Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I need an answer
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 1 of 58 (565372)
06-16-2010 11:34 AM


As a child of 12 years of catholic school, and a science enthusiasts I have been torn by the argument for as long as I can remember. Now from the reading and documentaries I've come across, I have simplified the 2 sides down to this:
Evolution: Here's our proof, here's what we know so far, there's a few holes, but we're working on it.
Creation: There's too many holes in evolution, it must be creation.
so the creationism theory says "Evolution isn't all correct, so it must be this" without giving me as much proof as evolution has. please someone show me the proof. Let me put it this way (while watching a documentary by Kent Hovind).
Just because you can point out a handful of inconsistencies with modern science laws pointing to evolution and the age of the earth and so forth, does not make your theory stronger. you're not posing a theory, your basing a belief on the inconsistencies of another theory. A long time ago man believed the earth was flat. we didn't know any better. If Dr. Hovind was alive back then he would say "no your science is wrong, explain the currents or weather patterns or magnetic poles, it must be God". well then a hundred years later we could explain these things, and his argument is now null and void. So if you consider that we are still learning things, the things he calls in to question (rotation of planets, formation of matter/energies etc.) can not be answered now, but could be answered in 100 years, it makes his argument ineffective. Instead i need to see proof that the earth WAS formed 10000 years ago, and not only that, but that God is the one who formed it, with his hands, in 6 days. WITHOUT saying that our theories are wrong, but proposing new ones. please. my sanity and spirituality are on the line here.

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Huntard, posted 06-18-2010 7:33 AM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 4 by Kitsune, posted 06-18-2010 8:32 AM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 06-18-2010 10:48 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 7 by ICANT, posted 06-18-2010 11:29 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 9 by Son, posted 06-19-2010 7:29 AM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 10 by purpledawn, posted 06-19-2010 8:05 AM RyanVanGo has replied
 Message 20 by dwise1, posted 06-22-2010 6:44 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 33 by Peg, posted 07-02-2010 10:51 PM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 11 of 58 (566014)
06-22-2010 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Kitsune
06-19-2010 3:39 AM


Thanks for the reply
well as was previously discussed, no I am not 12, although my grammar would lead you to believe that. I spent 12 years in catholic school, which surprisingly enough did teach us about other religions, the creation theory, and other popular questions, while focusing on the catholic faith. I think it's because of these schools (3 in total) that i think the way i do now. without meaning to, the nuns, priests, and teachers taught me to draw my own conclusions and ask a lot of questions, which I think is the way to be strong in your faith, rather than blindly following it.
In response to the other posters, I'm seeing a lot of what I thought about before, i.e. the creation theory is not dependent on fact, rather it is dependent on attempting to refute fact. I will give the theory credit for doing it's research, but the problem still remains that the research is misguided. They are attempting to prove the an apple is not an apple if sometimes it is green.
I do think very similar to you though, that the stories in the bible are meant to take a lesson from. There IS a definite possibility that there is truth within the bible, that parts CAN be taken as a historical documentation, however large parts simply do not add up or contradict themselves. I can provide further clarification on this if requested.
my stance is as follows (for now):
I believe that Jesus died for my sins, that he is the son of God. God created everything and has a divine plan. The Earth WAS NOT created 10,000 years ago. the vast majority of the bible is to give us a way to live and be good to others.
I am 24 years old, in the military, and have an appointment with a priest this weekend to have a further debate on the subject (respectfully of course), I'll let you know how it goes!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Kitsune, posted 06-19-2010 3:39 AM Kitsune has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-22-2010 6:18 PM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 12 of 58 (566017)
06-22-2010 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by purpledawn
06-19-2010 8:05 AM


Re: Why The Need for Proof?
Well quite simply, no one ever specifically told me if i was supposed to take the bible literally. My faith(as stated above) is based on an almost Aesop's Fables idea, which to some is blasphemous. So if it's ever proven that the earth is 10,000 years old, that's the first step in a whole new series of questions to determine who/what i believe in. Right now, the reason I've really started to chase this down, is that my belief that the story of Jesus may be not just inaccurate but a 100% complete fabrication. I like the idea that this was the son of God and died for my sins, despite that fact that there is no evidence, besides the bible and folklore (for lack of a more respectable term).
It's a vicious cycle really. I have already questioned and eventually denied almost everything in that book because of rational thought, which soon I'm afraid will cause me to deny the entire book, then deny the existence of God or a god. to the atheist this doesn't matter, but when you go further it means there is no reason, short of self preservation, to obey any sort of morals. It's kind of depressing really.
Maybe I'll bump that appointment up to Thursday. I have the day off anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by purpledawn, posted 06-19-2010 8:05 AM purpledawn has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by Huntard, posted 06-22-2010 1:47 PM RyanVanGo has replied
 Message 16 by purpledawn, posted 06-22-2010 4:29 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 17 by hotjer, posted 06-22-2010 4:51 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 18 by Kitsune, posted 06-22-2010 5:39 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 21 by dwise1, posted 06-22-2010 7:21 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 22 by zoetherat, posted 06-24-2010 6:09 PM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 14 of 58 (566030)
06-22-2010 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Huntard
06-22-2010 1:47 PM


