Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

okasha

(11,573 posts)
10. That fits quite tidily
Fri Jan 2, 2015, 11:06 PM
Jan 2015

with process theology. It also fits with Native American thought, which sees Creator in literally all of existence: there are no gaps.

The nuns in my Catholic school told us that back in the '50s. nichomachus Jan 2015 #1
even the US Catholics are still firmly evolutionist MisterP Jan 2015 #12
Well, as Ford points out, it's a preferable to New Earth creationism, but cbayer Jan 2015 #2
Problematic? Leontius Jan 2015 #5
You just made fun of Christians, Jews and Muslims JDDavis Jan 2015 #13
How do you think he made fun of anyone? Who are you going to report him to? cbayer Jan 2015 #17
I find it problematic because it continues to insert a guiding hand into a process cbayer Jan 2015 #16
Black or white, 1 or 0, guided or random, you limit your choice too much Leontius Jan 2015 #76
I don't limit my choices at all and it's certainly not black and white. cbayer Jan 2015 #78
Is consistent, is not consistent . Black or white, 1 or 0. Leontius Jan 2015 #79
No, it's nothing like my thinking at all. cbayer Jan 2015 #80
"Evolution depends on randomness." Jim__ Jun 2015 #95
Are you honestly questioning whether evolution depends on random mutations? cbayer Jun 2015 #99
I'm asking you to cite your evidence that the evolutionary process cannot be chaotic. Jim__ Jun 2015 #102
Cognitive dissonance and intellectual dishonesty... MellowDem Jan 2015 #3
The incredible God of the Gaps trots along to his new hiding place. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #4
Geez, AtheistCrusader, I so wish you would participate in the discourse here beyond simple dismissal pinto Jan 2015 #8
Evolution and religion are fundamentally incompatible. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #9
Why does this guy get to spout logic and history and science and facts in a JDDavis Jan 2015 #14
I agree, evolution and a "guiding hand" are incompatible. pinto Jan 2015 #38
I'm not sure that is true Major Nikon Jun 2015 #107
Touché and fair point. AtheistCrusader Jun 2015 #109
But evolution says edhopper Jan 2015 #6
Don't fall over, but I agree with you 100%. cbayer Jan 2015 #18
I remember edhopper Jan 2015 #20
Well, I knew we could only be on the same page for a minute or two, lol. cbayer Jan 2015 #22
I took him to mean edhopper Jan 2015 #23
And I disagree that they are receding. Quite the contrary. cbayer Jan 2015 #24
As I said edhopper Jan 2015 #25
I'm not sure there is a finite amount of what can be known, but that's a different subject. cbayer Jan 2015 #26
That quote edhopper Jan 2015 #28
I really don't see how you can reach that conclusion. cbayer Jan 2015 #30
Can you give me the source of that quote edhopper Jan 2015 #31
No, I can't, but I bet you can find it if you try. cbayer Jan 2015 #33
here edhopper Jan 2015 #35
Glad you found it but I can't stream. cbayer Jan 2015 #41
That he is saying edhopper Jan 2015 #43
See my other post about the Bill Moyers interview. cbayer Jan 2015 #46
I used the quote in the context of this thread edhopper Jan 2015 #49
I like it when we end up agreeing, edhopper. cbayer Jan 2015 #52
Yes edhopper Jan 2015 #54
NGT would also object to the way you're using the label "agnostic". eomer Jan 2015 #88
I can't listen to this, but I've heard him speak before. cbayer Jan 2015 #89
He clarifies that his real preference is to have no label at all applied to him. eomer Jan 2015 #90
I want to give a public shout out to you for transcribing this for me. cbayer Jan 2015 #91
Por nada - the discussion is one that I really enjoy listening to so it was no burden. eomer Jan 2015 #92
I will listen to it next time I have access to some real internet cbayer Jan 2015 #93
BTW, that's apparently not the interview where he said this. It was to Bill Moyers. cbayer Jan 2015 #45
I watched the interview and he said it. edhopper Jan 2015 #48
It must be an example that he has used more than once, then. cbayer Jan 2015 #51
I am not sure at this point if we understand what each other is saying edhopper Jan 2015 #34
I think when you took his quote out of context, you presented it as his thoughts. cbayer Jan 2015 #37
Watch the video edhopper Jan 2015 #39
You think he's an atheist? Even though he clearly says that he is not? cbayer Jan 2015 #42
