Why always evolution vs creation?

[Cato]

I am a long time atheist; however, I am not anti-religious (as long as religious people keep out their nose from my life). I am not proselytizing (or would this be "deselytizing"?); in fact, I envy those with deep religious conviction.

However, this being a forum specialized for religion AND politics, I think this is the right place to ask an important question regarding the unremitting debates between adherents of religions and atheists/agnostics without unduly offending the feelings.

So, why are people, mainly the religious ones, are diverting the debate always to the question of evolution vs. creation?

I mean the vast majority of religious people are not abstractly religious but very specifically. Their religiousity does not consist of only claiming that the universum or at least the earth has some originator of some "spiritual form" (whatever that means). No, the religions include very detailed specifics, like a God as a "person", sometimes even with a gender. Even more, the beliefs include very specifics regarding the creation of the "world", regarding the relationship between the God and humans not only in terms of creation but of expected behaviour, of punishment and reward. Even more, the beliefs include specific rituals and details "important" enough to kill each other over them.

There is a huge leap from accepting, that the "world" has been created by a higher being and that that being is watching us, caring for us, punishing and rewarding us, and that we have to follow special rituals in order to satisfy the wishes/expectations of that higher being.

Why are the religious concentrating on the single question "evolution/creation"? It is like if you accept, that the world has been created by a higher being, then you have to come with me in the church on Sunday, kniel down and mumble certain words etc. Of course, the church has to be my church, the rituals have to be my rituals, etc. - otherwise your belief is wrong.

What makes the religious ignore this IMO important aspect?

Edited July 30, 2009 by Cato

[DogOnPorch]

So, why are people, mainly the religious ones, are diverting the debate always to the question of evolution vs. creation?

Damned if I know...being an atheist like yourself. I imagine the more progressive religious thinkers are already 'at peace' with evolution; it being an incredible insight to God's handiwork, etc. The ones that try to deny things like the age of the Earth being VERY old are the ones that puzzle me. Too much information? Maybe it just makes it that much harder to take books like the Bible and Koran literally...which some seem to actually do!

Welcome to the forum, btw.

[Guest TrueMetis]

It's because they want to force their religion on others.

[GostHacked]

I have moved from athiest to agnostic, because in the end, I really do not know if the god exits or not.

But to your question: Is it because the church likes to deal with absolutes? Science likes to deal with absolutes as well, but having the notion in mind that it may not always be absolute with the discovery of new evidence. Both like to deal in absolutes, the process of getting to those absolutes are quite different. Religion interperets a book and there are many interpretations of the same book. Science tests all evidence and answers for consitancy in the results. They just seem to work opposite of each other.

DOP.

Maybe it just makes it that much harder to take books like the Bible and Koran literally...which some seem to actually do!

Imagine if all our laws were interpreted literally.

Scientists in many different fields, have worked seperately/independantly to arrive at the same conclusion on a topic. This is what we call a unifying theory. Religion seems to work opposite. They have the theory, and want all factions to adhere to it regardless. If it really is a matter of faith, then science has proved itself enough so that I can have faith in the results of multiple independant groups eventually arriving at the same conclusion...... but that is all God's handiwork apparently too.

God wanted to make the earth, but knowing it is like long division, you have to show your work.

[Cato]

It's because they want to force their religion on others.

I gather from the above, that you are not among the faithful. It is not only unfair but useless to opinion for others. Beside, all Christians, Muslims and religious Jews accept the results of that leap, but not all of them are pushy.

Is it because the church likes to deal with absolutes?

The Church is secondary in this issue. Accepting the authority of any Church is already past the relevant point. Someone does not accept the authority of the a Church without being a follower of that teaching, does one?

I asked this question several times on different places; I received only one honest and useful answer:

This is perfectly natural for me.

Now, if that person had made a deeper thought about that, he would have recognized, that the adherents of other religions could (and probably would) say the very same. But then what gives the superiority, the assurance of truth to your particular religion?

What I would like to hear from the faithful is, why they think their faith is the correct one and where they think the followers of other faiths made the error leading to the "wrong belief".

[lily]

I'm not sure if I understand exactly what you're asking here. You mention a leap from believing that there's a creator to believing this creator "watches over us and cares for us". And then you want opinions on why that is, and why we believe that our beliefs trump everyone else;s?

Well, right off the top... you're presenting your opinion as fact and then asking for an explanation of that fact, and then making a further supposition.

I don't push my beliefs on others. I believe most of the world's major religions have more in common than differences, so I'm not going to claim that mine is the only correct one. It's simply the one that makes the most sense to me... and it works for me.

