Hence why most get physically sick when under spiritual and psychological stresses of various, but significant kinds.

I think that even if you just don’t believe we have a spiritual side, you would have to admit that it is powerfully, powerfully, Coincidental that our Opposite just happens to be ‘the snake’ ... surely, for many at least, it re-opens the debate on the reality or value of seeing the Bible more literally than seems to be commonly believed today, even by various Christians.
Even completely outside anything Biblical, the discovery also supports the contention that there is a Deliberation [if not Absolute Genius] behind Creation, not just random, unintended, undirected chance.

@mattbrowne – I am sorry but I haven’t had a serious chance to look at your last entry until now.
I, very much, appreciate your sincerity of comment and your apparent genuine desire to help.
Therefore, perhaps for your benefit, I will reveal in briefest form my story.
The first degree I undertook was in “Applied Science – Human Movement”
I basically ‘topped’ that Degree. But even among the successes, my specialties mainly were in Psychology; Kinesiology and Applied anatomy; and (interconnected) Motor Learning. Biomechanics – another strong field. I undertook further animal Lab studies post that degree along with other accounting and socialist-based post Grads.

Quickly, the Socialist Post grad became a “revelation” for me.
Here I discovered, using elements of my accounting-economics post-grad background, exactly WHY we were losing jobs worldwide – following this ‘nonsense’ taught in Unis re society, also why families were failing more than ever and why we had heavy inflation with low productivity – all concurently – in the market.
To cut it very hard, the main problem I deduced was the work of the Feminist movement and its aftermath, which, still, to this day, has never been reversed and properly dealt with – and Hence, why we are still experiencing extraordinary economic problems – even worse, because we have done nothing to address these central very real issues, which I still take patient pains to explain re the realities to others, and how they impinge economically.
Eventually, I wrote a book with researched figs to support the conclusions drawn, as in all studies. That was 17 years ago.
Some yrs later, I was pondering the absolute wretchedness that this feminist work, NOW mixed with homosexuality, was increasingly causing to our earth and its potential past familial integrity and economic prosperity!
My previous degree had pointed out the Link between social science theory in contemporary society and natural science theory (evolution, specifically), claiming that ‘Evolution of the Species’ gave practical foundation to the Marxist-pro-feminist theme of the course – which, I later found out, seeps through virtually every degree by law in this country.
As I was pained by this scene with very little I apparently wasable to do about it, as only few listened and as I was wondering what might disprove evolution decisively, the thought came like a revelation to me suddenly, that the snake lay in very Opposite plain, upon the ground, to Man. I then immediately thought of other “Opposites”.
I then began a research via the more formal procedues I had been taught in my various Higher studies.
Over the next 9 years or so, it grew from there – testing my hypothesis with every factor I could consider re features and behaviour associated with Man and snakes. I largely used all the reports of the best Herpetologist books and researchers I could find to examine the various features.
I disussed these with herpetologists from our zoological Gardens and a few others, but, of course, the moment I pointed out possible Opposites, they withdrew from the intercourse.
The feeling from the overall thrust was not one of ridicule, but one that they had realized something akin for themselves, but did not want to discuss it, as they are ALl from the ‘natural history’ school of biological thought.

Moderators and loyal Flutherites (Jellys)

@denidowi blames Pro-Marxist Feminism and therefore women who have careers outside the home, Homosexuals, and Evolutionary Biologists and scientists for all the ills of society.

Not only does he shamelessly promote sales of his own books, but he vilifies women who refused to be chained to the home, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, and transgendered people for the destruction of the family and the collapse of society and the economy and blames scientists for undermining Christianity and the Bible.

This ignorant fanatical hatemonger must be stopped, at least here on Fluther.
He is actively promoting hatred against identifiable groups – an HATE CRIME in many countries.

Freedom of speech has it’s limits and the blaming of Feminists, working women and same sex
lovers and couples with all that is wrong in society far exceeds free and open discussion of ideas.

The Nazis identified the Jews are the people responsible for all economic and societal ills in Germany in the lead up to the Holocaust and the “Final Solution”

Moderators! I request the @denidowi be banned from Fluther for promoting his book for commercial gain, for acting to dehumanize Feminists, women in the job market and gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, and transgendered people and blaming them as groups for destroying the Family, the economy, our way of life and undermining his view of Biblical truth.

