Forums → WEPR → Christians + Evolution
| 50 | 14899 |
This is NOT an evolution debate, as both sides are in agreement that the process is fact.
I have a question for the select Christians who claim that science and Christianity can coexist; more specifically the ones who claim that evolution is driven by the Abrahamic God. According to Christianity, the creation story of how Adam and Eve sinned and therefore sin was born into everyone else is the main reason why Jesus was sent to die on earth, to absolve the original sin. Without that story taken as literal truth, does Christianity fall apart?
- 50 Replies
The story doesn't have to be taken literally. Original sin isn't literally from Adam and Eve. Original sin is an explanation to the flaws of humanity. It's basically a name for all of this:
People are, by nature, flawed. We aren't made perfect. No matter what we do, it is almost assured that we will sin and do wrong. Jesus died for us to be like, "hey bro. It's ok that you're not perfect. I love you no matter what. As long as you keep faith in God and are sorry for the wrong you do, everything will be A-OK"
We aren't made perfect.
god is perfect.
god made us in his image.
we are perfect.
or god failed. what makes god not perfect.
...
People are, by nature, flawed. We aren't made perfect. No matter what we do, it is almost assured that we will sin and do wrong. Jesus died for us to be like, "hey bro. It's ok that you're not perfect. I love you no matter what. As long as you keep faith in God and are sorry for the wrong you do, everything will be A-OK"
So the bible is basically a metaphoric behaviour and moral guide? If so, one could also take the being of god itself metaphorically; a sort of power, like fate, chance or social conventions, that watch over people's morality as long as they believe in behaving that way.
If so, one could also take the being of god itself metaphorically; a sort of power, like fate, chance or social conventions, that watch over people's morality as long as they believe in behaving that way.
Some things you just have to take on faith. There being a God is one of those things.
The story doesn't have to be taken literally. Original sin isn't literally from Adam and Eve. Original sin is an explanation to the flaws of humanity. It's basically a name for all of this:
People are, by nature, flawed. We aren't made perfect. No matter what we do, it is almost assured that we will sin and do wrong. Jesus died for us to be like, "hey bro. It's ok that you're not perfect. I love you no matter what. As long as you keep faith in God and are sorry for the wrong you do, everything will be A-OK"
Great! So...Why did Jesus have to die then? He sacrificed himself, right? That would not be necessary if there was no original sin...
Some things you just have to take on faith. There being a God is one of those things.
What? Faith is stupid. Can you name something scientific that actually makes since on faith? "This liquid marked 'DANGER' cures cancer! Have faith!"
Can you name something scientific that actually makes since on faith
All of this isn't the matrix or a dream or something like that. prove that it's not.
All of this isn't the matrix or a dream or something like that. prove that it's not.
First, just to make sure you read it, why did Jesus have to die for your sin if the original sin did not happen? That is what this is all about.
Now on to your question. If this was a dream, the second we realized this was a dream we would start lucid dreaming. The Matrix would be a logistic nightmare, and it would be utterly pointless to keep the people as the world is today. Besides, the fact that you DON'T have proof for either of those things means that you can dismiss them without it being faith, in fact, it is the logical thing to do in dismissing them. If you don't bring evidence with your statements, they can be dismissed without evidence.
Now on to your question. If this was a dream, the second we realized this was a dream we would start lucid dreaming.
Not if lucid dreaming didn't really exist, just only in our dreams within dreams.
If you don't bring evidence with your statements, they can be dismissed without evidence.
This, really, sums up everything about any fantastical claims. If they're true, you can find proof which is indisputable. We have proof for what we claim, but Christians pull out a 2000 year old book of oral stories and selective happenings, then further twist those words to mash them to fit the current system.
Not if lucid dreaming didn't really exist, just only in our dreams within dreams.
"There is no way that there is a giant spider living in your back yard. You see, it would just collapse in on itself..."
"NOT IF GRAVITY DID NOT EFFECT IT! CHECK MATE!"
Just saying "But what if that did not effect it?" does not make it any more likely. Besides, if it did not fit our definition of a "dream" (Which includes lucid dreaming), then it would not be a dream and there would be no reason to call it such.
so yes, if there were no first sin christianity is gone.
i can tell you, that in jewdisem, there are Jewish scientists, who say that the trigger to the evolution is god. that he is the touch who directed the animals to 'there place'. this explanie may move god "back", to a place of 'Deus ex machina'. he dont make the world go around, but his the one who gave the first spin. he dont control teh lght, its the sun, which was created by teh big bang. adn the ysay god is the trigger for the big bang.
im not sure if this is what yo meant, but this is what jewdisem have to say about it.
and you guys take the bible too much as a 'bunch of stories'. i am a comepletly atheist, but yet i have some respect to the bible. even that this is a version if a version of a version and keep going for hundreds of times, it yet show a period in history. like the greek mytholigy, i try to take off the myth and see the history. even if the time line is not always match, these are stories who were written in old times, who show how they lived then. its show there way of seeing god {in some books he shoot nukes, in some he just suggest, adn in some he dosent apear at all}.
but one this its not - its not a pile of garbage. it has a very good code of Behavior. espeicely the ten commandmnets. sure, the punishments are too harsh, and some rules look silly, but you can find pearles inside it. or at least some nice stories.