So, why are people, mainly the religious ones, are diverting the debate always to the question of evolution vs. creation?

Funny. It's my opinion that these discussions are usually started by the non-religious folk.

[Bonam]

I don't push my beliefs on others. I believe most of the world's major religions have more in common than differences, so I'm not going to claim that mine is the only correct one. It's simply the one that makes the most sense to me... and it works for me.

I find this an interesting statement, given that religion is generally founded on faith, rather than reason. Would you mind elaborating on what in particular you find to make more sense in the religion you choose to follow, as compared to others?

[lily]

I'm going to assume you don't realize the insult in your statement.

You don't think faith can be based on reason? You think people of faith just run their fingers down the listings in the phone book, randomly selecting their faith? And then blindly stick with it, because reason couldn't possibly enter into the equation?

[GostHacked]

I'm going to assume you don't realize the insult in your statement.

You don't think faith can be based on reason? You think people of faith just run their fingers down the listings in the phone book, randomly selecting their faith? And then blindly stick with it, because reason couldn't possibly enter into the equation?

Usually the religious take this personally to heart. It should not. And if your faith is based on reason, we just want to know how you came to that conclusion with reason and logic. Don't think of it as an insult, we simply want to know and understand. I am not a religious person and doubt I ever will be. So as an outsider to religion in general, I personally find it interesting how others come to the result of belief in a certain faith.

[lily]

We shouldn't take questions about our faith - and how it couldn't possibly be based on reason - to heart?

And no, I don't really think you want to understand. Reading even the few responses on this thread should give you an indication why.

[Bonam]

I'm going to assume you don't realize the insult in your statement.

You don't think faith can be based on reason? You think people of faith just run their fingers down the listings in the phone book, randomly selecting their faith? And then blindly stick with it, because reason couldn't possibly enter into the equation?

Most people don't "pick" their faith. They start out with whatever religion their parents followed. Many continue with it throughout their lives, others grow disenchanted and join a religion of one of their friends, or switch to the same religion as the person they marry, etc. I'm sure there are some few that actively examine the teachings and beliefs of various religions, and then pick one based on some specific criteria, but these must be a tiny minority.

You haven't answered my question though. Don't sit around looking wounded and insulted. If you truly picked your faith based on reason, certainly you wouldn't mind elaborating on the logic you used in your choice?

[Cato]

Well, right off the top... you're presenting your opinion as fact and then asking for an explanation of that fact, and then making a further supposition

I really do not understand what exactly you are referring to. Are you saying that the leap I mentioned is not existent, it is my invention? If so, then can you detail the transition from believing the existence (or past existence) of a "higher being" and your specific religion?

I'm not going to claim that mine is the only correct one

Have not you been told yet by "true believers", that this sort of belief is "cafeteria Catholocism"? It does not need to be Catholicism, but I heard it this way.

It's my opinion that these discussions are usually started by the non-religious folk

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Keep in mind, that "evolution", as far as it touches "creation" has not changed for a long time; it's the creationists, who are coming up with new creatures.

You don't think faith can be based on reason? You think people of faith just run their fingers down the listings in the phone book, randomly selecting their faith?

When do you think the vast majority of the religious became religious? Not in their early childhood? Don't you find it strange, that the children of Christians almost always become Christians, those of Moslims will be devoted Moslims and Jews' children are destined to become followers of the Jewish faith? You can add other religions as well.

The future faith of someone is decided by the parents and by the prevailing culture, not by the persons directly, reasoning plays no role.

I think it is a Catholic wisdom, that if a child is not Catholic yet when becoming 12, then he/she is lost for the faith or something like that.

[GostHacked]

We shouldn't take questions about our faith

Why not?

and how it couldn't possibly be based on reason - to heart?

It's simply the one that makes the most sense to me... and it works for me.

And no, I don't really think you want to understand. Reading even the few responses on this thread should give you an indication why.

I have always wanted to know. I have asked on this board many times. I have also asked friends and family about it. It is something I am interested in. Regardless, the 'responses' should never deter you. You are going to find this on any political or even religious forums. If you have faith and believe in it, nothing posted on these boards would shatter that. So if you are confident in your faith and how you came to settle into it. I'd like to hear the story. If religion works for you then great. But call me curious.

Lily, there have been many threads on the evolution vs religion/creationism/ID. And none of the religious people are willing to share thier personal thoughts on the subject. Every thread, the religious people just end up dropping off the debate. Because in the end, they can't really explain why or how they come to the faith. And not very good reasons are given to support their view.

