Ambiguity-uncertainty-vagueness the key to resistance against the idea of evolution?

No. We're talking about something supernatural, not just a matter of what a person is attracted to.I also added a long edit to that post you may not have seen.This message has been edited by Faith, 10-10-2005 05:17 PM

Did you actively try to move to christianity?

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Not at all. If anything I resisted it. It wasn't any more popular among the educated then than it is now. I cringed at the thought of joining the likes of Jerry Falwell.This message has been edited by Faith, 10-10-2005 06:34 PM

One might believe in God because they think they have good reasons to, and one might not beleive in God because they think they have good reasons to.So perhaps the poster was asking why you didn't believe in God before (your reasons) and why you do now.But I will tell you my reason for being rather skeptical of the basic religious idea: the accidental nature of life.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-10-2005 09:27 PMThis message has been edited by robinrohan, 10-10-2005 09:29 PM

quote:

---

It comes down to "I really WANT God to exist and for humans to be specially created, because the alternative is uncomfortable and unsatisfactory. Therefore, I believe God exists."

---

With me, it was; I can feel God, I know he exists. I also see physical evidence with a new idea, but this idea cannot be true, it would make life miserable, and human relations would prove insignificant. I couldn't live with a system of the sort, so I have resolved that it cannot be truthful. I see it as destruction of life, whereas you and asgara see it as an "icky feeling".

---

I am smiling.

A philosopher by the name of Albert Camus shares your feelings, and gloom. He is famous for his ideas now. He invented the theory of Absurdism, which seems to directly agree to your statements. I think his ideas are absurd lol.

quote:

---

Summary of Absurdism
Camus particularly is considered the originator of absurdism, a philosophy related to Existentialism. Absurdism contends that human beings are basically irrational and human suffering is the result of vain attempts by individuals to find reason or meaning in the absurd abyss of existence.

​

Camus claimed that the only true philosophical question was that of suicide. That is, should we bother living at all or simply kill ourselves? Camus argued that historically most people have either believed that life is meaningless and concluded in favor of suicide, or have created some artificial meaning like religion to fill their lives. Camus claims that there is a third option: we can realize that life is meaningless and nevertheless keep living. People who opt for this third option are "absurd heroes."

​

The Rebel, the Don Juan, and the Artist are three figures that Camus identifies as absurd heroes. Each of these people finds meaning in his or her own pursuits and thus lives up to the example of the Greek mythical figure Sisyphus, who was "condemned" to push a boulder up a hill for eternity fully aware that the boulder would simply fall down the hill as soon as he seemingly finished his task.

---

wikipedia

---

I am smiling.

Yup, as I've commented myself, our EvC friend RR is definitely an Existentialist.

And what are the clues to this accidentalness of life? Or what do you mean by the term?In my case once I was told God is a fairy tale I believed that, realizing I had no way to prove He wasn't, and just assumed that was true for the next 30 years. I even got rather aggressive about my atheism, argued with people about it.But we are now OT aren't we.Back to the topic: I didn't "resist" the idea of evolution at all same as I didn't resist being told God is a fairy tale. I believed it. I tried to think about it though, tried to understand the evidence for it. THAT was a frustrating experience. It seemed to me that ALL the evidence could be explained some other way just as well. I guess that's "ambiguity" for you, but science can't rest on ambiguity, even though ironically it's supposed to be a sign of superior intellect to tolerate it. Of course I figured I didn't have the brain to understand it completely despite trying, so I'd just give up and believe it on faith.

That's just it. Maybe the evidence can be explained some other way, but not just as well. There are many strange features in nature, features that should be regarded as very weird design indeed. The explanation that God created everything does not satisfactorily account for all these mad designs.God would have to be regarded as a rather incompetent designer, or a mad hatter, maybe even someone with an evil streak, and that just doesn't sit very well with the notion of God as a perfect being.A perfect designer makes perfect designs. Some designs in nature are far from perfect. Ergo, the designer is not perfect. God is perfect, ergo the designer is not God.Evolution, which basically comes down to a repetitive cycle of trial and error, is far more in line with imperfect results. I would like to take the idea that "evidence for evolution might be explained some other way just as well" and turn it around: the evidence for God's creation can be explained by evolution, not merely just as well, but far better.This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 11-Oct-2005 10:26 AM

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

A correct Christian theology explains imperfections, deformities and disease as the inevitable gradual deterioration of all nature on account of the Fall.This message has been edited by Faith, 10-11-2005 05:44 AM

That's not an explanation, that's a cop-out. It's just a general statement that lumps every specific case under the generic heading of "gradual deterioration of all nature". It can't, as evolution can and does, address every single case of imperfection with a plausible explanation of the specifics.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Hurricanes, car wrecks, cancer, meteors crashing into planets, tape worms, mad cow disease, earthquakes, Down's syndrome, being born with two heads, or no limbs . . .

In addition it is but one Christian perspective and not one accepted by the Majority of the Churches.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, I was simply informing you that your idea that imperfections can't be explained by a perfect Creator misunderstands the theology of that Creator. I believe ID shares this misunderstanding as they seem to argue a great deal from the idea of perfection.What specifics you think are explained by anything in particular is another subject. And how does evolution "address every single case of imperfection" anyway, and how do you know that the same principles would not also apply under the theology of the Fall?

OK. What I just said to Parasomnium is the theological answer to such things, though I guess I need to qualify this to say it is the theological answer of only one branch of the Christian Church since jar pointed out that there are some that don't recognize the Fall or don't interpret it this way. It's a consistent explanation, however. A perfect God made a perfect universe and sin brought disease, deformity, accidents, disasters and death into it.