There is no place on my Fluther for Hatemongering!

Such vicious ignorance must be blotted out wherever it arises.

I’m would not be surprised to find that he has been banned elsewhere.

His kind of promotion of hatred must be shut down here!

Who can read his most recent entry above mine and not see who he is blaming and for what they are being blamed?

This hateful man and his views offend that for which Fluther seems to stand.

My women friends here, my gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transsexuals, and transgendered friends here, deserve a place to discuss things free from attack and vilification by anyone who promotes disdain, distrust, disrespect, and hateful blame against them so they can promote their commercial interests (book sales) that promote ignorance.

This demagogue must be silenced here!

Thank you!

My friends, if you see the danger of his hate promotion, contact the Moderators with your concerns!

@denidowi – Thanks for your comment above. Unlike many of your earlier posts this one looks more professional and it does suggest an academic background. But it still seems to me that you’re focusing on other subjects and do not have a solid understanding of natural sciences, especially biology or even evolutionary biology.

If you’re goal is to refute evolution (and it sure is a worthy goal) you need to have a deep understanding of the science behind it. Albert Einstein knew everything about Isaac Newton’s theories of classical mechanics, universal gravitation and the laws of motion. Only because of this, he was able to refute it (or show that it’s only a good approximation in most cases) and come up with special and general relativity. The people trying to refute Einstein need to know all about his theories for example when trying to develop a quantum theory of gravitation.

Your knowledge of evolution is virtually zero and I’m pretty sure you can’t explain the science behind mitochondrial DNA or comparative genomics. So like Einstein if you want to refute evolution, you’ve got to understand it first. Then we’ll talk.

@mattbrowne – Thanks for your input – Your understanding was expecially pleasing following that well-over-the-top outburst by our ‘friend’ Doc Lawrence, who seems to have developed some vendetta out on me since I challenged what ocviously must have been one of his ‘securities’ in his view of the nature of God.
I just hope, though, that most people can read right through this insincere fellow.

Anyway… sorry… none of your concern.

Yes; I am honest in my limitations.
You do need to remember though, that I have done 4 years or more of studies that directly equate to human and animal physiology, anatomy and the many areas that surround these central studies, which have included, biology 101, chemistry and physics also at that basic level. I do understand and well-comprehend Evolution of the Species; I have read and sifted through quite many texts and also general books on it: I have never read Darwin, though, and I hope to do that some time: I have a family of 7 and so far, 5 grandchildren to attend to: we had one of the latter here all day today… so in my various commitments in life, time is tough on me I’m afraid.

I agree I know nothing of genetics, except Mendel’s experiments and how the basics work, nor specific studies on Mitochondrial DNA, although of course, aspects were treated in Physiology courses: it is some time, now, though since I studeid such material although, having said that, I do assist my wife with most of these areas in her current nursing degree she is doing.

Matt, may I say one thing re your advice:
You need to realize that when Albert Einstein made his discoveries vs previous Newton theory, he only had to overcome a very small field of scientists… and he was able to simply get to know Newton’s work alone [within reason] well enough to do that… whereas, for me to try and cover all the claims of archaeologists and the many, many sub-fields, and laterally-connected fields and all the wondrous efforts at connecting one science after another with evolution and to come up against the millions of scientists today who ‘fight’ for the evolutionary belief is a Task almost infinitely Huger than Albert Einstein’s.
I hope you appreciate that.
It would dwarf Einstein’s task – literally.
PLUS this discovery challenges for a literal belief on the Holy Bible!!!! ... and That is a ‘No-No!”
Ask LawrenceLOL!
You have seen his reaction – it is literal ‘arms’!!
I leave the rest to your imagination. ;)

@denidowi – Two more questions:

How old is the Earth?

How long ago did life get started on Earth?

Matt, you’re pointedly asking me Qs to nail me down, supposedly, on credibility.
And I can tell you in all honesty, I don’t know.
I only have beliefs.
No one knows – despite wild unproven – impossible-to-prove, claims.

I am interested in truth… I am interested in that which CAN be discovered: at present I know of nothing that can genuinely prove anything such as this.
I will make – later, if you wish it, further comment or cast my reflections down… but right now, it is getting extremely late here.
I am thinking that perhaps I should send them to you privately, because, as you are aware in life, there is always that maniac somewhere that will twist the truth and cause a scene.