Maybe you can give some light to the subject.

[lily]

Most people don't "pick" their faith. They start out with whatever religion their parents followed. Many continue with it throughout their lives, others grow disenchanted and join a religion of one of their friends, or switch to the same religion as the person they marry, etc. I'm sure there are some few that actively examine the teachings and beliefs of various religions, and then pick one based on some specific criteria, but these must be a tiny minority.

We all go through a spell where we question our beliefs. For some reason, people that choose to become atheists/agnostics are seen to have made the "correct" choice - that their reasonong is better. Those of us who chose to remain in the faith are seen as what... sheep? Illogical?

You haven't answered my question though. Don't sit around looking wounded and insulted. If you truly picked your faith based on reason, certainly you wouldn't mind elaborating on the logic you used in your choice?

I'm not sitting around all wounded and insulted. My faith isn't so weak that you have that sort of power over me. I was just pointing out the insult in that statement.... you can see it or not. Doesn't bother me either way.

[lily]

I really do not understand what exactly you are referring to. Are you saying that the leap I mentioned is not existent, it is my invention? If so, then can you detail the transition from believing the existence (or past existence) of a "higher being" and your specific religion?

You stated your opinion and then asked for responses as if your opinion was fact. It isn't.

Have not you been told yet by "true believers", that this sort of belief is "cafeteria Catholocism"? It does not need to be Catholicism, but I heard it this way.

I've heard several people claim that there way is the only way. Some Christians wouldn't accept my baptism as "real" because I wasn't immersed. Others wouldn't because I was baptised as an infant. This is their opinion, and doesn't have any affect on my own faith and relationship with God.

Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Keep in mind, that "evolution", as far as it touches "creation" has not changed for a long time; it's the creationists, who are coming up with new creatures.

I don't really know what you mean here. New creatures?

But my point stands... most forums' religion sections are full of atheists ridiculing the faithful. Not just Christians, but every religion. I'm not seeing much different here.

When do you think the vast majority of the religious became religious? Not in their early childhood? Don't you find it strange, that the children of Christians almost always become Christians, those of Moslims will be devoted Moslims and Jews' children are destined to become followers of the Jewish faith? You can add other religions as well.

The future faith of someone is decided by the parents and by the prevailing culture, not by the persons directly, reasoning plays no role.

So you don't think reasoning ever plays a role... not even when children grow up and make their own decisions? Look at it this way. When you were little, your parents read you simple stories, probably ones where the main characters were talking animals. As an adult, do you continue to read the same sorts of stories? Or have you found a genre or 2 that appeal to you?

I was raised in the Christian faith. I've studied other faiths, but for one reason or another, I prefer my own. I'm sure tradition and the familiar do play a role, but it doesn't paint the entire picture.

[Bonam]

We all go through a spell where we question our beliefs. For some reason, people that choose to become atheists/agnostics are seen to have made the "correct" choice - that their reasonong is better. Those of us who chose to remain in the faith are seen as what... sheep? Illogical?

You said it not me. I was merely asking questions. Also, who is it that you feel perceives atheists/agnostics as having made the "correct" choice?

I'm not sitting around all wounded and insulted. My faith isn't so weak that you have that sort of power over me. I was just pointing out the insult in that statement.... you can see it or not. Doesn't bother me either way.

You take pride in the strength of your convictions, and yet are insulted when someone mentions that the foundation of religion is faith? Perhaps for you reason played a part in choosing your religion. Even if that is the case, a considerable part of any religion still rests on faith.

I see you are still choosing not to answer the question, though.

[lily]

Why not?

Do NOT do this again. If you want an honest discussion with me, quote me in context. don't cut off half my statement to make it look like I was saying something completely different.

I have always wanted to know. I have asked on this board many times. I have also asked friends and family about it. It is something I am interested in. Regardless, the 'responses' should never deter you. You are going to find this on any political or even religious forums. If you have faith and believe in it, nothing posted on these boards would shatter that. So if you are confident in your faith and how you came to settle into it. I'd like to hear the story. If religion works for you then great. But call me curious.

No response on a web board is going to shatter my faith. But most of these discussions aren't honest ones. Take this one, for example. It pre-supposes that those of us with faith have no reason.

Lily, there have been many threads on the evolution vs religion/creationism/ID. And none of the religious people are willing to share thier personal thoughts on the subject. Every thread, the religious people just end up dropping off the debate. Because in the end, they can't really explain why or how they come to the faith. And not very good reasons are given to support their view

Maybe you can give some light to the subject..

