Did Darwin Kill God?

[johnny crossan]

....As a side, The virgin birth and the resurrection was around, as a religious meme, for thousands and thousands of years before Jesus.

I think the context of the message (ie. as part of a faith based view of the world, which, if not taught -which it always is- is inherent in religious teachings) is at fault even moreso than the people. Faith is like a virus. You cant really blame people for getting sick.

I though it was only a matter of time before Dawkinsesque memes popped up after Father Ted's surreal TV encounter with the truly appalling Me,me Queen Sue Blackmore.

Of all the ultra Darwinian reductionist drivel to have emerged so far this has got win the cigar. Free will, altruism, science, religion - everything really - is best understood as either a benign or a malign infection. It's a worthy successor to virtuous slavery, colonial subjugation of lesser breeds, aryan genetics, apartheid, islamist violent change theory et al.

 

[Anonymous]

....As a side, The virgin birth and the resurrection was around, as a religious meme, for thousands and thousands of years before Jesus.

I think the context of the message (ie. as part of a faith based view of the world, which, if not taught -which it always is- is inherent in religious teachings) is at fault even moreso than the people. Faith is like a virus. You cant really blame people for getting sick.

I though it was only a matter of time before Dawkinsesque memes popped up after Father Ted's surreal TV encounter with the truly appalling Me,me Queen Sue Blackmore.

Of all the ultra Darwinian reductionist drivel to have emerged so far this has got win the cigar. Free will, altruism, science, religion - everything really - is best understood as either a benign or a malign infection. It's a worthy successor to virtuous slavery, colonial subjugation of lesser breeds, aryan genetics, apartheid, islamist violent change theory et al.

scenario.

you open a thread that is bound to have a heated debate.

conclusion.

you dont like what people debate.

interesting!

 

[mackenzie]

As I have said before, it's not the message that is at fault...it's the actions of people.

Some of what he said "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" etc are decent, but some of it , like trusting in faith over sight, was stupid, if not dangerous.

Im sure, if Jesus(existed and) was around today, I'd enjoy a beer with him. He may have been a man of peace in a time of (religious - and otherwise)bigotry and violence but it does not mean he got these words and teachings from anywhere but himself. There were obviously like-minded people around at the time. And there have been many many visionaries/revolutionaries throughout our history.

As a side, The virgin birth and the resurrection was around, as a religious meme, for thousands and thousands of years before Jesus.

I think the context of the message (ie. as part of a faith based view of the world, which, if not taught -which it always is- is inherent in religious teachings) is at fault even moreso than the people. Faith is like a virus. You cant really blame people for getting sick.[/quote]

Am well aware of the prophecies that were attached by the Gospels to make JC seem the "Chosen One."

But I struggle with your concept that his message was somehow at fault? Faith does not need to be a negative, or are you referring to "Blind" Faith?

Now THAT is dangerous.


EDIT...I cocked up the quote thing again, sorry.

 

[ElanJo]

....As a side, The virgin birth and the resurrection was around, as a religious meme, for thousands and thousands of years before Jesus.

I think the context of the message (ie. as part of a faith based view of the world, which, if not taught -which it always is- is inherent in religious teachings) is at fault even moreso than the people. Faith is like a virus. You cant really blame people for getting sick.

I though it was only a matter of time before Dawkinsesque memes popped up after Father Ted's surreal TV encounter with the truly appalling Me,me Queen Sue Blackmore.

Of all the ultra Darwinian reductionist drivel to have emerged so far this has got win the cigar. Free will, altruism, science, religion - everything really - is best understood as either a benign or a malign infection. It's a worthy successor to virtuous slavery, colonial subjugation of lesser breeds, aryan genetics, apartheid, islamist violent change theory et al.

Yawn... you again? no quotes this time? shame.

The faith/virus analogy is a decent one. A kid who is brought up to believe that a religion is real, that hell is real (and that if you dont believe you will go to hell forever - hell is a very real, and frightening, thing to children) etc etc can find it incredibly hard to overcome. If they don't manage they will likely spread it onto their own children. It also tends to infect your ability to rationalise and, in doing so, interact with the actual world around you. You aren't really living in the real world, you're in a sort of delusional daze.

But if you don't like the analogy, so what? How about you get into the ring proper, and get your hands dirty, instead of taking little semantic potshots?

 

[ElanJo]

As I have said before, it's not the message that is at fault...it's the actions of people.

Some of what he said "do unto others as you'd have them do unto you" etc are decent, but some of it , like trusting in faith over sight, was stupid, if not dangerous.

Im sure, if Jesus(existed and) was around today, I'd enjoy a beer with him. He may have been a man of peace in a time of (religious - and otherwise)bigotry and violence but it does not mean he got these words and teachings from anywhere but himself. There were obviously like-minded people around at the time. And there have been many many visionaries/revolutionaries throughout our history.

As a side, The virgin birth and the resurrection was around, as a religious meme, for thousands and thousands of years before Jesus.

I think the context of the message (ie. as part of a faith based view of the world, which, if not taught -which it always is- is inherent in religious teachings) is at fault even moreso than the people. Faith is like a virus. You cant really blame people for getting sick.

Am well aware of the prophecies that were attached by the Gospels to make JC seem the "Chosen One."

