Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Christian / Islam divide.
66 Answers
John McCain's 'running mate' in the American presidential election campaign, SarahPalin, wants creationism taught in Science classes in the USA. Does anybody else feel this backwards step increases divisions between religions? Surely the way forward is to accept other faiths, rather than to polarise people, as this inevitably will.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by bobclean. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hi, thanks everyone for your answers, it's been interesting watching this subject develop, but I didn't really mean for it to be a debate between religion and science, more that the proposed teaching of creationism will further increase the divide between faiths. We seem to be going backwards, with people becoming more and more entrenched in their beliefs. Christianity, ie American evangelical type and fundamentalist Islamics seem to be less tolerant towards each other and conflict, unfortunately, seems inevitable.
Bob, that seems to sum it up well. Getting back to the subject, some sections of society do seem to be going backwards - or at the very least, seem to be trapped in a time warp by denying evidence of evolution. Even though the major religions all advocate Creationism, their unity in that belief does not unite them. Religion causes dissent and disharmony, and intolerance between the faiths does appear to be growing. If parents want their children to learn anything other than 'facts', then rather than impose their unproven beliefs on anyone else's children, they should educate their own offspring separately on those particular topics. The teaching of Creationism, if taught at all, should be the preserve of parents, or of religious institutions. The subject has no place in science classes - or indeed in mainstream schools.
I am not a scientist and has limited knowledge about the subject. But one thing I would like to ask someone and I asked this question before as well.
1. I usually hear that creationism is unproven fact, but has anyone so far proved it wrong? If it has not been proved then I do not think it has been disapproved either.
2. Evolution itself according to scientists is still a theory. Or has anyone proved it as a fact?
3. My limited knowledge tells me that there have been more scientists who have opposed or at least have shown concerns about this theory.
Having said that being a Muslim I do not deny evolution completely and have said this before. It is the origin of the life I can not agree with.
1. I usually hear that creationism is unproven fact, but has anyone so far proved it wrong? If it has not been proved then I do not think it has been disapproved either.
2. Evolution itself according to scientists is still a theory. Or has anyone proved it as a fact?
3. My limited knowledge tells me that there have been more scientists who have opposed or at least have shown concerns about this theory.
Having said that being a Muslim I do not deny evolution completely and have said this before. It is the origin of the life I can not agree with.
Keyplus, in science, one makes a hypothesis and then determines a method of testing whether that hypothesis is true but also, as importantly, a method of testing whether that hypothesis is false.
There is no way that anyone has ever suggested of empirically testing whether a supernatural creator exists, therefore the idea of creation is outside the realms of scientific investigation.
Now, you're right to say that creationism has never been disproved. Neither has the existance of fire-breathing dragons or unicorns or fairies, yet we all live our lives as though they do not exist, because although we cannot prove they don't exist, there is no good reason to suppose they do. Similarly, to take creationism seriously, it would have to come up with something that could be tested, or generate some predictions. i.e. until we have a reason to suppose that creationism is any more real than dragons etc, we ignore it.
Oh, and we don't accept the mere fact that people assert that such things as dragons exist as credible evidence that they do. Ditto creationism.
There is no way that anyone has ever suggested of empirically testing whether a supernatural creator exists, therefore the idea of creation is outside the realms of scientific investigation.
Now, you're right to say that creationism has never been disproved. Neither has the existance of fire-breathing dragons or unicorns or fairies, yet we all live our lives as though they do not exist, because although we cannot prove they don't exist, there is no good reason to suppose they do. Similarly, to take creationism seriously, it would have to come up with something that could be tested, or generate some predictions. i.e. until we have a reason to suppose that creationism is any more real than dragons etc, we ignore it.
Oh, and we don't accept the mere fact that people assert that such things as dragons exist as credible evidence that they do. Ditto creationism.
Sherman - Well someone is telling us all the time what to believe and what not to, Human child does not come to this world holding a degree in his hand. Are you trying to say that whatever you believe in your life so far has nothing to do with any sort of influence?
And this is what it has to do with religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_creationi sm
After all creationism or evolutionism, nothing has been proved or disproved as yet. So in the end it is all faith and nothing established, and a test of faith. I think believing or not believing both are different faiths (and I don�t want to go into it again, done it so many times).
If science will prove evolution as irrevocable fact then I don�t think many would deny it,
Same way if anyone who does not believe that God exists die there and then, then I doubt many would refuse.
So where is the test of faith?
And this is what it has to do with religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_creationi sm
After all creationism or evolutionism, nothing has been proved or disproved as yet. So in the end it is all faith and nothing established, and a test of faith. I think believing or not believing both are different faiths (and I don�t want to go into it again, done it so many times).
If science will prove evolution as irrevocable fact then I don�t think many would deny it,
Same way if anyone who does not believe that God exists die there and then, then I doubt many would refuse.
So where is the test of faith?
Naomi � this might help you, all you have to do is �google�. I know for sure what you would say;
http://www.helpforhomeschoolers.com/Article5.h tm
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/27393 7/scientists_who_do_not_believe_in_the.html
http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v5i10f. htm
http://www.helpforhomeschoolers.com/Article5.h tm
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/27393 7/scientists_who_do_not_believe_in_the.html
http://www.ridgenet.net/~do_while/sage/v5i10f. htm
Still Key plus you said "because i am muslim"
i dont say im an aethiest therefore i believe in evolution or
im an aethiest therefore i believe that ham is better than cheese
it sounds like muslim faith hasnt decided personally-almost sitting on the fence if you will?
