What we must accept if we accept evolution Part 2

What is all of this except some sort of academic sounding rant for which the only discrepancy between it and the likes of willowtree or JAD is the lack of direct inflammatory language? There is simply no argument. Faith's version of God is incompatible with the TOE because she defines God and interprets the bible specifically to be incompatible. By this reason everyone who does accepts the TOE must be an atheist towards Faith's God. This of course means nothing in general unless you accept this perpetual state of pedantic lunacy!As it stands to the non-lunatic 3rd party observer there has been one major point missing from this whole discussion that some people touched on. There has been no attempt other than assertion to show that Faith's version of God is actually the God of the Bible.Certainly there is no doubting that Faith's God is BASED on the Bible but the only people I know of who believe in Faith's God or a "Faith style" God are fundamentalist Christian young earth creationists. Why would a non-lunatic 3rd party observer ever accept this definition of God especially those of us who have had personal experiences with God and have the ability to read the bible.The concept of "the Fall" as it is perpetuated by this subset of Christianity is self invented as a survival mechanism by those who must deal with contradiction in their faith while still claiming inerrancy. All the rules and effects of the fall are all applied into the theology ad-hoc. Assuming that Biblical literalism is even required to have "true" faith in Christ, those that fall into this category of "Faith style" God believers are not even Biblical literalists. Their theology is an addendum to Biblical literalism stimulated by supposed "logical" consequences of their own invention.Worse than this is that anyone who is a Christian is going to have almost the exact same problem simply with a less extreme difference because religion is subjective! I happen to believe that God who created this universe is someone who came down to a live as one of a member of people who had certain sense and connection with Him and who had their own political and religious mythology both borrowed and created by their culture over time. My God gave in clear terms and actions an attitude of how to be a good human being as well as a way to escape the pains of mortality. This is just a "Jazzns style" God though because really given that God is not physical there can be no actual objective definition of God. I happen to feel that my definition of God is more sane and that most reasonable Christians have a similar definition of God that is very close to mine.Exercise: Can you count how many words in the previous paragraph that suggest subjectivity?Some of what I am getting into is sort of regarding a Meta issue with this topic which is why I don't feel too bad posting it here. I first saw this thread and ignored it because the OP seemed pretty ridiculous to me. Only the people who define atheism, materialism, determinism, and God in a certain way would ever be able to say that the TOE, or any scientific theory for that matter, would logically insist upon acceptance of the others. These also just happen to be the people who I just happen not to care to have a conversation with because I prefer to talk about things that are actually stimulating. Hence I ignored the topic predicting that it would just go the way of any number of inane topics that inevitably are created here on this forum. Only when I saw this thread boom into a sequel did I realize that my beloved community of EvC actually took this dementia seriously. Really now, the next time someone claims to have a logical proof that the TOE implies atheism are you really ever going to make a compelling case through thick haze of zealot style conviction?Just remember folks, everyone's religion is different. Religion is probably the most subjective things we as humans ever stuff into our heads.This message has been edited by Jazzns, 01-31-2006 02:08 PM

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

I don't think you are a villan. Only if you held a public office would I be worried.I just call it like I see it. We ARE here to disagree.

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Can you even begin to to fathom that others think YOUR version of Christianity is the one that is abostate?Do I get an answer or another glib just like your response to Message 117?

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Umm. It is only just because your whole argument in this thread is based upon the premise that you know the true nature of God and that particular nature of God is incompatable with the ToE. The foundation of everything you have built in this thread, all the "logic", completely crumbles once you realize that starting point is based on pure subjectivity.Did you actually read my post Message 117? You may not have liked what I had to say in it but I basically said exactly the same thing. Your "logic" only works if you define God to be the one of your subjective belief.I am not saying you are some lone crazy person inventing weird Gods. I know perfectly well that other people have a similar construction of God. My point is that the ToE implies atheism only based on said construction and not on the objective definition of God.

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Welcome and your criticisms are spot on. Its hard sometimes when you work for an hour or so on a post and have it merely hand waved away just because someone can't deal with it. Thank you for getting your voice heard and helping to make more transparent the tactics of those who claim to have the sole sponsorship of logic.Sometimes it is hard to know what other people think about the conversation that takes place and it is good to see that the glib responses to real criticism are noticed as such.

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

So you should know exactly how it feels. This is strange given that not a single one of my posts to you thus far have recieved anything of substance. What about my posts don't you like? The fact that I disagree with you and consider your position completely defunct of merit and logic? I think you are totally wrong on a level that is way to deep to even begin to try to water it down. Can you not handle someone who disagrees with you so fiercly in a debate? Do you still think I am villifying you?If you would like I would sincerly help you start your own blog. I work on the web all day so I know how to do it pretty easily. That way you wouldn't have to stress and pressure of giving substantial responses to those who disagree with you because there would be no one who did. Blogs are great and they are all the rage. But you have been here long enough to know that this is a debate board and if you want people like me, who have rarely if ever treated YOU in such a glib manner, to take you seriously then maybe you might want to rethink your position on "do unto others".This message has been edited by Jazzns, 01-31-2006 08:23 PM

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Thats not even true. A literal interpretation of Genesis does not necessarily lead to concepts such as The Fall (at least the way YECs describe it) or no death before sin. These are ad-hoc reasonings that that only YECs add on to a literal interpretation of Genesis.The only thing Faith has shown is that her ad-hoc additions to Genesis which produce a character of God who is by definition incompatable with evolution is actually incompatable with evolution. Her entire argument is one big long winded tautology.

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show