@denidowi – Yes, your answer does undermine your credibility. Impossible to prove? Wild unproven claims? Scientists know the age of the Earth and the Sun. If you want to become a scientist you should know about this too. And radiometric dating doesn’t give us the only clues.

Have you ever heard of GPS? We can watch our continents move. We can watch our mountains grow. It’s amazing. We can also watch how flowing water turns edgy stones into pebbles. We can analyze geological strata. We can observe speciation. We can observe the evolution of multi-drug resistant organisms.

Again, study the basics first. Understand existing theories first, before trying to refute them. Everything else is a waste of your energy. Honest scientists don’t twist the truth and fudge empirical data.

@mattbrowne You have identified very well the @denidowi lacks a knowledge of much beyond what is today high school science. Your reference to GPS tracking of continental drift and the uplifting of mountain ranges contradicts a view of the Earth as a static never-changing place to which Denis Towers blindly adheres.

A person who claims to have “disproven” evolution who has never even read Darwin’s “An Origin of Species” can not claim to be terribly expert on the topic. Of course, modern understandings of a theory only started by Darwin’s work is probably also lacking in his knowledge base.

As for my experience and training, this Link refers to my last published study as co-investigator in Rheumatology where I served at the methodologist, statistical analyst and co-author. I was disabled shortly after that was submitted for publication. It continues to be cited in current research by others.

Do a search for other research in which I previously participated and you will find I have published as co-author in Human Genetics as well. Check with the University of Manitoba to verify the granting of my Ph.D. in 1992. Check out my M.A. thesis on Depression from the University of Western Ontario (1984).

I’ve earned my credibility. I don’t pretend to have expertise in fields in which I have not studied or worked.

You know, Matt, as time and technology continue to advance, there will become more and more that we are not able to ‘keep up with’ in life. So far, you feel that you have managed to keep up with a lot, apparently… but the time will come that because of various others of life’s commitments and because you will slowly become somewhat obsolete in your skills con the upcoming generation, you will fall behind: and if we are going to believe all these scientists re their new claims, we are just going to have to do so by sheer faith… and I’m afraid that holy writ warns against putting our “trust in the arm of the flesh”.
I believe that you are Christian, or of some religious persuasion – No??

What you are telling me about what they are claiming they are similating or “observing”, as they may put it, I would have Great difficulty in just accepting on face value that scientists said so.
I’m afraid, and I hate to sound so skeptical, but I have well and truly had more than enough debates in my past with other scientists and pseudo-scientists over things where I KNEW they were wrong, and were making their claims on a limited comprehension of the overall picture and because they had missed other important cues in the environment.
Now, if we are to consider THIS particular concern however: I am firmly of the understanding that one prime reason why we cannot trust our current, limited instruments [“the arm of flesh”] is because we now live in a world of decay. They purport to claim to be able to measure this decay based on mathematical formulae indicated as a result of current day (2000) observations in present ‘Earth’.
Do you know that there are many Christians who believe that the world is still “Falling” as a result of Adam’s transgression – that it has not stopped falling, and that if these same instruments, had they been capable of working then, were used to measure decay [say] 4,000 years ago, they would have obtained different equations than they use now!
So, if we are to believe the Bible at all, and I know that You personally hold great reservations about all sorts of sections in it… but if we are to believe the many aspects of it, we can quite readily see that the earth has not always existed in its current “fallen” state. I don’t know, for instance, if you are aware of these texts in the Bible, but when God speaks of others transfiguring etc before Him, He speaks of a “Quickened” state wrought upon them in order to do this.
After Moses’ experience with God, for instance, he said, “Now for this cause I know that man is nothing… which thing I had never supposed”.
The earth and everything in it was in an exceedingly “quickened” state during the time it was being formed – a far higher plane of existence, which we, from this low level, at present, could not even comprehend… neither can any of our flimsy present instruments even access the ‘doings’ of nature at this level of perception.
Consider, further…
What must have been the state of the earth by comparison with today prior to the flood of Noah??
IF, instead of simply being skeptical on this issue, which skepticism is merely based on what today’s [situated] instruments seem to indicate was the case, you give holy writ its benefit of the doubt and look at the scene as a genuine possibility, then we must begin to wonder on the precise difference of the Pre-Noah state on the basis that Righteous men lived over 900 years, and that as God, Himself said, there was no rainbow in existence before this time… and if you care to read further, you will see it also indicates other differences of the people: I’ll leave that to your own research integrity re fairness to points made in the discussion.