I just looked it up edhopper Jan 2015 #47
Lol, it's just like some people assume I am a believer. cbayer Jan 2015 #50
He makes it clear edhopper Jan 2015 #53
I disagree. He makes it clear that god is not part of his scientific thinking. cbayer Jan 2015 #55
just to jump in-- digonswine Jan 2015 #65
You make some really good points. cbayer Jan 2015 #67
I do absolutely care- digonswine Jan 2015 #71
Ah, get some wonderful and refreshing sleep. cbayer Jan 2015 #72
Ahhh-that's better--as I was saying. . . digonswine Jan 2015 #82
That's a really interesting perspective you have. cbayer Jan 2015 #83
I suppose- digonswine Jan 2015 #85
If creation can be handled as allegory and not as literal, what is wrong cbayer Jan 2015 #86
I'm a thinking person and I don't care. cbayer Jun 2015 #98
I think I get that- digonswine Jun 2015 #106
One does not have to be an atheist or a theist? Well, logic says one does. Yorktown Jun 2015 #94
If he doesn't believe in God/s phil89 Jun 2015 #103
"scientific ignorance grows exponentially" is obviously a wrong statement. Yorktown Jun 2015 #111
St. Augustine: The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Book I struggle4progress Jan 2015 #7
That fits quite tidily okasha Jan 2015 #10
I think that needs to be repeated. There are no gaps. Leontius Jan 2015 #15
How convenient. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #19
Then why do we need science? phil89 Jun 2015 #104
Only fundies try and make us choose Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #11
I'm curious. AtheistCrusader Jan 2015 #21
I don't know the proper name Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #74
Your presumption is opposed to the scientific method... MellowDem Jan 2015 #68
Not really true Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #75
There's no need for a "stand-in".... MellowDem Jan 2015 #87
Why is 14 billion years nothing to a supreme being. edhopper Jan 2015 #70
To take those in order Prophet 451 Jan 2015 #77
Forgot who I was talking to edhopper Jan 2015 #81
When did God decide to create us? edhopper Jan 2015 #27
There isn't any reason why the two can not continue to exists, if you don't believe then it is your Thinkingabout Jan 2015 #29
I grew up accepting both. louis-t Jan 2015 #32
Can you answer any of my questions from post #27? edhopper Jan 2015 #36
No, because I'm not God. louis-t Jan 2015 #40
So we should just not seek answers edhopper Jan 2015 #44
It's never been a burning obsession of mine. louis-t Jan 2015 #56
I guess that is why edhopper Jan 2015 #57
compartmentalization... MellowDem Jan 2015 #69
Ok folks, now for something completely different - Randomness and Mathematical Proof (Sci Amer) pinto Jan 2015 #58
Intellectual dishonesty. The Bible DOES contradict scientific realities. Joe Magarac Jan 2015 #59
Did you read any of the discussions in this thread? Or just choose a drive by post? pinto Jan 2015 #60
Lol, Joe Magarac. Don't hold back. cbayer Jan 2015 #61
Hi Joe, don't worry about the people attacking you personally below. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #97
By his own admission: The belief in question is whatever the believer wants it to be. DetlefK Jan 2015 #62
I was taught that in a Lutheran college years ago. jwirr Jan 2015 #63
I was taught that in a Catholic high school okasha Jan 2015 #64
I think that science teachers in these schools were liberal thinkers who realized that it did not jwirr Jan 2015 #66
That'exactly right. okasha Jan 2015 #73
If God was in some way behind the creation of life... goldent Jan 2015 #84
Layer of ridiculous voodoo horseshit along with a dose of science-acceptance. Warren Stupidity Jun 2015 #96
The God of the gaps. It slices, it dices, it postpones the age of reason yet again! AtheistCrusader Jun 2015 #100
Perhaps one really can have their cake and eat it too Major Nikon Jun 2015 #108
How did he as a scientist come to the conclusion that God belongs into this theory? DetlefK Jun 2015 #101
the mainstream's always accepted the evidence as it came in MisterP Jun 2015 #105
I grew up accepting both, and as such, never took the Bible literally... Humanist_Activist Jun 2015 #110
Wish I'd seen this earlier. Been saying this for years. (nt) UrbScotty Aug 2015 #112
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Evolution-Accepting Chris...»Reply #10