quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Isn't that the definition of God, an omnipotent being?

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Please direct me to the proof of our evolution from amino acids all the way to modern human. Please! I will make the time. Really. Unlike you, I do not say it isn't true, I'm just saying there is no proof that shows mutation by mutation how amino acids evolved into humans.

I wrote previously that I agree with your statement there is no proof that amino acids evolved into humans. Hate to be nit-picky here but for my own peace of mind let me remark that no-one ever claimed amino acids evolved into humans. The narrative is that DNA became encapsulated in primative cells and this began the chain of life that leads to humans. No proof but a lot of evidence and as I said before a work in progress.

In that vein, here is an easily read article by Olivia Judson in today's NYT describing the remarkable melding of the sciences of Genetics and Paleontology by the construction of the Neanderthal Genome. New tools and new knowledge.
The article is linked here. Enjoy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
Yes, that IF there was a creator being, it wasn't "supernatural" one, but something entirely "natural".

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Isn't that the definition of God, an omnipotent being?

Only when you are restricting yourself to one type of God (Judeo/Christian for example).
Not every worships the same god/goddess/godz and that is the concept that many people struggle understanding.  It's easier for non believers to tear apart something they think they already know about, which is why you rarely see posts on forums here running down other religions.  The only ones that get the brunt of attacks are christian, jewish and islamic beliefs, because these are the most mainstream.

the.dark.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Isn't that the definition of God, an omnipotent being?

Only when you are restricting yourself to one type of God (Judeo/Christian for example).
Not every worships the same god/goddess/godz and that is the concept that many people struggle understanding.  It's easier for non believers to tear apart something they think they already know about, which is why you rarely see posts on forums here running down other religions.  The only ones that get the brunt of attacks are christian, jewish and islamic beliefs, because these are the most mainstream.

the.dark.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania


So is the obvious conclusion that there was no other form of consciousness around prior to the Big Bang? My little pittling Homo sapien brain does not pretend to understand how it all got here, you must forgive my inability to time travel and have it all figured out.

I will say what I always say on this matter.... the only intellectually valid answer about this subject is that of the agnostic. Anyone that pretends to have the one true answer is basing that on their personal beliefs. Yes, I have beliefs, and they are every bit as valid as anyone else's... even those who think some random chain of amino acids explains it all

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

What we as humans do not know still exceeds what we do know.  In my opinio, for people to simply stop exploring all possibilities for no other reason than a refusal to believe there could be another explaination is more akin to a flat-world bias than any religion has ever imposed.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Isn't that the definition of God, an omnipotent being?

Only when you are restricting yourself to one type of God (Judeo/Christian for example).
Not every worships the same god/goddess/godz and that is the concept that many people struggle understanding.  It's easier for non believers to tear apart something they think they already know about, which is why you rarely see posts on forums here running down other religions.  The only ones that get the brunt of attacks are christian, jewish and islamic beliefs, because these are the most mainstream.

the.dark.

Questioning does not equate to "tearing apart".

I would think that if something is worth believing then it could stand up to being challenged.

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Questioning does not equate to "tearing apart".

I would think that if something is worth believing then it could stand up to being challenged.

I don't see your posts in general as 'questioning' because you come across - intentionally or otherwise - as very close minded and as I was responding to you, 'tearing apart' was apt.  It's my observation and doesn't mean others might see you in the same way.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened
What we as humans do not know still exceeds what we do know.  In my opinio, for people to simply stop exploring all possibilities for no other reason than a refusal to believe there could be another explaination is more akin to a flat-world bias than any religion has ever imposed.

Which is absolutely true but there are things we have evidence of that can lead us to a logical possibility.

To say that you believe in something that has absolutely no proof is not a logical possibility.

quote:

I will say what I always say on this matter.... the only intellectually valid answer about this subject is that of the agnostic.

quote:

Anyone that pretends to have the one true answer is basing that on their personal beliefs. Yes, I have beliefs, and they are every bit as valid as anyone else's... even those who think some random chain of amino acids explains it all

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

Please direct me to the proof of our evolution from amino acids all the way to modern human. Please! I will make the time. Really. Unlike you, I do not say it isn't true, I'm just saying there is no proof that shows mutation by mutation how amino acids evolved into humans.

I wrote previously that I agree with your statement there is no proof that amino acids evolved into humans. Hate to be nit-picky here but for my own peace of mind let me remark that no-one ever claimed amino acids evolved into humans. The narrative is that DNA became encapsulated in primative cells and this began the chain of life that leads to humans. No proof but a lot of evidence and as I said before a work in progress.

In that vein, here is an easily read article by Olivia Judson in today's NYT describing the remarkable melding of the sciences of Genetics and Paleontology by the construction of the Neanderthal Genome. New tools and new knowledge.
The article is linked here. Enjoy.

