theophilus

This will be my last response to you unless you can demonstrate some ability or willingness to engage in meaningful argument.

There is, and can only be, one "true" God, i.e., ontologically and governmentally. There are however, many "gods," i.e., objects of worship in this world. The Bible speaks of "the god of this world" referring to Satan's rule in the lives of those who rebel against God.

Since the one true God neither lies nor contradicts himself and has revealed himself and his law through his word, we cannot both be right. Since you claim to have recieved direct revelation from God, it would have to be consistent with his previous revelation, so you'll have to acknowledge that Jesus Christ is indeed the Son of God, that you are a lost sinner deserving of eternal punishment and Jesus is the only true savior.

You'll also have to show me, consistent with his previous revelation, how I'm wrong.

Good luch.

Jack the Bodiless

You have absolutely no basis whatsoever for the assumption that "the one true God neither lies nor contradicts himself and has revealed himself and his law through his word". Therefore I can just as easily declare that this is not true.

Alternatively, I can declare that it IS true, but that the Bible is not God's word.

You're really not trying very hard, Theo. It's simple. You're worshipping the wrong God!

Now prove ME wrong.

theophilus

Fiach

Evolution is a complex process that we have known about from its amazing 2 billion year fossil record of stepwise changes. But until recently all we only knew that it definitely occurred but not anything about the mechanisms. In only the past 5 years our knowledge has leapt in quantum bounds. We completed the human genome, identified the genes of some 70 or more diseases, and the genes responsible for various bodily organs. Evolution is not simple natural selection. Real life is far more complex than childish Biblical faerie tales.

The CGAT nucleotide sequences are the basis of the code. The DNA in all multicellular animals undergoes a splitting of the double helix. However when each half realigns in the sperm or egg, it doesn't realign like the entire unihelix of its parent. It is composed of fragments of genes and grouped chromosomal fragments. So that is why you don't necessarily get half of your father's dominant genes. You may get many of his recessives. So recombinations produce changes.

Then to make it worse, there are internal rearrangements that occur in the sequences due to "carpenter genes" called transposons that make somewhat random changes. Then some of the genes do not simply reduplicate but in error repeat the sequence several times or 60 times. It is much like you holding your finger too long on the "e" of the keyboard and typing "eeeeeeeeeee". This replication series may do one of several things. It may have no noticeable effect if it just produces an excess of some protein not critical. Or it might produce an altered protein that kills the neuron (Huntingtons Disease). It may prove non-viable and result in a stillborn. Rarely it produces a protein or part of a structure that changes it in such a way as to give the animal an advantage. For example, the code for a reptile scale may alter to produce a branching fractal structure that we know as a feather. If the new change is beneficial, the line of creatures bearing it will survive. The old root species may also survive as a separate species or die out if climate or conditions have changed to its disadvantage. Other mechanisms known to affect evolution are viral and bacterial intrusions.

How do we know? We know because we still have these in our very own DNA. They are silent for the most part. And in the past they may have triggered a change in the code that led to a few successes that soon became a majority.

We have identified old genes that we still carry but are usually silent. One terrible one is the one that once coded for an arthropod exoskeleton (shell). That was in a remote ancestor of the Cambrian Period with an exoskelton like crabs and bugs. One of its offspring mutated to develop a notochord (like a cartilaginous backbone but not bone). Some of them failed to develop a shell. The greater flexibility without the need to moult the shell made these guys successful and later led to amphioxus and to fish, and to us. But the exoskelton gene still can be found but other genes suppress its manifestation. In the rare instances where this gene manifests the unfortunate baby grows a shell and dies as a result.

Evolution is a phenomenon that occurred basically from frequent mutations of which a small few are more successful, especially in changed environments. The biomolecular mechanisms that allow these mutations is much more complex than we thought 10 years ago.

The real challenge for us now is how to use our knowledge in trying to eliminate diseases. Ethical issues include the genetic manipulation to produce superior athletes, scientists, musicians, artists, etc. Is it ethical for us to genetically engineer our grandchildren?

I realise that this is a long posting but the mechanisms of evolution are so very complex that I attended a weeklong seminar 7 hours per day intensively outlining those processes. And believe me, it takes a super attention span and fabulous memory storage to just absorb this information. That is why it is put on CD's. Your brain can't store the data. We are all fortunate to be alive at this time of great discovery of our own origins and our kinship with the rest of the Animal Kingdom.