What does my faith have to do with evolution? I believe in evolution. There's no "vs" in the discussion.

[Bonam]

What does my faith have to do with evolution? I believe in evolution. There's no "vs" in the discussion.

Excellent, a point we can agree on. I too believe that there is no conflict between evolution (and science in general) and religion, except that which is manufactured by certain religious leaders.

[lily]

You said it not me. I was merely asking questions.

Gee... wasn't I asking questions too? I didn't "say" anything.

Also, who is it that you feel perceives atheists/agnostics as having made the "correct" choice?

The atheists/agnostics in these forums who insist on discussing faith with the beleievers.

You take pride in the strength of your convictions, and yet are insulted when someone mentions that the foundation of religion is faith? Perhaps for you reason played a part in choosing your religion. Even if that is the case, a considerable part of any religion still rests on faith.

For someone that prides himself on his "reason" you can't seem to grasp the fact that I'm not insulted.

The foundation is indeed faith. That would be why I keep using the word in each and every response. I can almost type it without looking at the keyboard now, too.

How about you use that reason and logic you seem to think are the hallmark of the non-believers. People who are raised in a religion all go through a time when they face doubts. Some choose to remain in their beliefs, others don't. For some reason, you choose to believe that only one group used reason. I don't.

I see you are still choosing not to answer the question, though.

You're very perceptive.

[Bonam]

The atheists/agnostics in these forums who insist on discussing faith with the beleievers.

Perhaps some do, but I am not one of them. I had not intent to post in this thread before I saw your statement, which I found interesting and responded to. I have no conflict with religion, so long as it does not try to convert me nor assert undue political influence. And I also realize that debating the existence of god or other such fundamental tenets of religion with those who have diametrically opposing viewpoints is generally unproductive.

For someone that prides himself on his "reason" you can't seem to grasp the fact that I'm not insulted.

When someone does not respond directly, but instead says: "what you said was insulting!", it's generally a good indicator that they have been insulted. Perhaps not in your case though, if you say so, shrug. I had no intent to insult, but I do see how one that is touchy about the subject could be insulted by my question. People can find ways to be insulted by many things that were not intended as insults.

The foundation is indeed faith. That would be why I keep using the word in each and every response. I can almost type it without looking at the keyboard now, too.

So if you agree that the foundation is faith, why then did you find my statement to the same effect insulting?

How about you use that reason and logic you seem to think are the hallmark of the non-believers. People who are raised in a religion all go through a time when they face doubts. Some choose to remain in their beliefs, others don't. For some reason, you choose to believe that only one group used reason. I don't.

I see reason where it has been displayed. Being an atheist, I understand full well the reasoning behind not believing in religion. You claim to have used reason to come to your religious beliefs, and I have asked what that reasoning is, and you have thus far not responded. If you wish to convince others of your logic, perhaps you would be so kind as to share some of this logic with them?

[lily]

Perhaps some do, but I am not one of them. I had not intent to post in this thread before I saw your statement, which I found interesting and responded to. I have no conflict with religion, so long as it does not try to convert me nor assert undue political influence. And I also realize that debating the existence of god or other such fundamental tenets of religion with those who have diametrically opposing viewpoints is generally unproductive.

I have no conflict with atheism/agnosticism.... except when they passively aggressively try to convert me.

When someone does not respond directly, but instead says: "what you said was insulting!", it's generally a good indicator that they have been insulted. Perhaps not in your case though, if you say so, shrug. I had no intent to insult, but I do see how one that is touchy about the subject could be insulted by my question. People can find ways to be insulted by many things that were not intended as insults.

"I'm going to assume you don't realize the insult in your statement" is a far cry from "what you said was insulting!"

So if you agree that the foundation is faith, why then did you find my statement to the same effect insulting?

I've already explained this. But I shall explain it again. Hopefully you'll understand this time.

I see reason where it has been displayed. Being an atheist, I understand full well the reasoning behind not believing in religion. You claim to have used reason to come to your religious beliefs, and I have asked what that reasoning is, and you have thus far not responded. If you wish to convince others of your logic, perhaps you would be so kind as to share some of this logic with them?

If you and I faced the same or similar doubts, why do you accept that you used reason and assume I didn't to come to our respective decisions?

I don't see any purpose to convincing others of my logic.

Edited July 31, 2009 by lily

[Bonam]

If you and I faced the same or similar doubts, why do you accept that you used reason and assume I didn't to come to our respective decisions?

