What does the Dali Llama say about evolution?

Nothing Buddism deals with the individual. This is why I converted.

Actually the Dali Lama likes science but he thinks evolution has some limitations.

Yes but Buddhism has nothing to do with god it has to deal with our individul suffering and the path to nirvana.

Thank you for the enlightment.

Just for the sake of any sane people reading this thread I would like to point out that the above quote about Noah’s flood is total bunk without any merit whatsoever.

For the sane person, let me assure you that many scientists themselves are indeed of the Christian faith, and they have looked into the idea of trying to tie in a great flood to explain various observations concerning geological evolution. The bottom lines is that there is absolutely no evidence that any such great flood occurred. The data simply can’t be made to fit that model no matter how grossly out of shape it is contorted.

This claim that Noah’s flood could account for geological evidence is totally unwarranted hype put out by hopeful creationists in a last gasp attempt to salvage what they see as an extremely threatened theological picture.




The purpose of Creationists is clear. Evolution presents a real threat to their belief system that claims that a God exists who will offer them eternal life. They mistakenly believe that it all comes down to “God vs Evolution”. They can’t coexist! Or so they believe.

That’s what the whole argument is about to begin with. It’s an argument that these things can’t possibly coexist, therefore one of them must be wrong! That’s the mindset of a Creationist.

Most Christians I know accept evolution and don’t see it as a threat to their belief system. They simply don’t take the Bible so literally. In fact, many people that I personally know genuinely believe that the story of Noah’s flood is a parable and was never meant to be an actual historical event. So there is a wide range of beliefs out there surrounding a single dogmatic account of earth’s history.

Creationists are literalists for the most part. But the Bible makes no sense when taken literally. It must be taken as inspirational parables. It becomes self-inconsistent and contradictory if taken verbatim. Therefore it doesn’t even make any sense in its own right when viewed that way.

So the verbatim approach to the biblical stories is doomed to fail on its own merit, even without external knowledge such as evolution.

I saw a Discovery Channel show where they proved the entire human race as we know it today came from Africa. Does that prove creation or evolution?

Undercover Bro

"If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims. No one who wants to understand the world can ignore the basic insights of theories as key as evolution, relativity and quantum mechanics." – The Deli Lama

So he’s clearly listing evolution right along side relativity and quantum mechanics.

I agree, all three of these so-called ‘theories’ have all been shown to be true at least in their predictions. There may be refinements to all of them, but nothing that is going to completely rebuke any of them. Any refinements are only going to enhance the bulk of what they already hold to be true.

If the first humaniod stood first in Africa, so what does that mean?

It doesn't 'prove' either one. It would be compatible with both ideas.

However it does make one wonder why a God would create people in Africa and then inspire a book that focuses on the history of Middle East.

You'd think that if God created people originally in Africa, then that would also be the geographical center for his stories.

So my own opinion on this would be that while it doesn’t prove or disprove anything, it raises questions concerning the consistency of God. Seems like maybe the Egyptians would have been God’s chosen people instead of the Jews then?

Just a thought. Not meant to be the start of a debate. I don’t believe in the divinity of those stories in any case.

What about Alla? Ain't he got something to say about the chosen?

Anarchy

I'm not sure how that works. I know that the Bible and the Quran are both based on a lot of the same folklore. But clearly they are not based on identical folklore.

I honestly have no clue what the Quran has to say about any chosen people or if it even mentions chosen people at all.

I think a lot of the stories supposedly have the same characters, places, and events, but actual give different plots and details to the stories.

So who knows? Like I say, I don't believe in the divinity of any of it anyway. It's all just regional mythology to me.

Sorry Untamed, but Abracadabra has you here. All of your facts and reasons and well stated arguments count for nothing in the face of his gratuitous assertions. Yep, his unsupported statements carrry more weight than any amount of evidence.



You just have to laugh. You can't take this crap seriously, even if you tried. You can give all of the facts and well reasoned arguments you want and then Abracadabra or Claude will just come running in to call you a fundamentalist and never once try to refute your argument. They will attack you, your intelligence, your integrity and get away with it scott free.



We were all once slaves to sin, so maybe it's wrong for me to get so much joy out of reading their logical fallacies. But darn it, I can't help myself.

