Religion in the Modern World > Comments on The 3 D's of creation.

Go to Religion in the Modern WorldAdd a commentGo to The 3 D's of creation.

food4thought - Re: Christianity has evolved...

I remember those days, school lunches on Fridays were always problematic because fish was not always available. It was better not to eat than to pull out a ham sandwich in front of the nuns. An edict issued from the Vatican in the mid 60's clarified that not eating meat on Fridays was merely an optional tradition and not a rule. That tradition is however still alive and well in small pockets across North America. I was in Rochester NY a year ago, going for lunch on a Friday with some associates, every restaurant we checked out had fish as the lunch special.

I could not agree more about the need for religions to stop bullying each other.

posted by gomedome on March 27, 2012 at 6:25 AM | link to this | reply

Christianity has evolved...

When I was growing up, Catholics weren't supposed to eat meat on Friday, then all that changed! According to the Baptists in the south, my sister, a Catholic isn't a member of an actual religion. The next evolution Religions need to make is not to bully each other.

posted by food4thought on March 26, 2012 at 10:05 PM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: Re: ash_pradhan - Re: I agree, but let me elaborate...

When you put it this way GD, I have no qualm with your position. I'd like to read / discuss your views / suggestions / solutions for improving the sad state of our scientific education..I'm seriously thinking of offering some home-tutoring to those needing / deserving.

posted by ash_pradhan on March 23, 2012 at 11:51 AM | link to this | reply

Re: Re: ash_pradhan - Re: I agree, but let me elaborate...

In North America there has been a trend developing over the past couple of decades where the fundamental Christian agenda discarding evolution in favor of creationism has effectively dumbed down an alarmingly large segment of the youth demographic. This is a generation where possibly as many as 30% of children reaching college age have an anti-science mentality and are years behind the remainder of the same youth demographic in their basic understanding of science. I cannot think of a worse scenario for a region facing stiffer global competition than ever before.

 

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 7:10 PM | link to this | reply

TAPS. - that would be an unfortunate outcome

But ultimately you have to do what you feel comfortable with.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:57 PM | link to this | reply

Katray2 - Re: Fascinating and as always, thought provoking, Gomedome..

In a broad sense virtually all hypothesis concerning the origins of both the universe and life rely on a propagating event (sometimes referred to as first cause) of some type. The questions of how did the first one appear or how did the process begin being answered by divine intervention is to me not an unreasonable speculation. Attempts at literal translation of any ancient holy book will inevitably be an exercise of force fitting a non compliant reality.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:56 PM | link to this | reply

Re: ash_pradhan - Re: I agree, but let me elaborate...

Yes, again I agree with your reply..and so do I with your comment below "Evolution and Creationism need not be pitted against each other". To me, a firm believer in what I shall call "Divinity", as well as a staunch engineer by professional training, the synonimity of Evolution and Creation is what makes complete sense. The challenge lies in learning / understanding / sharing more & more about the Universe, both within and without, and not getting hung up over pitting the two to push one's own agendas / theories, be they religious / scientific / whatever.

 

posted by ash_pradhan on March 22, 2012 at 9:58 AM | link to this | reply

Re: TAPS. - I would not use the word "crazy"

Probably it would be good for me to avoid your religious blog and let you do your own thing your own way without me butting in.  But, I do find your suggestions and opinions interesting.

posted by TAPS. on March 22, 2012 at 9:12 AM | link to this | reply

Fascinating and as always, thought provoking, Gomedome..

Your last sentence sums up the possibilities that many see. An intelligent person I know, a believer in a higher power and also in scientific theories, said he thinks God could have set evolution in motion; bases it on free will not only of human beings but of nature itself. A "Godly" day could mean millions of years. The determination to take everything in the Bible literally baffles him.

posted by Katray2 on March 22, 2012 at 8:50 AM | link to this | reply

TAPS. - I would not use the word "crazy"

But I would suggest that you are ignoring the fact that the Wesleyan/Methodist interpretations of communing with God through Jesus Christ are only as prevalent as they are in your geographical region. I am from a different part of the world and for the ease of creating an analogy, would suggest that I view Jesus Christ in a similar way as the Jewish people do. It seems likely that his legend was based on a real Jewish man named Yeshua Bar Yoseph and many important philosophies have been ascribed to him over the years, making him one of the most important humans born in history but for me it stops there.

