Quote
Originally posted by: MeBeJedi
"A parable: A man and his son are walking down the street. The boy looks at a huge building and says "Wow, how did that building get here dad?" "Well son, a lot of people in construction crews, and civil engineers, and building managers built that building". A little while later they come to a suspension bridge "Wow! How did this bridge get here dad?" "Well son, again it was construction people, engineers, and the like". "How did we get here dad?" "Well, by accident son"."

But that depends on what you mean by "accident". None of these structures built themselves, and none those structures existed in that state (size, capacity, materials) when the very first of their kind was built. As the knowledge of humans increased, so did out ability to build these things as they are now, but make no mistake - there were accidents along the way - both good and bad. If you were to look at the first "bridge" made by man thousands of years ago, you probably would have been very hard-pressed to visualize what they currently are today.

Consider this - the Grand Canyon now stands where there was once a great plain of flatlands. If you were to take a person from that era, and bring them to present day Arizona, and tell them that the huge valleys were created by the Colorado river over thousands of years, how quick do you think he would be to believe you?

Another thing about "accidents" - many of out greatest inventions were created by accident, hence the colloquial use of the term "Eureka!" Hell, even the defining of gravity was predicated by an apple "accidentally" falling from a tree. What makes the difference is whether or not the new knowledge or insight can later be proven.

Another good example is gambling. People keep trying to come up with methods about how to win at lotteries and slot machines (use favorite numbers, insert quarter with left hand, etc.), thinking that they are somehow "improving" their chances. Regardless of the fact that you are more likely to be hit by lightning, millions of people "believe" that they have a better chance of winning the big bucks. How much sense does that make?

Here's something else to ponder - I saw an ad with Steve Jpbs where he said his lottery numbers were always "1-2-3-4-5-6", because those six numbers have as much a chance of winning as any other six numbers. Do you agree, disagree, or do you understand both sides of this argument?

And as to the "There are 5 buildings made of concrete, did they evolve from the sidewalk?" argument - if you think this simplistic example validates your stance in any wat, then perhaps this isn't a topic that you should try to discuss. Whether or not a theory starts out this way, the scientific process is designed to find out id the theory is true or not. If it turns out that what used to be touted as "truth" is revealed to be a false theory, it is not the fault of the Scientific Method - it is the fault of the practitioners, or perhaps new counter evidence has been found.

I could play the straw-man argument, and ask where God came from: the inevitable answer being that he's always been around. Now you want me to believe this person with tremendous powers has always existed, and only recently created man? Earth was created in 7 days, then we had Adam and Eve, and a bunch of begating up until today, and yet there's evidence that the Earth, not to mention the surrounding universe, has been around for millions and billions of years. (If you think the math is wrong, keep in mind that a lot of that same math is used by the engineers that build building and bridges, as well those who put men on the moon.)

Hell, I could even make this scenario: What if a person believed with all their heart and faith that the buildings were not the result of evolution, but that the concrete has been there since before time itself, and it created the buildings in its own image. AT one point, the buldings were demolished by a non-believer, but they miraculously rebuilt themselves a week later? What if this believer even wrote a book explaining how his beliefs about the concrete and buildings should guide one's choices (Title: My Life as a House), and that the words come from the concrete itself?

How much credence would you give that belief? Would it make more sense to you as a theory? Which would be easier to change with counter-evidence? Also, before you laugh and/or get angry at this analogy, think about all the news stories about people seeing Jesus' face in the dirt of a basement window, or the natual coloration of a brick in their fireplace. Once or twice a year, something like this comes up, and thousands of people flock to these sites to view what they believe to be the face of Jesus. Is this ridiculous, or faith?

Keep in mind that Christianity, and its belief in a single, benevolent God, is a rather recent phenomena compared to other world religions, and yet it has gone over quite an evolution, itself. If you've read the Old Testament, then you know what I'm talking about (you know, that whole "research" thing I was talking about?) Not only has the concept of God and what he does changed from its inception to today, but there are also widely varyibg beliefs between current-day congregations of all countries.

Now, were all these differences brought about by the Scientific Method, or it is simply people focusing on their favored beliefs of God, and recreating him in their own image? Whose God is the real "God", then. If homosexuality is truly an abomination, then can a homosexual truly believe in God? Does God really care if the homosexual believes in him or not?

Before you answer, keep in mind: More people have been killed throughout our history in the name or God (or religion) than for any other reason. We have the Crusades, the Inquisition, and even the knowledge and official admission of thousands of boys and girls molested by members of the Church. Where was God then? Is this simply the fault of the practitioners, or does some of the blame fall on the creator of the practitioners as well?

Or does this simply fall into the convenient catch-all: "The Lord works in strange and mysterious ways."?

As to the Word of God - The Bible. Even if the first Bible contained the word of God, think of the thousands of years of translations, additions, ommissions and rewrites that have occured by the hand of man, either "accidental" or even intentional. I might remind you that in the early days, the churches liked being the sole "interpreter" of the Bible, and so chose to keep it in Latin and other "high languages" to prevent the regular peasantry from reading it for themselves. Regardless, the Bible is now found in English, but there are several different versions of the Bible, each preferred by different people. (The very thing that the church tried to avoid.)

Think of it this way. Take Bossk's example: "He likes to think that evolution still happened over the course of the number of years that scientists believe it to have happened but that the Bible refers to that entire process as a "day." What if his friend is wrong about the length of the day? Is this blasphemy? Does he go to hell because he is wrong about what God means by a "day" in the bible? What if someone else believes otherwise? How is one to find out who is right and who is wrong? Which person is the better believer? Keep in mind that such discussions do take place and split beliefs, such as whether or not Jesus should be worshipped as being on the same level as God, himself.

Of course, this doesn't take into account the many things that we now know to exist prior to the existance of man, and therefore, the existance of the Bible, which would explain why we don't read about the dinosaur