Survey : human origins

[Kulindahr]

My fave is the redefinion of "Christian" to exclude the billion people with wrong theology that atheists mistakenly argue against, willfully blind as they are to the handful with the correct theology....you know, the "true Christians."

Christianity is not a democracy. It rests on an objective body of "data". Just as with science, those who do not conform to that data are doing something other than science/Christianity. They may think they're doing it right, but an analysis shows that they are in fact not. So it's not a "redefinition", any more than someone insisting the earth is round is a "redefinition".

 

[Kulindahr]

My skepticism of religion is not my "belief" or my "opinion." It is my assessment.

To me, I reserve opinions for wine and art.

And for many Christians, that Christianity is true is their assessment. That's why I responded as I did to the (oft-repeated redefinition) of faith as "belief without evidence".

 

[Kulindahr]

I believe we are only talking about humans here (because I know wild animals have to adapt often). But, in Christian teaching, Adam and Eve were created by God. They had Cain, Able, and Seth. I imagine that God created more women for them to create more children with. I don't think that everything was given directly to them. I still think that people had to figure out fire and such. Anyway, there is nothing that would even come close to saying humans came from apes.

And yes, I have added Hindu on later because I believe in reincarnation because I have a hard time thinking that someone who is mentally handicapped or babies who die only get that one chance to live.

Historically, orthodox Christians have taken Adam and Eve as allegorical, symbolic, even representatives of all mankind. Since the second creation story in Genesis, found in Genesis 2, isn't in a type of literature meant to be taken literally, all those are legitimate positions within the parameters of that literary type (though "representatives" is rather stretching the point). A novel modern interpretation that arguably fits is that evolution of humans proceeded outside the Garden until they could reproduce with Adam and Eve, so when they got evicted they were the parents of the "real" human race. There's no arguing against it on either biblical or scientific grounds, but it sort of stretches the imagination.

Reincarnation isn't very compatible with Christianity, BTW -- the Bible says we die once, and then go to judgment. It's not easy to stretch that around the idea of reincarnation.

 

[bankside]

I have a hard time thinking about particle physics in any meaningful way. That doesn't change the validity of particle physics because my math skills are underdeveloped. Or for that matter because expert physicists often struggle to explain their work to non-specialists like myself. There are those who can do it. And since physics is about modeling the universe to begin with, it translates fairly well to just present a more simplified model.

 

[bankside]

Wait! You overlook evolution because you can't find it anywhere in the book people wrote to say whether it was god's idea or not. But the same book doesn't mention where all these extra women came from for cain and abel and seth to sleep with, and you're okay with that without even thinking twice.