Why can't I ask a simple f****** question without everyone jumping to conclusions about what my opinion is?

Question

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AuVcw48KyPTTDyVXzikXsk3sy6IX?qid=20070213081220AA9mF2y

only rt66lt actually answered the quetion. Everyone else is either off in la la land ("Look at the horshoe crab") or assuming that I believe God helped evolution along.

What I am looking for is an answer from somebody as to why direct creation by God is a superior belief to what might be called 'God-guided' evolution (And again for the record, I believe in pure evolution without invervention by a god)..

Answer 1

Mullah I don't know what these folks' problems are. I have the same issue when I ask a question. I have been told that I am trying to discredit christianity, that I need to apologize.

And then in response to the same question, I have been told that I need to stop getting all my info from the bible and open a science book instead.

It's the herd mentality if you ask me. IQ points drop in proportion to the increase in group size.

Wow, they are talking about evolution here, when this question is clearly not about evolution. It's amazing.

Answer 2

I am a moderate also when it comes to science, but that being said I hate to say the answer to your problem can be summed up in two words:

radical empiricism

There has been a shift in science from one that is allowing some question for other perspectives (including spiritual) to one that is heavily influenced by an athiestic view of reality. Arguably, this was present in science from the first days the term was coined. However, what you see happening now is the result of popular scientists like Skinner (who was an atheist) and other proponents of a world that SHOULD only be based on observational evidence, experiment, control, logic, etc., and with this assumption is that all forms of dogma must be abolished. These people are in places of authority acting as the gatekeepers of reality so that even if you ask the "wrong" question on Yahoo, they will try to invalidate your question.

I'm sorry radical empiricists are trying to take over. Don't worry. If they become too abusive report them to Yahoo : )

THIS answer deserves a second read:


"Mullah I don't know what these folks' problems are. I have the same issue when I ask a question. I have been told that I am trying to discredit christianity, that I need to apologize.

And then in response to the same question, I have been told that I need to stop getting all my info from the bible and open a science book instead.

It's the herd mentality if you ask me. IQ points drop in proportion to the increase in group size.

Wow, they are talking about evolution here, when this question is clearly not about evolution. It's amazing."

Now at least I know somebody else sees that there are some kind of radical scientist/empiricists (maybe an atheist organization?) who are trying to EMBARRASS people who have spiritual questions. That's just plain wrong.

Answer 3

In answer to your first question, its because so many people get onto this site and ask questions in an attempt to prove a point, rather than to get information. I think its kind of sad. Forums exist for the purpose of debating. Yahoo ask exists to get information or to share your knowledge on a subject.
In answer to your second, I think only very scared and bull headed people cannot accept that some people choose to believe in the same God as them in a slightly different manner. Some people just dont understand that God gave us free will, and only *He* can take it away, so they need to stop trying to do what only *He* can do.
For the record, I'm cool with not believing in God if thats what you feel is true, I'm just saying this from a Christian standpoint. God gave us all logic and free will so that we will make our descisions about *Him* ourselves. It doesn't mean anything if we are forced to believe in him through law or through lack of proper education. I'm sure *He'd* rather see an athiest use his brain to come to a conclusion he might not like than to see someone worship *Him* just because they dont know anything else. If I am wrong (or anybody else, for that matter) then I guess its a good thing that God loves us all and forgives us.

Answer 4

I suggest that you read parts of the book of Genesis, not as a literal account of the creation of the universe, but from the viewpoint of it being a genetic instruction manual. Consider for instance that the often misinterpreted 'rib' of Adam is a mistranslation of 'side'. This makes sense when you consider that it could be talking about one side of a DNA helix, yes ?

This doesn't answer your question because it implies that god invented evolution rather than governed an already existing system of evolution, but I do think you should consider it when you formulate your own answer.

For the record, I am not a christian or a theologian.

Answer 5

I will attempt to answer your question. Beliefs by their very nature are subjective, and as such cannot be universally called "superior" or "inferior". Those who believe that direct creation by God is a superior belief also have a belief system that precludes any other explanation for creation. It is simply based upon their belief system. It does not have any relationship with objective fact that can be proven.

Those who believe in God-guided evolution have a different belief system in which evolution is the creation of God, and the scientific laws are also a creation of God. But again, this is a belief system, and cannot be proven by objective fact.

There is another way of looking at it--that God and all things are One. Basically this is a belief system too, but its outlook is different in that it says that scientific laws aren't created by God but ARE God, that all creation is not made by God but IS God. This is more of a matter of semantics, it could be argued, but it is still a belief system.

I hope this helps to answer your question.

Answer 6

i wager its component of their nurturing. If it become human nature then i wager actually everyone would attempt this, yet i recognize there are those that dont so its no longer nature. i wager human beings have a tendency to act previously questioning, i admit i become like that until eventually one time issues fairly were given messy.. yet now i ask, locate out and that i rapidly question that individual (no longer in a advise way) to make sure the actuality. i wager human beings dont supply others the great thing about the doubt interior a similar way they'd like it, so i attempt to provide human beings the great thing about the doubt previously leaping to conclusions.

Answer 7

You worded your previous question a little off-course if that is the result you desired.

I do not think either belief is superior. They are theories and will remain as that until someone proves otherwise. Evolution is the most viable to me, but it does make more superior.

Answer 8

The key is not why they do or don't, it is how they understand.
This is the key! Understanding!

I personally do not understand many things. However I may lean towards my own understanding, which can lead me to a form of ignorance. It also can lead me towards a form of Logic or Intelligence or Rationality, etc., etc., etc..

Does this understanding I have help me to help others. Maybe! Maybe not! But what it is, is my own understanding.

Now if I step outside of my own understanding and look towards another's understanding, will this enable me or disable me. For some the answer is yes! For others the answer is no!
Why?
If my answer was no, it is because I prefer my own understanding as the only way.
If my answer is yes, it is because I realized that my way is not the absolute way.

Does this make me stronger or weaker. For some it is a weakness, for others it is a strength.

The key to this whole issue is Understanding!

Answer 9

You only asked this question because you think creationists wear silly hats.

I think the honest answer is, the theological position of there being a clockwork, rational, God largely gave way to the more existential concepts of gnostic experience of God. In other words, Sarte and Kierkegaard replaced theologians like Kant.

I think the more faith based, experiential, concept of God had the undesired effect of causing a reaction against the clockwork concept of God by people who didn't understand the newer ideas.

Answer 10

Theologically speaking a perfect being would not need guided evolution of mankind. Evolution implies movement towards the optimum. If one assumes God is perfect, then we also assume He exists. We must further assume His revelation, the Bible, is also His divine words to mankind. He states in the Bible he created man and women in a perfect state before the Fall. Hence evolution of man that is guided is a contradiction to these assumptions.