Why didnt you say because of what i know and have seen... i have formed x opinion?
i dont say im an aethiest therefore i believe in evolution or
im an aethiest therefore i believe that ham is better than cheese
it sounds like muslim faith hasnt decided personally-almost sitting on the fence if you will?
Why didnt you say because of what i know and have seen... i have formed x opinion?
Can anyone spot some sort of similarity here, to make things easier look for the bold words,
keyplus90
Thurs 04/09/08
14:45 Sherman - Well someone is telling us all the time what to believe and what not to, Human child does not come to this world holding a degree in his hand. Are you trying to say that whatever you believe in your life so far has nothing to do with any sort of influence?
The Sherman
Thurs 04/09/08
15:05 Still Key plus you said "because i am muslim"
i dont say im an aethiest therefore i believe in evolution or
im an aethiest therefore i believe that ham is better than cheese
it sounds like muslim faith hasnt decided personally-almost sitting on the fence if you will?
Why didnt you say because of what i know and have seen... i have formed x opinion?
keyplus90
Thurs 04/09/08
14:45 Sherman - Well someone is telling us all the time what to believe and what not to, Human child does not come to this world holding a degree in his hand. Are you trying to say that whatever you believe in your life so far has nothing to do with any sort of influence?
The Sherman
Thurs 04/09/08
15:05 Still Key plus you said "because i am muslim"
i dont say im an aethiest therefore i believe in evolution or
im an aethiest therefore i believe that ham is better than cheese
it sounds like muslim faith hasnt decided personally-almost sitting on the fence if you will?
Why didnt you say because of what i know and have seen... i have formed x opinion?
Because I possess a healthy functioning brain and body which rely on each other for their continued existence and without which I would have no means to perceive, comprehend or need to conform to reality I am of the opinion that when I die I will have nothing to live for or any means or need to have an opinion about anything.
In the divide between those who value the one existence that is possible for us to experience, a lifetime here on this Earth, and between the various divisive factions of those who seek an existence beyond reason and beyond the grave, belief in God (or any other kind of disembodied consciousness without means, reason or purpose for existing) is the common denominator.
In the divide between those who value the one existence that is possible for us to experience, a lifetime here on this Earth, and between the various divisive factions of those who seek an existence beyond reason and beyond the grave, belief in God (or any other kind of disembodied consciousness without means, reason or purpose for existing) is the common denominator.
Keyplus, you made a sweeping statement, and I asked for statistics to qualify your claim. What you have provided are a few obscure websites, all with their own pre-conceived agendas, giving the names of equally obscure men of science - and not necessarily men who are qualified in any field related to biology. Sorry, not impressed.
You're absolutely right when you say that a human child doesn't come into this world holding a degree in his hand, but one would hope that eventually that child will become a man, and will, therefore, eventually develop a mind of his own. My own opinions are now far removed from those of my parents, and of my teachers. What grown, intelligent, person requires the services of teachers to tell him or her how to think? None I know, I'm happy to say.
You're absolutely right when you say that a human child doesn't come into this world holding a degree in his hand, but one would hope that eventually that child will become a man, and will, therefore, eventually develop a mind of his own. My own opinions are now far removed from those of my parents, and of my teachers. What grown, intelligent, person requires the services of teachers to tell him or her how to think? None I know, I'm happy to say.
Sherman: "[...]can you tell me is there anywhere where evolution doesn't stack up?
are there any doubts in your mind or something that doesnt make sense when looking at evolution? "
There's nothing that I'm aware of that undermines the theory, no. There's terrifc and fierce debates between scientists about specific mechanisms at point x or y, of course, but there's no suggestion that anyone has come up with a deal breaker that I'm aware of.
You do get creationists claiming there's all sorts of problems, of course. They say things like, 'there's no transitional fossils' and 'complex structures like eyes couldn't evolve' and 'speciation has never been observed' but these are all just utter lies that are pushed on to unspecting religious people who don't know the real facts well enough to understand they've been lied to.
The other thing that happens is that creationists set up strawman arguments. They will say something like, 'If evolution is true, why have we never seen a tiger turn into a squirel' or similar. The problem with these arguments (and some of them are less obviously retarded than the tiger/squirel example) is that evolutionary theory doesn't predict any such thing, and if it did happen, we'd have to rethink the entire thing. You get creationists who will swear blind that their argument is really important and 'proves' evolution is a fake and yet they're actually just fighting their own delusions.
You just wish they'd go and read a book and discover what the actual theory is about rather than what they would like it to be about.
are there any doubts in your mind or something that doesnt make sense when looking at evolution? "
There's nothing that I'm aware of that undermines the theory, no. There's terrifc and fierce debates between scientists about specific mechanisms at point x or y, of course, but there's no suggestion that anyone has come up with a deal breaker that I'm aware of.
You do get creationists claiming there's all sorts of problems, of course. They say things like, 'there's no transitional fossils' and 'complex structures like eyes couldn't evolve' and 'speciation has never been observed' but these are all just utter lies that are pushed on to unspecting religious people who don't know the real facts well enough to understand they've been lied to.
The other thing that happens is that creationists set up strawman arguments. They will say something like, 'If evolution is true, why have we never seen a tiger turn into a squirel' or similar. The problem with these arguments (and some of them are less obviously retarded than the tiger/squirel example) is that evolutionary theory doesn't predict any such thing, and if it did happen, we'd have to rethink the entire thing. You get creationists who will swear blind that their argument is really important and 'proves' evolution is a fake and yet they're actually just fighting their own delusions.
You just wish they'd go and read a book and discover what the actual theory is about rather than what they would like it to be about.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.