More evidence that the whole "monkeys and typewriters" thing makes as much sense as "The earth is carried on the back of a giant turtle." SOMEBDODY had to have come up with this. And whatever He was smoking, I want some:
Well, the earth being on the back of a giant turtle only sounds like bull to you because you don't believe in the giant turtle. It's not like you're like, "There must be SOME explanation for all this, so that giant turtle thing is starting to sound pretty good!" If you don't believe in God, science has pretty good explanations for lots of things. Heck, even if you DO believe in God, science has pretty good explanations for lots of things. I know that most of my Christian friends view science as part of God's work, not separate from it.
When I was in college, I took a genetics course. One of my classmates was a very skeptical agnostic.
One of the things we learned out was an enzyme called DNA polymerase. DNA polymerase travels up and down your strands of DNA, checking the sequence of amino acids. When it finds an error, it snips out the wrong amino acid, fetches the right one, and splices it in.
Tom said, "You know, you can talk about monkeys and typewriters until you're blue in the face, but SOMEBODY had to have come up with that."
Or, as it's been said, the presence of a watch implies the existence of a watchmaker.
The world is simply too complex and interrelated to have happened entirely by chance.
Now, I have a particular God in mind who to me clearly must be the Watchmaker. I think Tom was a bit more vague about who the Watchmaker was. But it takes MORE faith to believe that this all happened by accident than to believe that there's an intelligence behind it.
But it takes MORE faith to believe that this all happened by accident than to believe that there's an intelligence behind it.
My point is, it's quite ironic to call a belief system that relies entirely on faith nonsensical in a post that deals with a belief system that relies entirely on faith, just in a different entity.
Personally, since I'm not inclined to have faith, I think it takes less faith to accept what science knows, hope we find out more, and refrain from commenting on the unknowns. Were I inclined to believe, I might find it easiest to do that instead.
I do think that the beliefs of most of my Christian friends strike me as pretty common-sense -- but they generally think that evolution goes hand-in-hand with God.
Well, the earth being on the back of a giant turtle only sounds like bull to you because you don't believe in the giant turtle. It's not like you're like, "There must be SOME explanation for all this, so that giant turtle thing is starting to sound pretty good!" If you don't believe in God, science has pretty good explanations for lots of things. Heck, even if you DO believe in God, science has pretty good explanations for lots of things. I know that most of my Christian friends view science as part of God's work, not separate from it.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was in college, I took a genetics course. One of my classmates was a very skeptical agnostic.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things we learned out was an enzyme called DNA polymerase. DNA polymerase travels up and down your strands of DNA, checking the sequence of amino acids. When it finds an error, it snips out the wrong amino acid, fetches the right one, and splices it in.
Tom said, "You know, you can talk about monkeys and typewriters until you're blue in the face, but SOMEBODY had to have come up with that."
Or, as it's been said, the presence of a watch implies the existence of a watchmaker.
The world is simply too complex and interrelated to have happened entirely by chance.
Now, I have a particular God in mind who to me clearly must be the Watchmaker. I think Tom was a bit more vague about who the Watchmaker was. But it takes MORE faith to believe that this all happened by accident than to believe that there's an intelligence behind it.
But it takes MORE faith to believe that this all happened by accident than to believe that there's an intelligence behind it.
ReplyDeleteMy point is, it's quite ironic to call a belief system that relies entirely on faith nonsensical in a post that deals with a belief system that relies entirely on faith, just in a different entity.
Personally, since I'm not inclined to have faith, I think it takes less faith to accept what science knows, hope we find out more, and refrain from commenting on the unknowns. Were I inclined to believe, I might find it easiest to do that instead.
I do think that the beliefs of most of my Christian friends strike me as pretty common-sense -- but they generally think that evolution goes hand-in-hand with God.