Creationism vs Evolution, Equal?

[kirk1690]

maybe it was JEHOVAH who instigated evolution , ever considered that ? intelligent design is the new buzzword.... the bible was written at a time when people would not have understood this so adam and eve was an easier idea to digest. Im not sure myself but its something to think about

[Russ]

Originally Posted by danielf

Depends what you mean with valid. It's different is all I'm saying.

So what did YOU mean by ''for starters we all agree Britain exists''?

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ B

So what did YOU mean by ''for starters we all agree Britain exists''?

Actually, I edited my post to say it's an empirical fact. Surely, it is not too hard to grasp that having faith that an empirically/objectively observable entity behaves in a certain manner is a different matter than believing in the existence of a supernatural omnipotent being that cannot be objectively observed?

Well in a way the story of Creation can still be true.If you think along the terms that time means nothing to a Deity and that a God's day may be measured in terms of millions of years.

Well that was how I viewed it when I was younger and still believed in a God.

Originally Posted by danielf

Actually, I edited my post to say it's an empirical fact. Surely, it is not too hard to grasp that having faith that an empirically/objectively observable entity behaves in a certain manner is a different matter than believing in the existence of a supernatural omnipotent being that cannot be objectively observed?

But if it is empirically measured and observed and documented, is it faith?

[Pierre]

Hold on a minute.

This whole "faith" thing started becaused Chris T made an 'off the cuff' remark

Faith? How odd.

Implying that it is odd that the Raja (and therefore anyone) who did not have "faith" in a religious context should be able to use the word faith.

So before Russ gets on his high horse

So faith in an entity is only vakid if 'we' all agree it exists?

It was in fact Chris T that was initially discounting "non-believers" use of the word.

I for one do not believe there is any difference in the use of the word faith for people or supernatural beings.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Chris T

Why are you asking me?! The outline popper posted from Wikipedia shows that memetics is a much deeper 'theory' than what you posted as your understanding of it.

I have no intention of defending memetics, I simply observe that based on the Wikipedia entry, there seems to be a lot more to it than you apparently thought.

Well going by that wiki article, to me it seems I'm on the right track. A meme is an idea that can evolve, expand, and cease to exist etc.
I can see how religion can be seen as a meme, it's an idea, it fits with other likeminded people, so expands. Other religions come along, they fit better or are forced to fit, and the old religion gets forgotten, the death of a meme, and in it's place is the new one, which propergates and mutates as it goes.
Isn't that what happens with religion? A religion "fits" with someone, so they adopt it, and propergate it to their children etc, over time, due to the affect of other memes, for instance homosexuality and divorce being considered acceptable, it changes.

Originally Posted by Chris T

I'm not certain how these questions are relevant to what I asked you.

Faith in a human being is based on your actual experience of them, what you know there reaction to similar situations have been, not what you've been told their reaction would be.
For instance, if I were invovled in an accident, left with a broken leg and a complete stranger, if he said he was going to get help, I'd have hope he would, but I wouldn't have faith that he would.

---------- Post added at 15:35 ---------- Previous post was at 15:34 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris T

But if it is empirically measured and observed and documented, is it faith?

Yes, of course it is.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chris T

But if it is empirically measured and observed and documented, is it faith?

There is no difference. Faith in anyone, or anything. Is the hope, the belief, the desire, the will and the trust that they will deliver, live up to and achieve our expectations of them.

Well that's how I would understand it.

This empirical nonsense is irrelavent

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Chris T

But if it is empirically measured and observed and documented, is it faith?

But we are talking about faith in an empirically observed entity's behaviour versus faith in the existence of a non-empirically observed entity... It's like saying 'I believe the mail man will be on time Tomorrow' versus 'I believe in the Tooth-fairy' Both are beliefs, but of a totally different order.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Hold on a minute.

This whole "faith" thing started becaused Chris T made an 'off the cuff' remark



Implying that it is odd that the Raja (and therefore anyone) who did not have "faith" in a religious context should be able to use the word faith.

So before Russ gets on his high horse



It was in fact Chris T that was initially discounting "non-believers" use of the word.

I for one do not believe there is any difference in the use of the word faith for people or supernatural beings.

You're making a lot of assumptions. I don't see anyone claiming exclusive use of the word 'faith', only a request for clarification on people's meaning of it. Is it wrong for us to use the same questioning back at those who usually question our beliefs?

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Russ B

You're making a lot of assumptions. I don't see anyone claiming exclusive use of the word 'faith', only a request for clarification on people's meaning of it. Is it wrong for us to use the same questioning back at those who usually question our beliefs?

Do you only have faith in the deity you worship Russ, or do you have faith in other things?

[Pierre]

Is it wrong for us to use the same questioning back at those who usually question our beliefs?

Not at all, it's called debate.

It's like saying 'I believe the mail man will be on time Tomorrow' versus 'I believe in the Tooth-fairy' Both are beliefs, but of a totally different order.

I don't agree to that. The use of the word faith (based on my perception of it) is correct on both counts.

It is a question of managing your expectations based on personal view points. To a child the tooth fairy and Father Christmas are very real and their faith that they will receive presents is usually justified and rewarded. As you get older and find out the truth about Father Christmas you find out the truth and lose your faith - you don't expect anything.

Whereas the religious amongst us believe that Christ is the truth and therefore are wholly justified in having their faith.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I don't agree to that. The use of the word faith (based on my perception of it) is correct on both counts.

Which is why I said 'both are beliefs' The amount of 'faith' (acceptance of a premise in the absence of objective observations) involved is rather different though...

Edit: Surely, I'm stating the bleedingly obvious here?

[MarkD]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

Well in a way the story of Creation can still be true.If you think along the terms that time means nothing to a Deity and that a God's day may be measured in terms of millions of years.

Well that was how I viewed it when I was younger and still believed in a God.

I seem to remember that word originally used was the Hebrew yom that has a number of meanings one being a period of time of no specific duration. The other bit that amuses me is people that say God made the world in seven days. What the Genesis has is that the world was made in six days, after all it has that he rested on the seventh so that cannot count.

[Xaccers]

Originally Posted by Pierre

As you get older and find out the truth about Father Christmas you find out the truth and lose your faith - you don't expect anything.

Speak for yourself, I still believe in Father Christmas.