gays

[StreamlineTrade]

Quote from Kassz007:



By the way, an eye wasn't created by randomness. It's called natural selection.

Not really.

Natural Selection is a theory that gives possible explanation as to why the eye will be successful and passed down to further generations. It has nothing to do with the miracle that concerns itself with how the eye was created in order to enter the natural selection debate.

You are putting the cart before the horse.

 

[StreamlineTrade]

Quote from omegapoint:

That always trumps ...right into a cul de sac. The great equalizer.

God existed before existence began.

Simply put, the concepts behind these questions are both deeply scientific and philosophical. Simply because we cannot comprehend the answer, does not mean that no answer exists, or that it is incorrect.

As a child, I struggled with the concepts of nuclear physics. Now, I happen to have a deep understanding. Does this mean that the concepts of nuclear physics were less correct, or even invalid when I was younger?

 

[omegapoint]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:

God existed before existence began.

Simply put, the concepts behind these questions are both deeply scientific and philosophical. Simply because we cannot comprehend the answer, does not mean that no answer exists, or that it is incorrect.

As a child, I struggled with the concepts of nuclear physics. Now, I happen to have a deep understanding. Does this mean that the concepts of nuclear physics were less correct, or even invalid when I was younger?

I haven't kept up with this thread. Is this agnosticism you're referring to or some organized religion? I find evangelists often use agnosticism to support their beliefs. I don't necessarily disagree with the notion of using the word God to stand in for the yet to be discovered mysteries of existence.

 

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:
God existed before existence began.

As a child, I struggled with the concepts of nuclear physics. Now, I happen to have a deep understanding. Does this mean that the concepts of nuclear physics were less correct, or even invalid when I was younger?

No. It just means that you cannot tell before hand which concepts are based on truth and which ones are fairly tales.

For example, as a child I struggled with the concept of Santa Claus. Now, I have a deeper understanding. Does that mean that the concept of Santa Claus was correct or valid when I was young?

But that's what believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (aka God) want us to do - they want us to believe a priori. Belief without knowledge is the basis of religion, and the basis of most of what's wrong with the world to boot.

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:

Not really.

Natural Selection is a theory that gives possible explanation as to why the eye will be successful and passed down to further generations. It has nothing to do with the miracle that concerns itself with how the eye was created in order to enter the natural selection debate.

You are putting the cart before the horse.

Natural selection states that the eye wasn't always an eye as we know it today. It was slowly evolved over time to be what we now know as an eye. But to go back to what created the original eye "molecule" (not sure if this is the correct term, but it should suffice to get my point across), I suppose you would have to revert to the big bang theory or something similiar.

On the flipside, the creation argument would be that god created this complex thing called an eye. But then you get into the infinite regress of who created this god that created a thing called an eye.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from Kassz007:

Who created god?

Man, of course.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:

Not really.

Natural Selection is a theory that gives possible explanation as to why the eye will be successful and passed down to further generations. It has nothing to do with the miracle that concerns itself with how the eye was created in order to enter the natural selection debate.

You are putting the cart before the horse.

You are putting the bible before education. What is presently the eye first began as tissue that, over the expanse of time, became sensitive to light. Natural selection generally favored those species with such photosensitive tissue. It very slowly evolved from there over a very long period of time.

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:



Simply put, the concepts behind these questions are both deeply scientific and philosophical. Simply because we cannot comprehend the answer, does not mean that no answer exists, or that it is incorrect.

As a child, I struggled with the concepts of nuclear physics. Now, I happen to have a deep understanding. Does this mean that the concepts of nuclear physics were less correct, or even invalid when I was younger?

You could say the exact same thing about the unanswered questions about the big bang theory. However, many god believers use the fact that we don't know everything about the big bang theory to discredit it.

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from traderNik:

No. It just means that you cannot tell before hand which concepts are based on truth and which ones are fairly tales.

For example, as a child I struggled with the concept of Santa Claus. Now, I have a deeper understanding. Does that mean that the concept of Santa Claus was correct or valid when I was young?

But that's what believers in the Flying Spaghetti Monster (aka God) want us to do - they want us to believe a priori. Belief without knowledge is the basis of religion, and the basis of most of what's wrong with the world to boot.

Religion encourages ignorance.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from StreamlineTrade:

...As a child, I struggled with the concepts of nuclear physics.

Oh, shut up.