Replies

Looks like we won't be able to discuss this - I am far too inferior for discussions with you.

But, why do I have to delve into arguments of evolution vs creation to prove my own beliefs? You see - I do not believe in the ultimate validity of evolution without a creator to start the process. I do not think science is a higher authority than God. I believe that God created the science as the science evolves from understanding the workings of God's creations.

I understand that there are many who hold on to any excuse to prevent or mock belief. Why should I care what they think about my willingness to believe? Are they superior to those that have faith in their creator?

God does not become God based on your understanding of his creations. You become a believer based on your understandings of the methods of God's creations.

Belief in God is for all people whether scientists, natives, or bums. Belief in God is a matter of faith. Scientists, and highly educated people believe they have to have proof - which circumvents faith and, in fact, puts them in the position of judging whether God is worthy of their belief. They search and delve in arguments to prove He is not.

What should God think of their efforts? Who would be the more valued believer - the street bum who merely accepts Him on faith or the scientist who spends his career espousing exposure of the fallacies of belief to come to a final decision to believe (after years of persuading others against belief)?

Looks like we won't be able to discuss this - I am far too inferior for discussions with you.

No, you're probably just not used to dealing with someone as perpetually crabby as me. I do apologize for that, but when I see arrogant theists repeating the tired old canard that "there are no atheists in foxholes" and someone referring to all atheists as "liberal air heads" (and I know that you weren't the one doing that), I get a little pissy.

But, why do I have to delve into arguments of evolution vs creation to prove my own beliefs?

You don't.

You see - I do not believe in the ultimate validity of evolution without a creator to start the process.

Well, I won't argue with you. As science can only study the natural world, observing a supernatural cause for any natural phenomenon is outside of the realm of science. As such, science cannot address the possibility of a Creator starting something like evolution; which means that it can neither confirm nor deny such a thing.

When someone wants to argue that evolution is true, but that a divine creator was behind it somehow, I'm not going to get involved. That's not a discussion based purely on science, but at the same time they're not denying anything presented by science, so I usually have no quarrel with them. My problem in this discussion has been with a number of people who assert that the existence of 'God' (and not just any divine agent, but a specific God, typically as described in the Bible) is somehow "obvious", despite the fact that less than half of the planet believes in such a deity. To me, that comes off as an arrogant insult against non-believers where it is said that it's not so much that they've just not seen the right evidence, but that they are idiotically ignoring very obvious evidence right in front of them. As though someone with no knowledge of Western culture could one day go outside and discern just from the sunrise that there is a single God and that this God gave His Son to die for the sins of humanity. It's also a blanket dismissal of every argument for any other religion and against Christianity and while those arguments may well be flawed, it still looks like a cop-out to sweep them all away by saying "if you don't get it, there's just something wrong with you".

Perhaps I misinterpreted something that you said to mean that. I was seeing red after a few of the more arrogant comments yesterday, and I apologize if I attacked you unfairly.