What is more faith than religion?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brad McFall:
What is the general responsibility or response to the ICR position that taught evolution is a "religion"? The only thing I can think of is that it is then some kind of horizontal ritualized pedagogy (assuming this is not a bluff for either side). I know that one can not equate teachers of evolution and a fraternity and when the next thing I hear is that it takes more "faith" to believe in evolution than creation this appears fundamentally evangelistic to me.

​

It can not be the case if evolution is true that it must be learned the same way as 7+5=12 because I can count to these numbers and and verify an instance. I have never been able to verify in resemblence/similarly this evolution that taugt me not this but the existence of taxogeny to which I have alluded.

​

I assume taxa aside that the debaters simply are trying to position concepts of the environment post-Scopes. That being the extent to which GATES considers any meaning to word "ecosystem" than the transition to an object economy it seems that NOMA is really about GOUld denying that a ding an sich exists and has nothing to do with any creative difference of Catholicism and Panbiogeography (which addresses the common line in humans) and any reformed creationism the mass of catholics may be witholding.

​

Please correct me if I am wrong.

---

The ICR isn't interested in science at all, all they want is to spread their religious dogma.

quote:

---

Originally posted by acmhttu001_2006:
Interesting topic here,
Hmmm, I though a religion was a set of ethical prinicples to live by and to base your life off. Evolution does not set forth ethics nor does it say how we are to live our lived by. Why? Again, we are crossing Magesterium most horribly. The questions of religion and ethics lie in the Magesterium of Religion or the Magesterium of Law, not in the Magesterium of Science. The Magesterium of Science does not answer how we should live our lives. It merely tries to answer how life came about [scientific] and places characteristics of life to things.
It is not intersted in matters of "religion"
More faith to believe in evolution. Actually, I believe that it would take more faith to believe in creation. I am answering this outside of the Magesterium of Science. To me, things are easier to believe if you can see evidence for what you believe in. I do not walk to class and see a man being "created" from the dust. But everyday, I see the way how things change over time.
7 + 5 does not always = 12. I am a math major, it only takes redefining the number system.
Interesting you mention NOMA, what do you think of it? Can you please clarify the last paragraph, I got lost. Somewhere, you jumped a lot of conclusions.

---

Also, there is a big difference between religious faith and normal faith. With religious faith one is expected to accept without truly questioning what one is told or without any real evidence. With normal faith one goes by previous experience of a certain event or person.[This message has been edited by nos482, 09-14-2002]