But I struggle with your concept that his message was somehow at fault? Faith does not need to be a negative, or are you referring to "Blind" Faith?

Now THAT is dangerous.


EDIT...I cocked up the quote thing again, sorry.

Faith that your girlfriend wont cheat, yea, that's a decent faith to have...... but it is one based on evidence, so is it even faith?.

Religious faith, I see no positives at all. It's all blind to me.

The decent stuff Jesus (supposedly) said really had nothing exclusively religious about them. The exclusively religious stuff was rubbish/stupid/dangerous - take your pick.


PS. lol, again, at the quote malfunction :P (sorted it for you :) )

 

[bizzbo]

how about, faith that if you are caring and virtuous, that you will be rewarded

evil or what

 

[Bigga]

Even if I accept the argument for the process to be slow, what I'm TRYING TO SAY, is that SOMEWHERE on this planet MUST BE living evidence of evolving Ape to Man-Ape in its infancy or mid stage or penultimate stages. there's none. Not ONE IOTA of living proof except that we happen to hold the same basic shapes of Apes! Oh and share DNA and brain shape!

I don't get why there needs to be a living example?

If the theory is that the most advantageous genetic traits are passed down to offspring and the least advantageous aren't - on the basis that those with the advantage produce offspring, while those without die before they can produce offspring - then it all comes down to the environment in which the organism lives.

Apes are, as yet, best suited to living in their environment. But still, should any mutation give one ape an advantage over another, that mutation is most likely to develop. Should that happen, why should those with and those without the mutation both remain able to survive - if the advantage is that great, the numbers of those without will continue to decrease until there's none.

Given that, in our society and environment (or whatever society across the world), humans are the top of the food chain, why should there be "lesser evolved" forms of humans still living?

I can dissect your argument by pointing out that there are always 'anomalies'. Not ONE without 'mutation'?? Not even one with genes strong enough to document a link? In other words a 'throwback'??

Hard to believe...

 

[ElanJo]

how about, faith that if you are caring and virtuous, that you will be rewarded

evil or what

What religion is that? Just being caring and virtuous isn't enough for any religion I know of. You'll still be burning away for eternity in hell fire,

In any case, I am taking faith in it's entirety, with it's logical outcomes etc... not a cherry picked, false (if we want to be technical), segment. I'd also say that if religious people are only nice to others because its one of god's commandments, I think the atheist, who is nice to others, should be at the head of any queue outside heaven. There's nothing noble about being nice just because a dictator tells you to.

Argh!, I fear I am getting caught up in a load of irrelevant crap....

NOTHING THAT HAS BEEN SAID IN THIS THREAD, PLEA'S OF HOW A RELIGION CAN HAVE NICE PARTS ETC, MAKES RELIGION/GOD TRUE!

I want to be able to sit here and tell you that I have had a long weekend with an oiled up, leather-clad, Keira Knightley and Natalie Portman, but, unfortunately, just wanting it to have happened does not mean that it did :(

When the religious folk have some evidence to back up their claims give us a shout, and then we can discuss whether God is a tyrant or lovable bearded bloke.... but until then, I think I'll try and find out where my Goddesses, Keira and Nat, live.

 

[ElanJo]

Even if I accept the argument for the process to be slow, what I'm TRYING TO SAY, is that SOMEWHERE on this planet MUST BE living evidence of evolving Ape to Man-Ape in its infancy or mid stage or penultimate stages. there's none. Not ONE IOTA of living proof except that we happen to hold the same basic shapes of Apes! Oh and share DNA and brain shape!

I don't get why there needs to be a living example?

If the theory is that the most advantageous genetic traits are passed down to offspring and the least advantageous aren't - on the basis that those with the advantage produce offspring, while those without die before they can produce offspring - then it all comes down to the environment in which the organism lives.

Apes are, as yet, best suited to living in their environment. But still, should any mutation give one ape an advantage over another, that mutation is most likely to develop. Should that happen, why should those with and those without the mutation both remain able to survive - if the advantage is that great, the numbers of those without will continue to decrease until there's none.

Given that, in our society and environment (or whatever society across the world), humans are the top of the food chain, why should there be "lesser evolved" forms of humans still living?

I can dissect your argument by pointing out that there are always 'anomalies'. Not ONE without 'mutation'?? Not even one with genes strong enough to document a link? In other words a 'throwback'??

Hard to believe...

You'd need a tribe large enough to produce offspring and avoid inbreeding.

Maybe you should be out searching for "big foot"? Prove your "anomaly" exists

 

[BlueMooney]

I can dissect your argument by pointing out that there are always 'anomalies'. Not ONE without 'mutation'?? Not even one with genes strong enough to document a link? In other words a 'throwback'??

Hard to believe...

Depends on the size of link you're after, though. You won't find any half-man-half-ape type creatures because mutations aren't that big.

I'm guessing now because I've not done the research, nor have the time to do so, but I'm guessing that there has been so much inter-breeding between humans over the years that any would-be examples of mutations one or two steps back have died out or have become the norm.

You still do see mutations - people are born with six fingers or six toes on one hand or foot. But there's no advantage to them being there (while equally no disadvantage), so there's no reason for them to continually be passed on through generations.