You say it's "unsupported" but this is in fact, the current state of accepted science. It’s well documented and is available for any intelligent person who cares to research it. As they often say, seek and ye shall find.

Like Voil said before, if you have something that you believe you can support with science and logic then just turn it in to the proper people and, if what you say holds and truth, then it will be accepted as such.

You are the one who is always accusing people of having ‘strawman’ arguments etc, yet you are the one who actually presents ‘strawman’ arguments based on the actual definition of that word. You are the one who is offering crackpot ideas that are unsubstantiated.

Moreover, it’s a bit late for you to pretend that your ideas aren’t religiously motivated. You have already made your undying fundamentalist approach to religion vividly clear over the past months. Even sane Christians won’t back up your fundamentalists beliefs in that area.

All you ever do is attack people on these forums. Then you accuse them of attacking you. That's because you need to distract from the fact that your claims hold no water.

The fact is that you have a religious agenda. And besides, any sane person can see that my words are true just in your arguments. I don’t need to provide any evidence.

As soon as the topic of ‘evolution’ comes up the truth of my claims become immediately obvious. The first thing that Creationists start up with is that the world can’t possibly be 4.5 millions years old.

Well, already they have departed from their claim that evolution can’t be correct, and they are now claiming that all of geology and physics is incorrect!.

A person doesn’t need to have a Ph.D. to see the truth in this Spider. The evidence for it is obvious and quite clear to anyone who sincerely has an open-mind and who isn’t blinded by a need argue for a predetermined outcome to support a mythology as being the verbatim truth.

You always want your cake and eat it too. I have no need to provide evidence for what is obvious.

To denounce evolution requires denouncing all of science. Just look at the Creationist’s arguments. They aren’t just arguing that evolution is wrong, they are arguing that science is wrong about everything.

They have no choice but to take that path, because to accept that science is actually correct in all these other areas naturally leads to the fact that evolution had to have occurred.

So they have no choice but to deny the age of the earth, and all other scientific means of measuring and observing things. According to them, all of science would need to be wrong.

The evidence for this is in their very own arguments.

No need to even provide a link. Just listen to what the Creationists are claiming you’d have to believe in order to denounce evolution.

They offer me all the ‘support’ I need. To claim that my statements are 'unsupported' is silly. They have no choice but to denounce all of science if they want to pretend the evolution didn't actually occur.

Thank for the support guys!

Abracadabra,

Let me explain something that you are obviously overlooking.

First, you posted several times that I abuse my daughter. You have lied and claimed that you didn't, but I know that you were warned by the Admins for doing just that. I am not going to dig through your tripe filled posts for several months to find when you started making these claims, but if anyone wishes to, be my guest. So any complaints you have about anything I have said to you are moot, because quite honestly, there isn't much worse you can say about someone than to accuse them of child abuse.

Second, NOTHING in my posts in this thread mention faith. You throw up strawman arguments which have nothing to do with what I have posted here. My point is that "Lucy" could be a mutant like "Oliver". You can't argue that it's not possible. I have shown documentation in this thread that shows a human with a normal human pelvis can walk on hands and feet. So any suggestion that Lucy couldn't have is also false. The only evidence that anyone has offered to refute my statements is "You are a fundamentalist". Okay, but how does that refute my arguments? Does the fact that I am a Christian automatically negate any observations or arguments I make? If you believe that, then you need to throw out the work of thousands of scientists, setting science back hundreds of years. Address my point. Explain why Lucy couldn't be a mutant. Explain to me this: Why hasn't science is suggested that she might have been a mutant? I already know the answer, because they assume Evolution and therefore assume that she is a missing link. They did the same thing with Oliver, until it was revealed that he was just a normal, but deformed, chimp.

This is a discussion forum. In a discussion, all items are discussed. You and your ilk would love to just shut up all Christian voices. Anyone who disagrees and says "Hey, how about magnetic striping on the ocean floor? Doesn't the fact that the stripes are all straight indicate rapid seafloor spreading? If the magetic field took thousands of years to change, then shouldn't the magnetic stripes be curved?" Well, science doesn't have an answer for that one, but they sure know that when it comes up to tell the Christians to "SHUT THE HELL UP!". So go ahead and tell us to shut up some more and we will continue to state what we know to be true.