I will never be able to reconcile the notion that an all knowing omnipotent being, if he in fact exists, would use such an inefficient and obscure method to disseminate the path to eternal bliss for such an historically small portion of mankind.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 8:34 AM | link to this | reply

Re: TAPS. - you are not getting off the hook that easily

But...but...but...I don't feel like I am on a hook.  LOL
I feel no need for an argument, and no need to attempt to "reconcile" biblical truths and scientific truths.  Both are terribly fascinating and you can't really fully appreciate one without the other.  The important focus is always and ever the reconciliation of man to God through Jesus Christ.  Everything else falls into place at the appropriate time.  I sound like a crazy old woman, don't I. 

posted by TAPS. on March 22, 2012 at 7:20 AM | link to this | reply

Kabu - Re: you have some excellent comments here friend Gome

As I mentioned in an earlier reply, if a person believes that a God creator is responsible for all that exists, evolution used as a tool by the God creator is the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn. Evolution and Creationism need not be pitted against each other and it matters not to the validity of the science whether or not a God creator initiated the process. Truth be known; science cannot offer anything but speculation as to the origins of life but does provide us with some concrete evidence on how life has changed after it first appeared.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:43 AM | link to this | reply

TAPS. - you are not getting off the hook that easily

I won't be deleting your comment, instead I'm calling it an example of the basis for the creationist argument. Which inevitably produces an attempt to reconcile ancient scriptures with irrefutable scientific truths that refuse to comply. Leaving the altering and distorting of those truths as the only course of action.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:30 AM | link to this | reply

Xeno-x - Re: creationists

When someone attempts to arrive at a pre-conceived conclusion by force fitting the pieces and ignoring all that does not support the intended outcome, the sum total of what they believe can only be contrived and unworkable. This would be true in any field of study but we see it amplfied within religious beliefs because the individual is motivated first and foremost by proving to themselves that scriptures are infallible. The end result is a mountain of lies forced upon themselves and anyone they are able to influence.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:23 AM | link to this | reply

WaterKat - Re: Your last sentence sums it up for me...

Not being influenced in my observations by any form of scripture or ancient holy book, your position seems to me to be the only logical conclusion someone who believes there is a God and creator can come to.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:14 AM | link to this | reply

ash_pradhan - Re: I agree, but let me elaborate...

In this sense you are using the word "evolution" as a verb to describe the constant state of change in the universe around us as opposed to using it as a scientific term to explain the changes in living organisms over time. Still, it is a valid application of the word based on the fact that these changes are very real.

posted by gomedome on March 22, 2012 at 6:11 AM | link to this | reply

you have some excellent comments here friend Gome

I really appreciated your last line....perhaps because it is what I believe.

If a person must ascribe our beginnings to a creator being of some sort, does not the possibility exist that evolution was the primary tool used for creation?

posted by Kabu on March 21, 2012 at 9:29 PM | link to this | reply

I know you don't want to read this, but I love it and am compelled to share it here.  I won't be offended if you delete it from your blog comments:

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.  And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.  And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.  And God said, Let there be light:  and there was light....." 
~Genesis 1:1-3, The Holy Bible, KJV

 

 

posted by TAPS. on March 21, 2012 at 8:10 PM | link to this | reply

creationists

disregard hard evidcne and even fair analysis of the Bible to believe insomething that has no merit at all.

It is interesting how similar these alternative views of creation mentioned are -- and my own views -- and how somebody in both the Old and New seems to have latched onto the same precepts.

posted by Xeno-x on March 21, 2012 at 5:27 PM | link to this | reply

Your last sentence sums it up for me...

My belief has always been that Evolution is "Gods" method of Creation. In other words EVOLUTION IS GOD!  Why there is ever a debate over this topic is beyond me.

posted by WaterKat on March 21, 2012 at 3:30 PM | link to this | reply

I agree, but let me elaborate...

According to the "Vedanta" philosophy, there are three cyclical phases in the Universe going on simultaneously, "Creation, Maintenance, and Destruction". The force behind the process, or "evolution", of these phases is variously known as the "Creator / God / The Force / The Vibration" etc, etc, depending on one's upbringing / education. Albeit, the process is one of evolution, as you correctrly submit. In that sense, the argument "Creation vs Evolution" falls through, and seems to me to be merely something manufactured by those wanting to push their own parochial agendas.

Good to read / respond to your stimulating posts again GD, I've missed them :)!

posted by ash_pradhan on March 21, 2012 at 3:14 PM | link to this | reply

Referrals - About Us - Press - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Conduct Policy
Copyright © 2017 Shaycom Corporation. All rights reserved.