Australian Politics Forum - Is Religion compatible with Evolution?

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #345 - Aug 15^th, 2011 at 8:19pm

Frances wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 12:28pm:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 7:22am:

Bearing in mind that Josephus was just reporting what was received wisdom by 90CE and did not bother to investigate further, which indicates how irrelevant Christianity was even by 90CE.

Jesus was clearly a largely unheard of and irrelevant historical figure during the 1st century CE. Josephus's reference to him barely confirms that he existed at all.

Given that the Romans were persecuting the Christians in an effort to eliminate the religion altogether, it is unlikely that there would be many commentators writing about them. Certainly, there are numerous writings mentioning Jesus, but the problem with using most of them as evidence is that they were practically all written by Christians. From an objective point of view, you have to look for something that is written by someone who was not a follower of Christ

Yes, the Christian movement had its problems in the 1st century CE.

To confuse things further, Romans did not distinguish between austere Orthodox Judaism, Messianic Judaism and Pauline Christianity.

However, Jesus was not initially associated with Pauline Christianity but with the more extreme Messianic Judaism. He never, in his lifetime, met Saul/Paul and anyone who knew Jesus (given that he existed at all) would not have associated him with the strange Jewish 'perversion' that was Paul's idea of the legacy of Jesus.

According to Robert Eisenman, however, Josephus, did have some association with the Essenes and Eisenman suggests that his largely benign (if fleeting) references to Jesus were the result of that association.

Other writers (circa Jesus' time) may have taken a dimmer view of Jesus (regarding his more obvious involvement with Messianic Judaism as demonstrated by James) and if they wrote about him in depth in that negative light, those documents would have been unlikely to survive later Christian purges of anti-Jesus accounts.

As it stands the Gospel of Peter portrays a much more angry and violent Jesus than the four Gospels of the NT (even if that gospel is considered a forgery).

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #346 - Aug 15^th, 2011 at 8:32pm

Yadda wrote on Aug 15^th, 2011 at 9:13am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 14^th, 2011 at 4:54pm:

Just for the record :

#1,
I believe Jesus probably existed as an historical figure.

#2,
I believe he was not born in Bethlehem, so could not have fulfilled the requirements of Scripture for Messiahship.

#3,
I do not believe he considered himself the Messiah (or the 'Son of God').

#4,
I believe the Jesus story became the story of 'Christ' (Messiah) via Pauline doctrine.

#5,
I believe Jesus was virtually unknown in Palestine during his lifetime.

So your position is the the Gospel(s) account of Jesus, and of his life, was [in your opinion] largely all a fabrication and untrue ?

Point 3, especially, is in conflict with the Gospel(s) account of what Jesus [supposedly] stated about himself.

i.e.
The Gospel(s) account clearly shows that Jesus did claim to be the Jewish Messiah, and be divine.

But of course, if the Gospel(s) account of Jesus life, was largely all a fabrication and untrue, then Jesus would not have been the Jewish Messiah.

And if your assertion, point 2, is correct, then Jesus himself would must likely have been in on the deception too ???

So, for any individual, it all hinges upon whether you can believe that the Gospel(s) and NT account of Jesus, and of his life, was true.

My opinion is that the Jesus we know of today is entirely a Pauline fabrication.

The Gospels' account of what Jesus said are so full of interpolations or recollections by Pauline sympathisers or tainted by the religious 'war' raging between Paul and James of the Jerusalem Council over the legacy of Jesus, that anything Pauline Christianity has to say about Jesus (particularly what he said and did) is highly questionable in terms of historical fact.

I doubt Jesus was in on any deception and likely never considered himself the Messiah. If he did, then he failed in fulfilling his mission as a Jewish Messiah and he would have known that himself. The Jewish Messiah had a military role who, through god's favour, would save the Jews from their enemies... Not change sides and work for enemies of Judaism. The 'spiritual' Messiah was entirely a Pauline idea and Jesus didn't live to determine his Pauline legacy.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #347 - Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:04am

One final point regarding Paul's mission.