It is very easy for us to comprehend that things exist well outside what we are able to measure now anyway. We know that the human limits for instance on audibility are extremel against what actually is… many animals can hear far outside our capablities of perception… likewise our minimal perception amongst the overall spectrum of light… and no doubt, because WE are so limited, the instruments we make are also severely limited in their readings of the REAL enormous size and spectrum that actually exists in the cosmos out there. What if our 5 flimsy mechanisms of perception are only half the picture?? What if there could actually be 10 mechanisms of perception available to life??
Do you know that they have only more recently finally realized that (or how) they could use a simple mechanism such as a magnetic field to draw power from it and make a generator, yet these simple matters should have been accessible generations ago. I was working on a magnetic field for power generation nearly 20 years ago, but no available finance or lab for it.

Matt, there are just so many “Unknowns” in the realm of earth’s entire creation and its overall sojourn that we cannot possibly look at our 5 minute wonder here and claim how god-like we are in our ‘superior’ knowledge and pat ourselves on the back exclaiming how brilliantly clever we are that we now know it all!

Faith does not require living in a delusional state, neither does it preclude it, apparently.

@denidowi – I could very well escape that conclusion. :)

(My above quip is in response to this quip above. I have read the Bible, many times, and have always managed to escape the conclusion that Adam and Eve and the snake and all that jazz really happened as written. I am of the opinion that it’s a politically inspired propaganda piece, with not a shred of evidence to back it up.)

@laureth – perhaps, not PREVIOUSLY… No! ... not the scrap of evidence

@Dr_Lawrence – Yes, you’ve earned your credibility. Thanks for sharing the article.

@denidowi – The Bible is a combination of historical events, advice, poetry, myths and parables. It talks about purpose and meaning. It talks about our spiritual well being. It contains symbols and metaphors (which does not mean that everything is about metaphors).

To give you an example

Matthew 5:13 – You are the salt of the earth.

These are the words of Jesus. Does he talk to salt? No, he talks to people who gathered to listen to his sermon on the mount. Does Jesus think people are salt? That people are just salt crystals which consist of NaCl? No, salt is a metaphor. Jesus talks to people. He compares people with salt.

The seven days of Genesis symbolize the order of existence. The people who felt inspired by God wrote down the seven days and they didn’t mean it was 7×24 hours. Same way as Jesus doesn’t think he can talk to salt and that salt is able to listen to him. Noah’s animals in his ark symbolize the survival of animals faced with natural disasters. Earth’s history is full of natural disasters. Adam and Eve had to leave the paradise, because when humans seek knowledge, they will also discover the ugly parts.

A modern variation of this parable is part of ‘The Time Machine’ by H.G. Wells. Do you know the story? The Eloi live in a (temporary) kind of paradise. To remain in this paradise they show no interest in knowledge at all. The time traveler discovers that none of the books in the old library has ever been opened. He wants them to pursue knowledge, but this means they will have to leave the paradise. And they will find ugliness.

I’m going yto leave it alone now, matt… because you are such a heck of a way short of the mark, there is no possible way I could help you much from where YOU stand using this extremely limited medium and situation with you being 1000’s miles from here.
It’s obviously a face-to-face job where every split second between 2 people tells its own story.
That is impossible via this set up.
I wish you well with your style and comp teck work.
Perhaps we will meet on other Q’s.
I met Doc Lozza on another topic entirely and was compelled by the skill and strength of his viewpoint to compliment him on a job very well done.
Fortunately, it was a far cry, though, from this topic, but he did a great job… so Matt, I’m sure we may meet in a more constructive mode somewhere else.

@denidowi – Come visit me next time you’re in Europe. Let’s have a cup of coffee and some German cakes!

I read this whole string and have come to the conclusion that Etpro and mattbrowne are correct. The difference between “religion” and “mythology” is that religion is your personal belief, mythology is the other guy’s.

Just to reiterate their main point, religion is ideology, evolution is science. When you try to ascribe a scientific basis for religion, you end up disproving the religion. If you try to prove evolution, you see some truths and some adjustments that should be made to the theory. The ironic part is that the religious try to burn both the scientist and the apologist at the stake.