RE: Evolution vs. Religion

RE: Evolution vs. Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:49:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I guess Buddhists and Thaoists are also theists. Buddhists and taoists don't adhere to a "higher power" at all. What is sought is a transcendental state of awareness, that involves a slight tinge of pantheism.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:50:11 PM)
I know, NZ. Thank you.

tweakabelle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:50:24 PM)
quote: I just did. The spirit is us.. among us.. through us.. a part of us... it is we who affect the spirit, not the other way around. Its much like karma. What you put in, you get out. The Natives believe in being kind to all things, taking only what is needed to survive, then celebrating the spirit that gave its life so the "people" could survive. That the earth was a gift to the "people" and should be treated as such. Its a spirituality more than a "religion". In this account, I understand this all pervading spirit to be more of an accumulation of effects than a cause ("it is we who affect the spirit, not the other way around") ("What you put in, you get out"). This appears to leave open the question of the origin of things. I see nothing that relates to either evolution or creation, other than the notion of a gift (which I find rather appealing). Is this a correct interpretation of your position? If so, could you please share your beliefs on the origins of things (if you have any) and whether you accept evolution as an explanation of how life adapts to its environment? Does the spirit pre-exist us? Does it precede the development of intelligent life on Earth? Did it influence that evolution?

Arpig -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:52:26 PM)
quote: As a panentheist, I would very strongly disagree with that. Fine, I don't care what term you use to describe her beliefs, I really don't give a fuck what you or she call it. I stand behind my statement that she does in fact believe in the concept of a divine, and thus her "I don't believe in God" was indeed a bit of semantic trickery. You can dispute my interpretation of God/divine/deity till your face falls off, but it isn't going to change my mind.

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:53:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I know, NZ. Thank you. :P What you are describing, based on the terms you have used ("Great Mystery, Great Spirit") is what neo-native american spirituality terms the more pantheistic versions of neopagan polytheism. To my recollection, it probably is different enough that the "spirit" and "mystery" weren't considered actively sentient or anthropomorphic entities, however there is a sense of their permeating presence and effect on life in a very naturalistic way. [Edited for clarity as to who I was responding to.]

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 10:56:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig Fine, I don't care what term you use to describe her beliefs, I really don't give a fuck what you or she call it. I stand behind my statement that she does in fact believe in the concept of a divine, and thus her "I don't believe in God" was indeed a bit of semantic trickery. Slightly, yes. In the sense that she has here (and tends to, in general) embody a very harlequin-ish personallity. I don't think the part of her description that was misleading was necessarily a complete deception, though, and the native american interpretation of said theistic-like energy does have enough differences from stereotypical monotheistic gods that her interest in pointing out the difference was probably warranted. But I think she probably was using it, at least partially, to help along a devil's advocate angle of discussion. [:D]

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:00:46 PM)
To the origins of things... They just are, tweak. We dont think about where they came from... just that they are. And "people" have the honor and duty of protecting what they were "given" (without an explanation of where it came from). The where doesnt matter to us. quote: and whether you accept evolution as an explanation of how life adapts to its environment? What is, is.. what will be, will be. Evolution is like anything else, natural if not forced. Force doesnt equate to the protection of life. Everything discovered is new, everything known is accepted. We are in awe of nature... and celebrate it. quote: Does the spirit pre-exist us? Does it precede the development of intelligent life on Earth? Did it influence that evolution? The spirit came into being when the earth did. Did it precede intelligent life? Depends on your definition of intelligent life. Many animals are amazingly intelligent... more so than man in many ways... less so than man in others. Did it influence? Im assuming you mean did the spirit influence life. Its my belief that we all influence life... not some man in the sky. If, say, a certain form of life... lets say spiders... were wiped out, it would have devestating effects on nature. Everything has a beginning. Everything will have an end. It all began together, it will all end together. Nature is heaven.... destroying nature is hell.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:02:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig quote: As a panentheist, I would very strongly disagree with that. Fine, I don't care what term you use to describe her beliefs, I really don't give a fuck what you or she call it. I stand behind my statement that she does in fact believe in the concept of a divine, and thus her "I don't believe in God" was indeed a bit of semantic trickery. You can dispute my interpretation of God/divine/deity till your face falls off, but it isn't going to change my mind. Its ok. I dont mind you being wrong. [:D]

Ishtarr -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:02:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig You can dispute my interpretation of God/divine/deity till your face falls off, but it isn't going to change my mind. I wasn't trying to suggest that you where wrong in accusing tazzy of semantic trickery. While I have no beef in this debate, I've made that same accusation towards her more than once in the past... I merely wanted to point out that the difference between pantheism and panentheism is not a matter of mere semantics and that tazzy's view clearly fall under one category but not the other one. As far as whether I think she was being deliberately obscure in this debate or not... Lets just say that I've never been one to assume good will in debate from somebody who will not lay out there position from the start, and then accuse you of not knowing what their position is, justifying this by the claim that you couldn't know because you didn't ask... To me there is no debate unless there is transparency in what everybody's position is, which means that somebody who doesn't lay out there position from the start isn't looking to debate. Ishtar