When Saul had his 'Road to Damascus' experience, he did not convert to 'Pauline Christianity', he converted to Messianic Judaism as defined by the Jerusalem Council led by James. He initially submitted to James' authority and began evangelising the Council's doctrine to non-Jews.

We can take from this that the ghostly Jesus, he claimed communed with him, did not command him to countermand James' orders and initially he followed James instructions.

Not so long after his conversion, he unilaterally takes it on himself to diverge from the Council's doctrine and begins evangelising something completely different - effectively a new religion.

It has been suggested that he did this because non-Jews could not and would not convert to Judaism (initially a Council requirement, prior to advancing to Messianic Judaism) as Judaism was seen by 'Gentiles' as unreasonably austere.

Initially James appears to have acceded to the idea that non-Jews would never accept full submission to Mosaic Law, but Paul pushed the point so far that James finally drew the line against Paul and sent agents to undo the damage Paul was doing to the Messianic movement and demanded Paul stand before the Council to account for his 'heresy'. Those arguments are laid out in Acts (with a Pauline bias, of course).

To cut a long story short, we can take from this that Jesus obviously never directed Paul to diverge from Judaism evidenced by the fact that, directly after his conversion, Paul submitted to the Council as the highest authority on the Messianic movement's orthodoxy.

So, what has all this got to do with religion and the theory of evolution being (in)compatible? All Religion is based on doctrine which (at least in principle) is necessarily immutable (i.e. It's doctrine does not evolve - except by mistranslation, misinterpretation, deceptive interpolation and redaction). It is, in that regard, incompatible with science which openly accedes to the inevitability (or at least the probability) of change to its doctrines.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:25am by NorthOfNorth »

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Ex Dame Pansi

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 24168

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #348 - Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:39am

Helian, Have you studied theology? you seem to have very good knowledge of the bible. I have read some of John Shelby Spong's books and I'm sure he would agree with what you are saying. He is a retired bishop and has studied the holy bible for probably 60 years or more.

I really think to understand the bible and Christian religion, you have to have the guts to be prepared to stand alone if you should happen to come to the conclusion that there is no 'protector' God in the heavens who is hanging out waiting to give one a serve and the other a gift, for no obvious reason.

Spong reckons you can follow a Christian faith without believing that the bible was God breathed, but it would be so far removed from the church of today that we wouldn't recognise it.

I can't see how you can believe in both creation and evolution. Maybe ditch the bible story and say there was a God that caused the big bang, if you really need a God, then you can have both....sort of.

Back to top

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace." Hendrix
andrei said: Great isn't it? Seeing boatloads of what is nothing more than human garbage turn up.....

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #349 - Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:46am

Pansi, Yes I have read and listened to Spong and I agree with him completely. I believe that if 'Christianity' has any chance of survival, it will be along the lines that Spong proposes.

Have I studied, Theology? No, not in the formal sense, but as any ex-Catholic will affirm, the process of de-Catholicism requires many years of commitment to the truth behind the fantasy of the doctrine.

Back to top

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

Yadda

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 21842
A cat with a view

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #350 - Aug 17^th, 2011 at 8:44am

helian,

Thanks for your considered response, in posts #346, #347

It is good to at least understand your own perspective on the Jesus 'issue', and your own perceptions regarding 'Pauline' Christianity.

As i have already stated....
"So, for any individual, it all hinges upon whether you can believe that the Gospel(s) and NT account of Jesus, and of his life, was true."

And i do.

As i examine the account of Jesus life, and take into in consideration the OT scripture relating to the history of the Jewish people, to me, it all [collectively, but not wholly] makes sense.

Back to top

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30093
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #351 - Aug 17^th, 2011 at 11:50am

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:46am:

Pansi, Yes I have read and listened to Spong and I agree with him completely. I believe that if 'Christianity' has any chance of survival, it will be along the lines that Spong proposes.

