Joined: 1-March 05
Member No.: 8,849
I've heard rants and raves about this subject on other forums, so I figured I'd bring the disease here. Please, though:
If you want to argue a point, don't turn this into a flame war. Seriously, just look at philosophy, facts, etc. NOT who has the better insults.
Just to make things clear: I'm for the Creation side of this, and yes I know, there's also an Intelligent Design part arising among scientists. However, I see this as a half-assed attempt to say 'We were created... but not by God.'
I put it in the polls, though, just in case.
So vote, then speak your piece!
Edited and added poll choices. March 25, 2011. ~Tombow
Joined: 4-December 04
From: Somewhere new that makes me better than you
Member No.: 3,228
QUOTE(What @ no bacon?,Mar 10 2005, 12:33 PM)
You know what? With regards to the origin of man, I believe that we're descendants of an extraterrestrial race that visited earth about half a million years ago.
Now tell me, how is this any less plausible than that hoodoo-voodoo creationism bullshit?
People are too quick to look at things in black-or-white terms. I'm failing my Logic class right now, but even I understand something so simple as 'If A does not support B, where A is true and C is an alternative to B, that does not necessarily mean C is true.' Just because Evolution, as a theory, does not consistently stand up to scientific scrutiny does not give any credence to Creationism, which has no scientific backing of ANY kind. You can have all the faith you want, but when asked to provide specific evidence that supports the claim of Creationism, you're not gonna be able to come up with any.
Ack - I missed the edit
One thing that you're point brings up perfectly is that it is not necessarily a bifurcation between creationism and evolution. There are possibilities of other options. So if one shows how flawed evolution is, it does not support creationism, but rather just shows that evolution is not necessarily true as written now. There are tons of other possibilities. I take a more skeptical view to this and say that we can't know for certain. My point is always that it's not irrational to believe in creationism, but even the creationist should respect the evolutionist.
QUOTE(definingmind @ Mar 10 2005, 03:23 PM)
@Arche: As for researching to see exactly what the orgins of this verse are, I can point you to a simple solution: John 1:1-5 "In the begining was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the begining with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it." Though the researching you're talking about does sound quite fun.
Anywho, now that I've said that, I leave this discussion. I say good day! *bowes and takes my leave*
The λογος or "word" as it's translated, is an interesting word in the time John was written. The neo-platonists seemed to use it as the universal constant that connects human beings to the perfect God. In their mind, God is so perfect that he could not even think about anything but himself. So, the λογος concept comes in. So when John writes this, I find it interesting and wonder if he means the Hellenistic λογος or not. Given the overall method text of John, I would say that he was appealing a bit to the hellenistic mind.
Anyway, the genesis verse is definitely part of the covenant literature IMO, which shows the value and supremecy of the sovereign over the vassal (chapter 1 and early chapter 2 show parts of this). Unfortunately, the only resources I have at home do not touch on the aspect of whether this is condenced or not. It is a long standing theological method, however, to think of these types of things as condensed in some way. Unless I research it formally, I defer any actual belief on it and just say that it's possible the verse refers to either - instant creation or creation over time.
Lastly, aliens and phlem Well, we now have a infinite causal chain of regression. As an infinite causal chain of regression, we cannot even have a beginning, so therefore, it's impossible for the world to even exist unless there is some necessity to begin it all in some way - but that's for another time