> > > > > > > > > In Antropolgy class today we discussed Creationism vs Evolution.
> > > > > > > > > This is a debate that I ussualy enjoy, if both sides can stay civil.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yeah, heh, Religion and Politics are two of the most inflammatory subjects I've ever known.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We watched a video on the Creationist point of veiw, I left not long after it started. One of the opening arguments was that Evolution is bad because Karl Marx liked it. That's not an argument, it's not even contradiction, the validity of the theory of Evolution has nothing to do with who belives it.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Agreed. No belief must necessarily attach one believer in it to another.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > the other argument was that a beliefe in Evolution negates the possibility of a God.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I don't believe that it does.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Not so, I belive Evolution is the prosess God set up to produce us.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, I don't believe that it happened that way. But not because I don't believe he couldn't have.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > The other reason I left was because I had heard these arguemts earler this year on the street corner when the traveling zelot stoped by to tell us we would all go to hell because we listen to rock and roll and the girls were pants instead of skirts.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Yeesh. *Some* people...
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Evolutionists are tring to have a serious debate and Creationists always seem to fall back on either character assassination, guilt by association, or just saying that thinking is bad and we need more blind obediance with out questions or independent thought.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > They seem to because that's what you see all the time. You left early on; I wonder if the rest of the video was like that, or if they brought up some good points later. They should have considered moving that to the end, or preferably omitting it altogether. It makes us look bad. I *hate* ad homenim, esp. when it comes from someone I otherwise might agree with. It causes others to paint me with the same brush.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Dar"I'm not new here, can you tell who I am?"win
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Nyper"Spider-Boy, is that you?"old
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > A while a ago I read something the Pope said about this. The gist of it was that belife in the sicentific explination does not conflict with Genisis. If you want to interpet "He created man out of dust" as the way the ancient Hebrews understood evolution from microbes (which developed after elements mixed in the anceint ocean and formed DNA) that is OK.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Genisis always seemed to be someone explianing a dream they had. A nomadic Hebrew goes to sleep one night and God explains (in a dream) the creation of the world. Now the big bang becomes "Let there be light (the light from the bang, since stars did not yet exist)", deep time (billions of year) is a hard concept for any one to grasp, but a week is comperehendable. This is what happens when an infinte mind like God's contacts the limited and confined minds of people, I think.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For the record I don't think Creationism should be taught in public school, it is a religous belife and we have seperation of church and state in the USA. If a parnet wants there kids to learn Creationism enrole them in a Catholic school, Sunday school, or home school them. Evolution is a scientific theory and belongs in science classes.
> > > > > > > At the most creationism should be presented as it is in my Anthroplogy class, another theory.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Spider-everseenInherittheWind,itisaboutthemonkeytrial-Boy
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But the problem with evolution in classrooms is the way teachers present it. Evolution is a theory, and far too many teachers teach it as fact. At least with creationism in schools students will be given an alternative to evolution.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And it's not fair to say that anyone who doesn't
> > > > > > like evolution should enrole their kids in private schools. They're just as entitled to a free education that doesn't deny their beleifs as everyone else.
> > > > > > -M"creationist, in case you're wondering."el
> > > > >
> > > > > These are very good points. First off, though, the "just a theory" is not a phrase you should be caught using. There's not such thing as "just a theory". What most people think "theory" means is actually a hypothesis.
> > > > > We still shouldn't teach evolution as fact. It is not fact, and there are still a few problems with it. We should teach several different beliefs of how Earth and sentient beings and fish and such came about, and not call any of them fact.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Dr. Morris Cecil "Oh, and the thing about the Pope, that's just his interpretation of it" Glalet, Th.D.
> > > >
> > > > In science a hypothesthis is an idea some one has, when they test it and find some evidence to support it, it becomes a theory. If positive evidence can be found it is a fact or "law (like gravity)"
> > > >
> > > > If evidence is found that disproves it, it is a false hypothesis.
> > > >
> > > > This is the first thing taught in most of the science classes I have taken in high school and college.
> > > >
> > > > Evolution can not become a law because it is such a slow prossess, and not completely under stood. It is still a theory, which mean there is a significant amout of evidence to support it.
> > > > Besides the fact the bible says so I haven't seen any evidence for creationism that will move me from my Evolutionist footing. Maybe i should have stayed for the video, but the narrator was insulting my intelegents. (About five people left before I did)
> > > >
> > > > Spider-franklysuprisedsomanypeoplearecreationists-Boy
> > >
> > > Okay, it seems like I've riled quite a few people with the term "just a thoery". All I meant by that is that evolution is not a proven indisputable fact, and schools should not be teaching it as such. Sorry if I worded things wrong in my earlier post, but I was racing against the warning bell for class.
> > >
> > > As for the popular idea that God had us evolve, well I wan't there, so I can't say for sure that it didn't happen that way. But still, the Bible says that we were created, the Bible was written by God, and if you can't trust God on these matters then who can you trust?
> > >
> > > M-franklyI'mgladIamone-el
> >
> > People wrote the Bible, before they wrote the stories down they were part of a oral tradition. Now think of the american Tale Tells
>
> You mean like Tale Tell hearts? Heehee. Sorry, I'll be serious now.
>
> , the sotires of Paul Bunniun. Most people agree these started as true stories, but the human need to embelish turned Paul from a tall man into a giant. These stories were proable grew over a couple hundred years. The stories that became the Bible were told for centuries before they were writen down, and then they have been rewriten, tranlsted, and interpreted for centuries. How close to the original form are the stories we know? No one can say.
>
> First off, Genesis did not come from folk-lore, it was written by Moses, who in turn heard it from the Man Himself. Also, most of the new testament at least was written down soon after the actual events took place, and was told by people who experienced these things first hand.
> So what about interpretation and translation? Well obviously there has been translation, but there is pretty strong evidence that it's meaning hasn't been altered. (Revelations 22:18-19 probably had something to with that)
>

That is the story used to justify the Bible, the question is, how did the ancient Hebrews (who were around for hundreds of years before Moses) explain their world?

Moses proable didn't write Genisis, but since he is considered on of the Heroes of the Jewish faith he is artibuted with writing them. It adds a validity they would not have if a long forgotten author had writen them.

Many of the book of the new testment were actually writen a while after the fact, and there are other christian writings not included in the bible, mostly because they didn't agree with a peice of Church doctrin. The Gospel of Thomas (i.e. Doubting Thomas, one of the 12 deciples) is not included, yet he was there. The new testment were the books that the Church liked the most, the books that supported the church's claim to power. After the cannon books were decided apon, any followers of the other books were called heritics, blasphemers, satan worshipers, and other nasty names and were killed.

> Spider-ifyoubelivetheBiblewordforwordyouwouldhave
> > toburnMinamoon,shedoesTarot,Witchstuff-Boy
>
> M"How exactly does burning people fit into what the Bible said about loving thy neighbor, and not condemning others?"el
>
>

"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" was the Bible quote used to justify the witch hunts in midevil europe and Salem Mass.

Just another example of Biblical confilicts