Have I studied, Theology? No, not in the formal sense, but as any ex-Catholic will affirm, the process of de-Catholicism requires many years of commitment to the truth behind the fantasy of the doctrine.

There is nothing to study. It is an old book written by ignorant peasants which is somehow given more attention than it deserves.

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged

Grey Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 5341 Gender:	Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution? Reply #352 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 3:02am Quote: The most fascinating thing about the Cambrian explosion is the evolution of eyes, which science still cannot account for. Humans do not know from where or how eyes evolved. They simple turned up unannounced. Without eyes, there is no light, because we cannot see. Poppycock!
Back to top	"It is in the shelter of each other that the people live" - Irish Proverb IP Logged

Grey Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 5341 Gender:	Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution? Reply #353 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 3:12am
Back to top	"It is in the shelter of each other that the people live" - Irish Proverb IP Logged

boogieman

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 307

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #354 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 6:12am

Frances wrote on Aug 11^th, 2011 at 12:37am:

For those who believe literally in the story of Adam and Eve, the answer would be no, but these people would be in the minority. For the majority of Christians, who would see the creation stories in Genesis as being allegories rather than factual accounts, the answer would be yes, religion and evolution are compatible.

Here's one view on the subject:

Quote:

Archbishop Gianfranco Ravasi, head of the Pontifical Council for Culture, said while the Church had been hostile to Darwin's theory in the past, the idea of evolution could be traced to St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas.

Father Giuseppe Tanzella-Nitti, Professor of Theology at the Pontifical Santa Croce University in Rome, added that 4th century theologian St Augustine had "never heard the term evolution, but knew that big fish eat smaller fish" and forms of life had been transformed "slowly over time". Aquinas made similar observations in the Middle Ages.

The conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University will discuss Intelligent Design to an extent, but only as a "cultural phenomenon" rather than a scientific or theological issue.

Monsignor Ravasi said Darwin's theories had never been formally condemned by the Roman Catholic Church, pointing to comments more than 50 years ago, when Pope Pius XII described evolution as a valid scientific approach to the development of humans.

Marc Leclerc, who teaches natural philosophy at the Gregorian University, said the "time has come for a rigorous and objective valuation" of Darwin by the Church as the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth approaches. Professor Leclerc argues that too many of Darwin's opponents, primarily Creationists, mistakenly claim his theories are "totally incompatible with a religious vision of reality".

Earlier this week, prominent scientists and leading religious figures wrote to The Daily Telegraph to call for an end to the fighting over Darwin's legacy. They argued that militant atheists are turning people away from evolution by using it to attack religion while they also urge believers in creationism to acknowledge the overwhelming body of evidence that now exists to support Darwin's theory.

The Church of England is seeking to bring Darwin back into the fold with a page on its website paying tribute to his "forgotten" work in his local parish, showing science and religion need not be at odds.

link to original article

There's nothing in religion that negates evolution at all. The Creationisrs are the ones who started this isue because they didn't like being "monkeys".

The truth is though that religion is incompatible with everything as it's a fraud, a fake, a lie of gigantic proportions.

Like any good lie, the more often it's repeated the more people will believe it.

But it's still a lie.

With photos of the Big Bang now available it becomes more obvious that some God did not create anything at all. Except doubt.

Back to top

IP Logged

NorthOfNorth

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 17258
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #355 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 7:26am

Yadda wrote on Aug 17^th, 2011 at 8:44am:

helian,

Thanks for your considered response, in posts #346, #347

It is good to at least understand your own perspective on the Jesus 'issue', and your own perceptions regarding 'Pauline' Christianity.

As i have already stated....
"So, for any individual, it all hinges upon whether you can believe that the Gospel(s) and NT account of Jesus, and of his life, was true."

And i do.