For a second i'll sound off topic, but i'm not.
So ancient mythology is widley debunked and not accepted, right?(do you know anybody who believes in olympians and titans etc.?)
Well why do we debunk it?
Mythology was created to explain things that could not be understand(usually nature)
So can anyone here tell me how ANY modern religion is not mythology too?
How can we say that lightning does not come from zeus(or jupiter) throwing them, but turn around and say the human race came from two people?
Public schools are allowed to teach about mythology, but not religion. Why?
Are religuon and mythology not synonymous?
"greek mythology" WAS religion back then.
What makes mythology, mythology?
What is the difference between mythology and religion?
Mythology is based on myths. 90% of all religions are based on myths!!
What are myths? Definition(paraphrased): stories made up to explain unknown phenomenon(usually in nature).
Do we can teach kids about made up men and women on olympus(which is a religion technically) but then NOT teach them about religion(which is mythology techinally).
I made it a little confusing, but do you see my point?
Or something "outrageous" like a zombie apocalypse. We can say that it is COMPLETLEY false JUST because we havent encountered it yet, but we can turn around and say that there is a man(men) in the sky(god(s)) that snapped his fingers and created the ENTIRE world in 6 days.
Public schools are allowed to teach about mythology, but not religion. Why?
The certainly are allowed to teach about both, such as in cultural classes or ancient history or ethics etc, just not as fact in a scientific setting (except in the South).
Sorry for the DP.
and you guys take the bible too much as a 'bunch of stories'.
but one this its not - its not a pile of garbage. it has a very good code of Behavior. espeicely the ten commandmnets. sure, the punishments are too harsh, and some rules look silly, but you can find pearles inside it. or at least some nice stories.
Bunch of stories =/= pile of garbage. The Brothers Grimm compiled some well-written behavioral/moral/ethical/cultural folklore with harsh punishments, too. What would you call it other than a bunch of stories? Would a 'kinder' reference, such as calling the bible "A Collection of Abrahamic Folklore in Ancient Times," change what it is?
espeicely the ten commandmnets.
However, such blanket laws create biblical contradictions. For example, "Thou shalt not kill." Later, God directly orders people to slaughter others. Many (12,000 in Joshua 8 and 10,000 in Judges 1:4 to name a few) are killed in such commanded attacks. In addition, Deuteronomy 32:42, in which God declares that his arrows will be 'drunk with blood' and his 'sword shall devour flesh,' is countered in Matthew 26:52 in which Jesus states "All that take the sword shall perish with the sword." How can this be possible if God doesn't die? Some interpret the phrase to mean "Those who judge will be judged themselves," but again, who/what judges God?
What is the difference between mythology and religion?
Type in religion on Thesaurus.com, mythology is a synonym. I suppose the main difference is the era. It's considered as mythology when the main cultural observance drops.
So can anyone here tell me how ANY modern religion is not mythology too?
There's still a wide following for modern religion.
-If it's not believed now but used to be widely, it's mythology.
-If it's not widely believed but currently followed it's a cult.
-If it's widely believed currently it's religion.
Public schools are allowed to teach about mythology, but not religion. Why?
Religion is taught in schools, in classes for it. The reason it's not taught in other parts is because it's not relevant to those parts, or claims absolute truth over everything else even though it's the opposite or not proven to be so.
What makes mythology, mythology?
Mythology is mythology when people stop following it.
-If it's not believed now but used to be widely, it's mythology.
-If it's not widely believed but currently followed it's a cult.
-If it's widely believed currently it's religion.
I disagree with these definitions. Mythology is the collection of myths and legends of a culture (hence the name). It's modern equivalent would be theology or the modern sets of belief. Helenism is a religion, paganism is a religion, but their sets of belief are now Greek and Norse mythology.
As such, the story of Adam and Eve can be called a myth if you don't think it actually happened, but you can still believe in the morality of the myth and that it is god teaching you those morals through the bible; so I don't think the term 'myth' and belief are exclusive. Christians are too proud to call their myths and legends mythology because it sounds old and forgotten, but as long as they don't believe in the literal occuring of those stories, they're myths. Probably mythologies are called that way today because no one will object to that? :P
As to my earlier point, I was saying that if so many things in the bible are to be taken metaphorically, I said why not take the being, god, as a metaphorical being. Most people believe in the actual existence of god even though they might think most stories are metaphors, but I ask again, why draw the line there? The bible doesn't loose it's messages only because all of it can be seen as metaphors instead of actual occurings.
You must be logged in to post a reply!