I make no such assumption. I know my logic for not accepting religious beliefs. I do not know yours for accepting them. What I do know is that you seem reluctant to share your logic. Perhaps you find your religious beliefs private and would rather not discuss them with others (which would be odd given the nature of the thread), or perhaps you are not confident of the validity of your reason. Or perhaps you did not use reason at all. Or maybe your reasoning and logic in coming to your beliefs is so impeccable that you guard your genius ideas, not wishing to share, hoping to one day capitalize on them.

As it is, we can't tell.

I don't see any purpose to convincing others of my logic.

What, then, is your purpose in this thread?

[lily]

I make no such assumption. I know my logic for not accepting religious beliefs. I do not know yours for accepting them. What I do know is that you seem reluctant to share your logic. Perhaps you find your religious beliefs private and would rather not discuss them with others (which would be odd given the nature of the thread), or perhaps you are not confident of the validity of your reason. Or perhaps you did not use reason at all. Or maybe your reasoning and logic in coming to your beliefs is so impeccable that you guard your genius ideas, not wishing to share, hoping to one day capitalize on them.

As it is, we can't tell.

I lol'ed at the last bit.

My faith is personal and private. I don't like to discuss the "rationale" as it were behind my decisions, because that can come across as trying to force my beliefs on others (see the 3rd or 4th response in the topic)

People try to separate science from religion, as if you can't accept both. I don't understand that. Evolution exists. I don'[t see it conflicting with a creationism theory at all.

People like to point and laugh at the Bible, figuring that everyone takes it literally. It's not. Some is literal, sure, but a lot is allegory, poetry.... some is cryptic enough that no'one can really say for sure what it means. We can only speculate based on what we know... but most average believers don't claim to have all the facts. (neither do scientists!)

I can talk to you about the circumstances surrounding my Granny's death. I can tell you things about my own life. But I don't think you would see that as a "logical" explanation.

[DogOnPorch]

I have moved from athiest to agnostic, because in the end, I really do not know if the god exits or not.

But to your question: Is it because the church likes to deal with absolutes? Science likes to deal with absolutes as well, but having the notion in mind that it may not always be absolute with the discovery of new evidence. Both like to deal in absolutes, the process of getting to those absolutes are quite different. Religion interperets a book and there are many interpretations of the same book. Science tests all evidence and answers for consitancy in the results. They just seem to work opposite of each other.

DOP.

Imagine if all our laws were interpreted literally.

Scientists in many different fields, have worked seperately/independantly to arrive at the same conclusion on a topic. This is what we call a unifying theory. Religion seems to work opposite. They have the theory, and want all factions to adhere to it regardless. If it really is a matter of faith, then science has proved itself enough so that I can have faith in the results of multiple independant groups eventually arriving at the same conclusion...... but that is all God's handiwork apparently too.

God wanted to make the earth, but knowing it is like long division, you have to show your work.

Religion has its good points: putting moraity on paper so at least you didn't have an excuse anymore when you coveted your neighbour's wife/wives, and such.

The architecture is amazing. Especially Gothic cathedrals which I'm a sucker for re: visiting.

The Christians Monks got busy and wrote everything down including books that were thought 'dangerous'. Much of our ancient literature comes to us via some monk freezing his ass off in some monestary, quill in hand.

The Judeao-Christian work ethic. Being idle is a sin...n'est pas?

Numerous other points that'll come to me later...

[GostHacked]

Do NOT do this again. If you want an honest discussion with me, quote me in context. don't cut off half my statement to make it look like I was saying something completely different.

I did quote you in context. And I asked a question. I also kind of interjected as well. Your complete quote was still there. I am being as honest as I can here. It may seem facetious to you, but this is what I usually run into when asking these questions. I get pegged as dishonest or whatever. I am always curious about religion and how people come to beleive in it, because for me, it is something that I just can't wrap my head around. My parents never forced any kind of religion on me or my sister. So I have never known or understood religion as those who grow up in a religion and stick with it throughout their lives.

Don't be instulted.

No response on a web board is going to shatter my faith. But most of these discussions aren't honest ones. Take this one, for example. It pre-supposes that those of us with faith have no reason.

I am not questioning your faith. I am questioning you on what and how you came to that final conclusion. If you see this as an insult, then we have nothing further to discuss. I am agnostic, but if religion works for you, then it works for you.

What does my faith have to do with evolution? I believe in evolution. There's no "vs" in the discussion.

For the fact that these topics seem to always end up with the debate between the two.