An interesting article.  Thanks. 
My point remains that is no actual proof of our evolution but we can accept evolution by perponderance of evidence.  Being certain of a thing based on a perponderance of evidence does not make one a fool.  You are correct, no one on this thread made the claim that amino acids evolved into humans.  But without an origin of life of earth there could be no humans. 

But my point really, was that why do people who believe in an Energy that goes beyond the confines of chemistry and biology need to provide abolute proof of this Energy (Spirit) when so many other aspects of natural science are simply accepted?  I was trying to make that point to RML but I always find your commentary to be thoughtful and again, I thank you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife
Isn't that the definition of God, an omnipotent being?

Only when you are restricting yourself to one type of God (Judeo/Christian for example).
Not every worships the same god/goddess/godz and that is the concept that many people struggle understanding.  It's easier for non believers to tear apart something they think they already know about, which is why you rarely see posts on forums here running down other religions.  The only ones that get the brunt of attacks are christian, jewish and islamic beliefs, because these are the most mainstream.

the.dark.

Questioning does not equate to "tearing apart".

I would think that if something is worth believing then it could stand up to being challenged.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: RCdc

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Questioning does not equate to "tearing apart".

I would think that if something is worth believing then it could stand up to being challenged.

I don't see your posts in general as 'questioning' because you come across - intentionally or otherwise - as very close minded and as I was responding to you, 'tearing apart' was apt.  It's my observation and doesn't mean others might see you in the same way.

That's funny because I have always regarded your posts on religion in the same way.

You "come across" as someone who researches religion to prove their own preconceived ideas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I do not believe that Indians came out of the ground in different locations all over the Americas, but many of them believe that this is their origin. I would never ridicule these narratives by calling them "myths". I just have more class than that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania
I do not believe that Indians came out of the ground in different locations all over the Americas, but many of them believe that this is their origin. I would never ridicule these narratives by calling them "myths". I just have more class than that.

I do accept that Indians came out of the ground in different locations all over the Americas.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened


Once again you are asking for absolute proof on one hand but allowing for logical possibility on the other but still insisting that the only "God" that can be discussed is the one you have defined that cannot be proven... It is a circular logic that is no logic at all.  It once again appears that your need to be right is dominant in your life.  Loosen up a bit.  It's better for the digestion.  Otherwise the steak and beer is gonna give you problems later on. 

I asked if you wanted to discuss in person why I am certain my God exists.  If you don't, I have no problem with that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened


Once again you are asking for absolute proof on one hand but allowing for logical possibility on the other but still insisting that the only "God" that can be discussed is the one you have defined that cannot be proven... It is a circular logic that is no logic at all.  It once again appears that your need to be right is dominant in your life.  Loosen up a bit.  It's better for the digestion.  Otherwise the steak and beer is gonna give you problems later on. 

I asked if you wanted to discuss in person why I am certain my God exists.  If you don't, I have no problem with that.

No, I am just trying to point out the difference between what can be proven by science and what can only be believed by faith.

The first has evidence to support it, although that evidence may not be conclusive.

The latter has no supporting evidence other than what people choose to believe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You do not like your beliefs challenged, namely that there is no God

I have to say, I come into contact all of the time with Atheists that do not offend me one iota. One of my favorite study partners is an atheist and he and I butt heads. I am thinking about a career path in religious studies, not because I believe all religions are true, but because I find beauty in how human beings interact with the Sacred.

My trouble with so many atheists is that they are rude and condescending to people with religious beliefs. I do not believe that Indians came out of the ground in different locations all over the Americas, but many of them believe that this is their origin. I would never ridicule these narratives by calling them "myths". I just have more class than that.

The fact of the matter is, you don't know the origins of everything. You claim to, and you do not like being challenged and told you don't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: juliaoceania

You do not like your beliefs challenged, namely that there is no God

I have to say, I come into contact all of the time with Atheists that do not offend me one iota. One of my favorite study partners is an atheist and he and I butt heads. I am thinking about a career path in religious studies, not because I believe all religions are true, but because I find beauty in how human beings interact with the Sacred.

My trouble with so many atheists is that they are rude and condescending to people with religious beliefs. I do not believe that Indians came out of the ground in different locations all over the Americas, but many of them believe that this is their origin. I would never ridicule these narratives by calling them "myths". I just have more class than that.

The fact of the matter is, you don't know the origins of everything. You claim to, and you do not like being challenged and told you don't.

I have never claimed there is no God, I have only questioned the existence of a God.

There is a difference.

You accuse me of the very thing you are doing, not being open to having your beliefs challenged.