Re: Why The Need for Proof?
I'm new to the forum thing so I'll do it this way:
"We don't think life is meaningless beyond self preservation. Only, we supply our own reason. In fact, realising there is no after life makes me want to live this life to the fullest, making sure I contribute to that wonderful species that is humanity, and I am privileged to be a part of. "
I know the way I worded it was too simplistic, and I regret doing so now. Of course if I were to find out that everything I believe in is a fallacy, I wouldn't just up and abandon my way of life, taking what I want, cheating on my wife for the sake of mass procreation (or for any other reason haha), or just generally being a nuisance. I do have morals, regardless of my beliefs. So please don't take that the wrong way.
Afraid probably wasn't a good word either, but if I think about it a bit, it is a bit frightening to think that what I've believe in for my whole life could possibly be completely wrong, then it's a bit unsettling. I'm sure when we discovered the earth was round some people freaked out a bit.
As to the rest, I do take Jesus to be a teacher, and I do not necessarily believe in the miracles he performed but take them as a teaching. But I do care if what I believe is true or not. It's silly to think that even though asking questions is what I do (don't think it's just about faith either) I am still so stubborn, that once someone proves that what I think is wrong, I will probably start arguing the other side. It would probably take God standing in front of me saying "Ryan, there's no such thing as God" to convince me. Then my head would explode.
But, even though I'm stubborn, I'm still a glutton for new information. If anyone thinks it's too complex, I'm a research fanatic. if you think i won't understand, i probably won't, but again, I'm stubborn, and I'll find out, if I have to teach myself astrology, astronomy, genetics, geology, whatever to a doctorate level i will get my answers. and if you think I'm too stubborn to accept what your saying, post anyway, because i am open minded, and someone else may stumble upon this thread...
so have at it, I'll be checking in frequently (creationists STRONGLY encouraged because I haven't heard much from them)
Thanks everyone,
Ryan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Huntard, posted 06-22-2010 1:47 PM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Huntard, posted 06-22-2010 2:19 PM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 23 of 58 (566706)
06-26-2010 3:12 AM