As i examine the account of Jesus life, and take into in consideration the OT scripture relating to the history of the Jewish people, to me, it all [collectively, but not wholly] makes sense.

The thing is that, really, its the essence of the Christian message which should be important... Being (1) living one's life by the golden rule - to do to others only that which you'd have done to you (or - that which is hateful to you, do not do to others), (2) Love one's neighbour as oneself. The second 'rule' requiring, of course, that the adherent learn to love / respect himself first such that he can reflect that degree of respect towards others (all respect being essentially self-respect) and (3) To ensure one's actions are guided by those principles.

Christian mythology is incidental and essentially irrelevant... Who cares whether or not Jesus was actually the 'Messiah' whose coming was foretold by the 'Prophets'?, Who cares whether there were or were not 12 apostles, or that Jesus did or did not perform miracles? Or whether he was born in Bethlehem or somewhere in Galilee, or that he was born of a virgin, or whether or not he rose from the dead. These were just stories conjured up by great storytellers to appease ancient and superstitious peoples who required that the central religious figure be a better / stronger / abler 'god' than the local competition!

None of the ridiculous Christian mythological baggage is worth even 5 minutes consideration when contemplating one's answer to the greatest of moral and ethical questions, 'How should I live?'.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Aug 18^th, 2011 at 7:54am by NorthOfNorth »

Conviction is the art of being certain

IP Logged

azulene

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 701
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #356 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 9:31am

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 18^th, 2011 at 7:26am:

Yadda wrote on Aug 17^th, 2011 at 8:44am:

helian,

Thanks for your considered response, in posts #346, #347

It is good to at least understand your own perspective on the Jesus 'issue', and your own perceptions regarding 'Pauline' Christianity.

As i have already stated....
"So, for any individual, it all hinges upon whether you can believe that the Gospel(s) and NT account of Jesus, and of his life, was true."

And i do.

As i examine the account of Jesus life, and take into in consideration the OT scripture relating to the history of the Jewish people, to me, it all [collectively, but not wholly] makes sense.

The thing is that, really, its the essence of the Christian message which should be important... Being (1) living one's life by the golden rule - to do to others only that which you'd have done to you (or - that which is hateful to you, do not do to others), (2) Love one's neighbour as oneself. The second 'rule' requiring, of course, that the adherent learn to love / respect himself first such that he can reflect that degree of respect towards others (all respect being essentially self-respect) and (3) To ensure one's actions are guided by those principles.

Christian mythology is incidental and essentially irrelevant... Who cares whether or not Jesus was actually the 'Messiah' whose coming was foretold by the 'Prophets'?, Who cares whether there were or were not 12 apostles, or that Jesus did or did not perform miracles? Or whether he was born in Bethlehem or somewhere in Galilee, or that he was born of a virgin, or whether or not he rose from the dead. These were just stories conjured up by great storytellers to appease ancient and superstitious peoples who required that the central religious figure be a better / stronger / abler 'god' than the local competition!

None of the ridiculous Christian mythological baggage is worth even 5 minutes consideration when contemplating one's answer to the greatest of moral and ethical questions, 'How should I live?'.

Just shows how badly most of them miss the point......

Back to top

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap."&& -- Napoleon Bonaparte

IP Logged

Bobby.

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 105974
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #357 - Aug 18^th, 2011 at 9:35am

Sir lastnail wrote on Aug 17^th, 2011 at 11:50am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:46am:

Pansi, Yes I have read and listened to Spong and I agree with him completely. I believe that if 'Christianity' has any chance of survival, it will be along the lines that Spong proposes.

Have I studied, Theology? No, not in the formal sense, but as any ex-Catholic will affirm, the process of de-Catholicism requires many years of commitment to the truth behind the fantasy of the doctrine.

There is nothing to study. It is an old book written by ignorant peasants which is somehow given more attention than it deserves.

Hear hear Nail !
Bronze age myth that plays on peoples fear of death.

