EvC Forum: Why evolution and Christianity cannot logically mesh

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Why evolution and Christianity cannot logically mesh

Archer Opteryx

Member (Idle past 3628 days)

Posts: 1811

From: East Asia

Joined: 08-16-2006

Normal Thread Display

Message 5 of 75 (351231)
09-22-2006 6:31 AM

Reply to: Message 4 by iano
09-22-2006 6:12 AM

a bad start

iano:

Traditional Christianity says that man is born a sinner (a result of the fall: whether of creationist/evolutionist origin) so when people talk about 'innocent little children' Traditional Christianity responds: "they are like us all - guilty little sinners".

Whose tradition?

You seem to be assuming the doctrines of original sin and total depravity as a given. Catholicism and Calvinism teach this. Eastern Orthodox Christianity never has. Neither do most branches of Protestantism outside Calvinism--some of them quite 'traditional.'

More realistic terms are in order if this discussion is to describe anything meaningful. 'Traditional Christianity' is a broad term that invites taking certain favored or disfavored parts for the whole. It skews the result toward what one wants to see.

Modulus points out more flaws in the OP that deserve attention. I look forward to seeing its author address these concerns.

It does look like the OP draws its conclusion by setting up its terms in a way to force the conclusion. Arguments like that can make tight little packages in themselves but they don't say much about the real world.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : Clarity.

Edited by Archer Opterix, : Spelling.

Archer

All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 4 by iano, posted 09-22-2006 6:12 AM		iano has not replied

Archer Opteryx

Member (Idle past 3628 days)

Posts: 1811

From: East Asia

Joined: 08-16-2006

Normal Thread Display

Message 13 of 75 (351269)
09-22-2006 10:06 AM

Reply to: Message 12 by iano
09-22-2006 9:48 AM

Iano: Animals = machines, not beings

iano:

According to traditional Christianity (or at least it does not clash with traditional Christianity) an animal is just a mechanical (in a biological sense) thing and to talk of cruelty to mechanical things is down to skewed thinking.[...]

[...] The animal is a machine as it ever was (programmed by God in his benevolence to communicate and respond to us for our pleasure and reward).[...]

[...] The sense of the animal suffering for its own sake is a projection of 'being' onto the animal that is unwarranted.

Wow.

Is this your belief?

You're doing a spectacular disservice to Christian ideas and total violence to what we know of the psychological life of animals.

Archer

All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 12 by iano, posted 09-22-2006 9:48 AM		iano has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 14 by iano, posted 09-22-2006 10:12 AM	Archer Opteryx has not replied
	Message 16 by nwr, posted 09-22-2006 12:29 PM	Archer Opteryx has not replied

Archer Opteryx

Member (Idle past 3628 days)

Posts: 1811

From: East Asia

Joined: 08-16-2006

Normal Thread Display

Message 40 of 75 (351620)
09-23-2006 3:47 PM

Reply to: Message 39 by iano
09-23-2006 1:20 PM

All creatures great and small

iano:

Given those two things, that man is of a different order than animals is also given. So when he suffers he does so in a way that cannot be allied to animals no matter how close physiological aspects can be compared. For man is an animal too but differs in one vital respect.

The similarity between man-the-animal and chimp-the animal 'suffering' is to be expected but since we cannot divorce man-the-God-made-being-in-a-similar-to-animal body from the animals we cannot comment on them suffering. To suffer is as far as it is possible to tell purely a human experience. We cannot say more than this for we cannot become solely animals in order to find out.

All the physiological similarity in the world scratches not one jot on that. By physiological read "any similarity between man an animal that arises out of their animalness" We cannot exclude the God-made bit in order to identify suffering apart from its presence in us

You overlook the rather obvious fact that physiological similarities have a lot to say about the presence of physiological pain. Wishing the correlation away doesn't make it go away.

I've wondered for some time what you mean by the label 'New Age' when applying it to other Christians. Now I know. By 'New Age' you mean any developments in Christian thought from the year 1000 onward. You have no patience for trendy Birkenstock-wearing hippies like Hildegard of Bingen, Francis of Assissi, Teresa of Avila, Meister Eckhart and Thomas Merton--all of whom espoused very different views from yours about the relation of human beings to other creatures on this planet.

By now it's plain you do not and cannot speak for 'traditional Christianity.' You seem not to know about most of the traditions you would represent.

You speak only for yourself. Truth in advertising should prompt you to admit as much.

Come to think of it... better scratch those Birkenstocks for Francis and Teresa.

Archer

All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 39 by iano, posted 09-23-2006 1:20 PM		iano has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 41 by Faith, posted 09-23-2006 4:02 PM	Archer Opteryx has replied
	Message 44 by iano, posted 09-23-2006 5:18 PM	Archer Opteryx has not replied

Archer Opteryx

Member (Idle past 3628 days)

Posts: 1811

From: East Asia

Joined: 08-16-2006

Normal Thread Display

Message 43 of 75 (351636)
09-23-2006 4:45 PM

Reply to: Message 41 by Faith
09-23-2006 4:02 PM

'You've heard of Plato? Aristotle? Socrates?--Morons!'

Faith:

I outgrew the above after the first couple of years of seeking.

In two years you outgrew Hildegard of Bingen, Francis of Assissi, Teresa of Avila, Meister Eckhart and Thomas Merton?

Wow. Plenty of intelligent people think it takes much longer than that just to understand them. But you say you outgrew them in two years.

And here I was thinking you didn't believe in macroevolution.

Although I love Teresa of Avila in particular, she's just too Catholic to stick to.

A more spiritually sophisticated dismissal can hardly be imagined.

Francis has a touching relation to Brother Animal, and I like him too.

Are you saying you agree with him? Or does the fact that he is as Catholic as Teresa preclude this?

But Hildegard and Meister Eckhart and Thomas Merton are all way over the line into heresy.

Surely you know these individuals figure prominently in any informed discussion of 'traditional Christianity.' I'm going to have to ask you to support your blanket dismissal of them as heretics.

Care to make your case? Or were you speaking ex cathedra?

Archer

All species are transitional.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 41 by Faith, posted 09-23-2006 4:02 PM		Faith has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	nwr, PaulK
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 0/2