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:05:07 PM)
quote: To me there is no debate unless there is transparency in what everybody's position is, which means that somebody who doesn't lay out there position from the start isn't looking to debate. Nope. I wasnt looking to debate my spiritual beliefs tonight. Nor did I run from the debate. However I am surprised my beliefs were not called into question when I posted the following.... And here is where my intellectual curiosity has lead me. I dont believe in an all powerful god, not in the sense that you seem to believe christians should. I do believe in a guiding force, and i do believe we all follow the same force, that force taking different forms for us all. I believe the bible is as historical as it could be, for th time it was written. I do believe science has made great discoveries. I do not believe the earth is only 6000 years old, and many that i know do not believe it is either. I do believe our universe was created, but not in the sense by a creator. However, i do not believe it was an accident either. I do believe in evolution, and i also believe the Bible points to that very fact. I do believe many who are agnostic and atheists believe the Bible to be more true than those who follow its messages. I do not argue against atheism, or agnosticism, simply because I am not in possession of absolute information to make any assertations as to the truth or lies about any of those positions. I do embrace anyone's right to believe as they wish, and deny no one that right.... I also believe those who wish to believe may do so... those who do not, may believe as they wish as well. I try very hard not to pidgeon hole anyone into any certain group, because, honestly, I do not belong in any group myself. Yet, I will speak up when I see others attempt to do that to others. The basics of my belief is that... believe whatever you desire. But, when you call into question the intelligence or morality of any group that has a differing belief than yourself, you are merely pointing out how narrow minded you are. ("you" not meaning you, personally). .......... http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=3539681 So to say I never laid out my position is disingenuous.

Kirata -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:13:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig I stand behind my statement that she does in fact believe in the concept of a divine, and thus her "I don't believe in God" was indeed a bit of semantic trickery. It seems to me that equating a concept of the divine with belief in a "God" is a bit of semantic trickery. K.

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:14:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: To me there is no debate unless there is transparency in what everybody's position is, which means that somebody who doesn't lay out there position from the start isn't looking to debate. Nope. I wasnt looking to debate my spiritual beliefs tonight. Nor did I run from the debate. To bring the topic back to the point, this proves to be precisely the sort of issue that turns the entire evolution debate to turmoil, because "creationism" (or it's clever ninja alter go, "intelligent design") precisely function under this sort of premise: where it hasn't offered any indication of what it, itself, thinks or is proposing, but offers up numerous potential reasons why the already offered solution may not be correct. Any debate about a topic necessitates the offering of premises and supportive arguments.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:17:04 PM)
So I must now make those statements I just posted from a Jan thread everytime I discuss anything related to religion? I must post a disertation of my beliefs each and every time?

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:17:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Arpig I stand behind my statement that she does in fact believe in the concept of a divine, and thus her "I don't believe in God" was indeed a bit of semantic trickery. It seems to me that equating a concept of the divine with belief in a "God" is a bit of semantic trickery. K. Not really, because divinity is typically anthropomorphized in some manner (we are humans, after all). Besides, the deabte taking place wouldn't really involve concepts of divinity that are not theistically based. And, while the title of the thread encompasses a wide potential of mythologies, the only ones that have any current relevance to the topic of evolution are the abrahamic kind.

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:20:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl So I must now make those statements I just posted from a Jan thread everytime I discuss anything related to religion? I must post a disertation of my beliefs each and every time? We haven't, either of us, posted any such dissertation yet, however we are in a much better place of understanding as to where your thoughts lie, no (unless I've been way off these last few posts)? And, by now, I think I've gotten lost as to where the initial disagreement between you and Arpig started anyhow. [8D]

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:22:27 PM)
I was about to say... "That isnt gonna happen"... lol As I have said before, these are terms I had not heard of before... not even in a religion class I took in college... then again I did miss a few classes while giving birth so they could have covered it while I was gone. Now that I better understand how to label it so others can have a "label" to hang on me... gesh... for a group of people that hates labels.... lol

NihilusZero -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl for a group of people that hates labels.... lol Not me. [8D You'll find me on the other side of the argument from those who treat labels as some sort of morality police (as if words aren't meant to inform, enlighten, and elucidate, rather than constrict). Don't get me started on one of the WIITWD myth topics! :P

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:27:32 PM)
You label lover you!

Ishtarr -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:28:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl I wasnt looking to debate my spiritual beliefs tonight. I wasn't assuming you were tazzy.

Arpig -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/20/2011 11:40:12 PM)
quote: It seems to me that equating a concept of the divine with belief in a "God" is a bit of semantic trickery. I disagree (no surprise there). To my eye, saying "I don't believe in God" when the person does in fact believe in a divine higher power is misleading. Perhaps if the statement had been "I don't believe in a specific God". I see no difference between the abrahamic uber-God, a vague all pervading spirit-of-everything, or a slew of individual independant spirits. They are all manifestations of divinity, and thus are all equivelent to me. The trickery comes from making an absolute statement, and then twisting that statement in subsequent posts to mean something different altogether.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875