I've Come To A Conclusion
I never did go to see the priest. After thinking about this for a long time, I realized that talking to a priest would simply be me trying to be talked out of thinking logically, and jumping back in to the whole "do it because someone else said it" thing. So here's what I've come up with, as best as I can explain it. I apologize in advance if it doesn't make a lot of sense, or if it seems like I've not thought long enough about it.
Evolutionists use simple reasoning and logic to deduce that, based on very clear evidence, the earth is billions of years old or at least WAY older than 10,000 years. There is way too much evidence out there saying that this is true. Yes there are holes in the theory, there are exceptions to the truths we've discovered but that doesn't completely disprove that this way is correct, and to think otherwise is a fallacy in deductive reasoning. Believing that evolution/age of the earth is a FACT is not a religion based on a belief system, but an almost perfect theory based on observed recordable data. We as a human race have evolved to a point that we can collect and organize this data and say "this is what happened, to the best of our knowledge". This is the scientific approach of taking the evidence and drawing a conclusion.
Creationists do in fact use evidence collected but don't use the same approach. There are things present on this earth that suggest a young earth, only not near enough to say "well there you have it, we're right". But based on conversations with Creationists this is generally not how they pose their argument anyway. They use the Bible as a historical text from eyewitness reports to pose their theories. They interpret the supernatural in a way that there CAN NOT be a working discussion with the people who don't believe it. It is a religion but can not be discounted. I know to say "they are not using logic to prove their theory" should say it's wrong, but that's where thinking like an evolutionist ruins the argument again. Because the belief that a lot of people I have spoken to have, is that any evidence pointing to evolution is the work of Satan injecting doubt in to our ever advancing minds. This to an evolutionist sounds like a cheap cop-out, but again, not thinking the same. If the Bible is all fact, and the earth was created in 7 days, and the supernatural exists, and Satan is providing doubt, then all the things evolutionists use as proof will no longer "hold up in court".
I know this is starting to sound silly, it's hard to make this point to both sides at once. but as a creationist if i say "well no your theories on evolution and speed of light in the astronomical and carbon dating are all seeds of doubt planted by Satan" an evolutionist would counter "no you can't use the supernatural to explain something you can't" well you can, because the evolutionist doesn't know the supernatural doesn't exist, we can't test for the existence of God or Satan. you can't. so logically, from a logical standpoint, if you can't prove that something does not exist, you don't have to accept that it does, but, to me at least, you have to accept that there is a REMOTE possibility. yes you have evidence pointing to a world from chaos, billions of years ago, but if the creationist view of "that evidence was placed here, Satan framed you" is admitted, yes your using what may seem like "magic and spells" but it kind of holds up.
my point is, i guess, that no matter how much the 2 sides argue, the arguments will match up. It can't happen, It's pointless to argue 1 side if the other is arguing something wholly different(id est science and faith).
so my conclusion is that I am agnostic. I want to believe that something created us, or at least put the parts in motion, but I'll never be able to prove it. at least this way, however poorly I can pose it, I can argue both sides. because that's what i like to do. I hope that made a shred of sense. It's always been difficult for me to write out thoughts and even now I know i didn't do it right. I'll keep posting on here though, and reading the replies because it's interesting.
Ryan

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-26-2010 3:54 AM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 25 by Huntard, posted 06-26-2010 4:14 AM RyanVanGo has replied
 Message 28 by zoetherat, posted 06-26-2010 6:21 AM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 26 of 58 (566712)
06-26-2010 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Huntard
06-26-2010 4:14 AM


Re: I've Come To A Conclusion
I actually looked in to it quite a bit, and to a degree that's how i was for a long time, but I think there's too much of a gap between the natural and supernatural to be able to even include them in the same argument. as was stated before you can basically use the logic i used before to argue any point, and that's true, even though it sounds ludicrous, how would you know Satan wasn't tricking me in to thinking i had 2 legs when i really have 3, you wouldn't because if he's doing it to everyone, no one would know. why? because we do not yet have the capacity to comprehend the supernatural, and it doesn't cross over to deductive reasoning.
it's because of this thought process I would find Deism difficult.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Huntard, posted 06-26-2010 4:14 AM Huntard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Huntard, posted 06-26-2010 5:06 AM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 30 of 58 (566746)
06-26-2010 3:31 PM


i understand
i completely get the points your making. i do. if i can't prove it didnt happen, i should believe in it by my logic. or by process of not being able to prove it's wrong i should give it a chance, even though it's wrong to me.
however, i am basing my belief that there IS a god who did these things based on evidence, albeit very little. The fact is that since man was able to think outside of the monkey mindset we have worship deities. why would this happen with no reason at all? I'm sure there are a few hypotheses as to why, but I'm taking it as evidence that there must have been witness of this, at some point and has been notably more refined as time goes on. this is small evidence, but enough, for me to ACKNOWLEDGE that there is a very real possibility, even though i'm not positive, i like to think so.
now if you really did create everything 2 minutes ago, please let me win the lottery this week.
thank,
Ryan

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Huntard, posted 06-26-2010 4:00 PM RyanVanGo has not replied
 Message 32 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-26-2010 7:24 PM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
RyanVanGo
Junior Member (Idle past 5016 days)
Posts: 8
Joined: 06-16-2010


Message 55 of 58 (568143)
07-04-2010 1:11 PM


oh man
it's getting pretty heated. i appreciate the breakdown of the creationist theory. However you take a much less literal point of view than others i talk to, who believe it took 6 days, it's 10000 years old and so on and so forth. they way you put it is basically the catholic school point of view saying "when they said days they meant like...God's days...which could be millions of years...cuz god has no sense of time." this i have been taught, but i appreciate a creationist getting in the fray. i haven't been ignoring my own thread, just like to see the argument steer away from "Ryan, you're silly for believing this. don't be agnostic be an atheist". keep it up everyone i'm learning things which is never a loss.
Ryan

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by BobbyCrick, posted 07-07-2010 10:33 AM RyanVanGo has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024