Oh and why don't you let the Christians speak for themselves? Seems to me that if any Christians strongly disagreed with me, they would have mentioned it by now.

ATTENTION!!! ATTENTION!!!

... for those whom may not have studied 'apologetics', and only have a traditional understanding of the following terms:

- INTEGRITY
- INTELLIGENCE
- TRUTH
- FACTS
- REASON
- WELL STATED ARGUMENTS
- PROOF
- EVIDENCE
- DEBATE
- ETC.

OUR RESIDENT SENIOR APOLOGETICS STUDENT, 'SPIDERCBM', HAS PRESENTED 'ABRA' WITH A SAMPLE OF 'EVIDENCE' WRITTEN UNDER THE REVISED 'APOLOGETIC' DEFINITIONS:



That's it folks!

Case settled!

You've heard it from the top apologetics students around!

They MUST know their 'stuff'!

And besides, what's more important to YOU???
Scientific proof, rational thinking, or what YOU think 'god' wrote in the bible!?!??!

See!!! So much simpler this way!!!


Here is another GEM of the new 'apologetics' versions of
what is refered to as 'WELL STATED ARGUMENTS', and 'FLAWLESS EVIDENCE'


Altough this one is not easy for the uninitiated, please take note that the revised 'apologetics' interpretations makes life a lot simpler.

When in doubt, just remember the easy to remember 'jingle' :

"... what's more important, scientific proof, or what YOU think 'god' wrote in the bible!?!??!...'

If the scientific proof contradicts the bible, of course what you think 'god' wrote in the bible wins!!!
Just 'apologize' old facts and scientific evidence away!!! That simple.

You're are now getting powerful insight into 'apologetically' talking your way out of just about anything 'old-fact-thingking', and scientific 'mumbo-jumbo' could throw at ...

"... what YOU think 'god' wrote in the bible..."


You too will be able to reply with such 'killer' rebuttals, while pretending to have 'fun':



That's it folks, 'killer' reply #2798 (yes there are quite a few of them). That's what you serve people whom show a 'resistance to change', when faced with the new 'apologetics' definitions of ...

- INTEGRITY
(your interpretation of the bible is always right)

- INTELLIGENCE
(as long as you understand your own interpretation of the bible)

- TRUTH
(your interprtation of the bible is never wrong)

- FACTS
(If it contradicts your interpretation of the bible, it's a fallacy)

- REASON
(if they believe in YOUR god, and agree with YOUR interpretation of the bible, then it means that they have access to reason)

- WELL STATED ARGUMENTS
(just double check with 'Dr.spidercbm' to make sure that it conforms with YOUR OWN understanding of the bible)

- PROOF
(forget about scientific proof, does the 'proof' presented agree with YOUR understanding of what 'god' wrote in the bible?)

- EVIDENCE (whatever YOU think 'god' wrote in the bible, that's all the evidence YOU need)

- OPEN-MINDED DEBATE
(as long as it is 'open' to what YOU understand 'god' wrote in the bible)



If they refuse to engage in what they might consider an intellectually and morally corrupt discussion, and denounce it, you always have the option of turning the tables around (apologetics soldering gives you this right, 'cause you're defending 'god' remember).

Below, 'spider' chose turn-table bomb #37. It is a favorite of 'spider' in moments of panic and desperation. A favorite of mine also!



It turns one's own idiocies around, by accusing one's 'ennemies' of committing 'logical fallacies' instead, regardless of the fact that one might just have finished accusing the ennemy with 'REFUSAL TO REFUTE'.
All the while, pretending to be amused by it all!!! #37 is usually very effective!!!

Anyhow, thank you 'spider' for this great lesson in 'apologetics' spinning. There is no one better qualified than you in that field.

Claude,

I was quoting Abra quoting Untamed. If you look at Untamed's post which was quoted by Abra, right above the statements quoted by Abra is a detailed discussion of Uranium-lead dating. That's what I was talking about. But since you are all about getting as much attention as possible while paying as little attention as possible, I can understand why you made the mistake.

Is it funny that you ignore several paragraphs worth of material refuting the use of uranium-lead dating? Yes, it is. I didn't even have to call TBS to ask if it was funny.