Fiach

Jack the Bodiless

And this is precisely why Christian presuppositionalists are insane. Their worldview contradicts perceived reality. Therefore they deny perceived reality: they retreat into self-delusion.

Note, also, their hypocrisy. They CANNOT know what the Bible says about ANYTHING, without FIRST presuming that they are READING it correctly.

Presumption of the accuracy of our senses and reason is the PRIME AXIOM: the assumption that MUST be made. We recognize this. You borrow this from OUR worldview, base YOUR worldview upon it (loosely), then deny that you have done so.
I don't believe the Bible, because it contradicts itself and because it contradicts observed reality.
NEITHER of us can know with absolute certainty that our senses are reliable.

However, I know at least as certainly as you know the Bible that grass is green, the sky is blue etc. And my worldview tells me WHY my senses are reliable (they evolved as survival aids).
The sequence of the fossil record (and the correlation with DNA data etc), which proves that the Genesis creation account is false. I know this as surely as you know anything written in the Bible (which is, after all, just a book: maybe your copy was printed by Satanists?)

But this is the wrong forum to discuss that in detail.

Again: my worldview is entirely free of such problems.

Oxymoron

You don't get it yet, do you Theo? There is no "debate" here, because you are assuming what other people on the forum know, as best we can know, to be false. You cannot debate what you will not critically examine. My postings were an ad hoc attempt to get you to consider that assuming an equally absurd but contradictory statement about the world that we share results in some more objective test to establish which one is correct because (as you rightly say) they cannot both be.

...which, I believe, is this:
But theo, just about every religion insists that their God is the correct one and all the others are blasphemy. You just don't get it, do you? We want to know how you know that your xianity is the one true religion and the bible is the true word of God. What does it have that (say) Islam and the Koran does not?

We want to know why you assume that particular dogma. Because presumably you can pre-assume any of them, to much the same effect.

If I were a xian? Hmmm... God considers lying a sin. Clearly, He wants me to know that you are a sinner for continually lying on his behalf and will suffer eternal damnation for it.

Oh, sod it: my God is better than your God. Your God is a fiction. Mine is a small, purple duck-billed platypus who created the universe with her Holy Spur last week, about 3 in the afternoon (just before tea-time). She reveals The Truth to me by telepathic transfer. I pre-assume that this is true, therefore anyone suggesting it is an absurdity is equally as wrong as getting you to question your Jebus myth. She told me that you were talking garbage and that it The Word of God so it must be true.

And don't go getting all "argument ad populum" on me. You are the only person who believes your exact version of xianity, after all.

On a final note: you have been patronising and insulting to people who - just like you - want to argue on their own terms. Instead of warming up your long-dead "assumptions", howz about trying to step outside of your tiny little box and seeing that there are ways of thinking that you just haven't encountered before? Or else, not scatter insults hither and thither; or sulk because you preach religion and dubious philosophy on an atheist forum and no-one agrees with you?

Fiach

Christians come here to proselytise, to save our souls. As such it could be considered a kind motive, since they believe we atheists are going to hell for thinking. I don't resent proselytisers because I think their motives are noble if misguided. However, they often begin with a kind and nice approach, but get frustrated at our logical arguments, and some resort to "you will burn in Hell, and I will be up in Heaven laughing."

Fiach
PS I will repost the excellent Newsweek article if it is OK with the Moderator.

Fiach

Newsweek
May 7, 2001

Religion And The Brain

Newsweek Magazine

Author: Sharon Begley
With Anne Underwood

Edition: U.S. Edition
Section: Science and Technology
Page: 50

Continued at:

Religion And The Brain

Oolon Colluphid

I had (more or less) said to Theo:

But it seems he's incapable of taking a hint. Therefore, I have started a thread in E/C in his honour.

The thread is located here. Enjoy!

TTFN, DT

Cozmodius

Wow, you're cut from the same cloth as those so-called "Christians" that used to burn Jews and Moslems at the stake. I have now come to the conclusion that your mind has deteriorated to the point of insanity from lack of oxygen, after being slammed shut for so long.

By the way, you do know that the trinity concept is NOT biblical at all right? Or have you never read the bible without someone "explaining" it to you?