Back to top

IP Logged

boogieman

Senior Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 307

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #358 - Aug 19^th, 2011 at 7:53am

Bobby. wrote on Aug 18^th, 2011 at 9:35am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Aug 17^th, 2011 at 11:50am:

NorthOfNorth wrote on Aug 16^th, 2011 at 8:46am:

Pansi, Yes I have read and listened to Spong and I agree with him completely. I believe that if 'Christianity' has any chance of survival, it will be along the lines that Spong proposes.

Have I studied, Theology? No, not in the formal sense, but as any ex-Catholic will affirm, the process of de-Catholicism requires many years of commitment to the truth behind the fantasy of the doctrine.

There is nothing to study. It is an old book written by ignorant peasants which is somehow given more attention than it deserves.

Hear hear Nail !
Bronze age myth that plays on peoples fear of death.

Actually it wasn' written by ignorant peasants at all. And, further, Christianity as a religion did not fully exist until around 300 AD. Prior to that there were many small groups claiming differing beliefs in a God and all claiming to be the one religion. They had similar basics but different beliefs and rituals. You might say it was much like today where there are so many versions of Christians you can't count them.

The Bible as we know it did not exist until around 300 AD. Prior to that there were various documents that were written by what you call ignorant peasants. Given semi God like status today for some reason.

The person who had the Bible written as one book was the Roman Emperor Constantine who himself converted to Christianity and appointed himself head of this new religion.

He had his gathering of priests and scholars gather as much documentation as they could and instructed them to put it all together to make a cohesive narrative, convincing to the minds of that time.

It has been since rewritten of course and many things have been changed but Constantine is really the person who combined all those splinter religions into one. You see he had his writers include as many rituals and quotes as possible from all the smaller groups so they were included.

Brilliant strategy actually as he turned his enemies into followers by doing what he did.

Why did he become Christian himself? It was because of a dream he had just before yet another big battle. He dreamt he won the battle but he carried a large cross into and during that battle.

So you could say Christianity is all one man's dream, but however you look at it it is not real or true. There is no God.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir lastnail

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 30093
Gender: male

Re: Is Religion compatible with Evolution?
Reply #359 - Aug 19^th, 2011 at 12:44pm

boogieman wrote on Aug 19^th, 2011 at 7:53am:

Actually it wasn' written by ignorant peasants at all. And, further, Christianity as a religion did not fully exist until around 300 AD. Prior to that there were many small groups claiming differing beliefs in a God and all claiming to be the one religion. They had similar basics but different beliefs and rituals. You might say it was much like today where there are so many versions of Christians you can't count them.

The Bible as we know it did not exist until around 300 AD. Prior to that there were various documents that were written by what you call ignorant peasants. Given semi God like status today for some reason.

The person who had the Bible written as one book was the Roman Emperor Constantine who himself converted to Christianity and appointed himself head of this new religion.

He had his gathering of priests and scholars gather as much documentation as they could and instructed them to put it all together to make a cohesive narrative, convincing to the minds of that time.

It has been since rewritten of course and many things have been changed but Constantine is really the person who combined all those splinter religions into one. You see he had his writers include as many rituals and quotes as possible from all the smaller groups so they were included.

Brilliant strategy actually as he turned his enemies into followers by doing what he did.

Why did he become Christian himself? It was because of a dream he had just before yet another big battle. He dreamt he won the battle but he carried a large cross into and during that battle.

So you could say Christianity is all one man's dream, but however you look at it it is not real or true. There is no God.

They were ignorant peasants making incorrect and unsubstantiated claims about the origins of the Universe and then persecuting anyone that didn't tow their line Sad

And the 3 day resurrection, virgin birth, heaven and hell are ideas that are all plagiarized from ancient religions.

Back to top

In August 2021, Newcastle Coroner Karen Dilks recorded that Lisa Shaw had died “due to complications of an AstraZeneca COVID vaccination”.

IP Logged