You poor kid, somebody should help you read this whole thread, so that you can see the only ones talking about God, faith or the Bible are you and Abra.

This is where you presented 'abra' with the 'sample' I was referring to.

It is the text YOU picked to illustrate YOUR idea of 'facts, evidence, and well reasoned arguments...'.

I figured those definitions had to be 'brand new' to most people.

Sorry you missed the point.

How's the mirror work going??? Still have trouble accepting the 'attention grabbing compulsion'???

Patience. It will come. Don't rush it.

It will free you up when you finally get it!


How's your 'puppy'?!?!?

[qutoe]First, you posted several times that I abuse my daughter. You have lied and claimed that you didn't,…

This is hitting below the belt Spider. A totally bogus accusation that has no truth to it whatsoever.

Yes! There was a thread where everyone was talking about sin, and very young children of preschool age. I had made statements in general that anyone who would publish a young child like that and tell them that they are a sinner would be an abusive parent.

Then you jumped in and started screaming that I was accusing you of abusing your daughter!

I didn’t even know that you had any children!!!

If you have a guilt complex concerning the way you’ve raised your children don’t try to pin that one on me Mr. Spider!

I didn’t even know that you had any children much less accuse you of doing anything wrong personally.

You have this really nasty need to turn everything into a personal war.

I have absolutely nothing against you personally Spider. I don’t even know who you are!

Your accusations against me claiming that I accused you of abusing your daughter is despicable and completely without merit. Although, I think I did agree with you that the scenario you described would indeed be abuse. I believe I did say that if that’s they way you treat children I wouldn’t want you to be around mine if I had any. But that was only after the fact that you were becoming defense about something you hadn’t even been directly accused of!

Your need to make everything person is discussing and getting really OLD Spider.

I have never made any personal accusations about how you might raise children. I didn’t even know that you had children until you revealed your guilt complex in the matter.

So bug off with you unwarranted personal accusations! They are totally untrue and uncalled for.

I have nothing against you Spider. Like I say, I don’t even know who you are. All I know about you is that you post religious fanaticism and seem to have an obsession with making personal insults and innuendos. Other than that you could be a spider for all I know.

And to your other erroneous accusation, I have never told anyone to ‘shut up’. I just put them to shame logically and you think that because I beat them logically that I told them to ‘shut up’ when in fact I merely showed that their arguments are empty and meaningless. That’s the idea in a debate Spider.

If you’re get too emotional involved, maybe you should take a break from the forums for a while. I see that you are also hurling personal insults at Voileazur, not to mention that you’ve been attempting to insult everyone by referring to them as ‘strawmen’.

You are the master of turning forum debates into personal insults Spider. Let there be no doubt about that.

Constantly referring to Voil as Claude only reveals your taunting nature. You are clearly attempting to incite an emotional response from people by pushing them to the limit with your hideous insults and innuendos. Is this supposed to be the behavior of a “Christian”?

I think your battle for religious righteousness was lost a long time ago Spider.

You presented a hypothetical "What if you put your child..." and I answered "If my daughter disobeyed me, she would be punished". You then started ranting "You make me sick! Puke! I not only feel sorry for you, but anyone who has the misfortune of meeting you! PUKE!"

A couple hours later you posted something like "I know someone who uses the Bible to call his daughter a sinner...etc". When I asked you to stop you said "I have no idea what you are talking about, I was simply talking about someone I know..." It wasn't in general, you claimed to know the person and you had just went into a rant about what a terrible person I was. YOU KNOW YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT ME. You didn't mention my name in the post, but anyone who was reading the threads at that time would have known whom you were speaking of.

Abra, calling Voil Claude is teasing in a way. But I guess you see nothing wrong with him telling me over and over again to stop posting? Do you see anything wrong with Voil saying I'm just a little boy trying to get attention? No, of course not! He's not a Christian! Well, guess what? Christians are allowed to defend themselves. As you whined before "I have feelings" well...surprise surprise surprise, SO DO I! Maybe you and Claude should treat others the way you want to be treated? Maybe if Claude hadn't attack me first, I wouldn't be calling him Claude? Maybe if you guys actually looked with a critical eye at your own behaviors, you would see that you incite Christians with your sarcasm, insults and attacks?