Oh. My. God.

Taft2016 said:
I have been. Repeatedly.

One can believe that species evolve and at the same time man is not part of that equation.
Click to expand...

Okay, but that is not the theory of evolution and you have no scientifc basis for your rejection of the theory of evolution. In other words you reject the theory of evolution and science in general. That's cool, but why do you lie about it?
 
Dick from the Internet said:
Okay, but that is not the theory of evolution and you have no scientifc basis for your rejection of the theory of evolution. In other words you reject the theory of evolution and science in general. That's cool, but why do you lie about it?
Click to expand...

Where did I say I have scientific proof of it? I said it's my belief.

Like the theory of Evolution is your belief.

Like I believe in evolution to a certain point.
Like I believe in global warming to a certain point.

Evolution has numerous components, one of which is that species evolve. I accept that part.
Another is that existing species evolved from lesser species. I accept that part as well.

I am not, however, an Evolutionary fundamentalist like yourself, who takes Darwin as your personal Lord and Savior.

There is no scientific proof either than all life emerged from single organism. Just theories.
 
Last edited:
Quote from Spinoza:

"things could have been produced by God in no other way, and in no other order than they have been produced”

I trust this settles that question.
 
Taft2016 said:
I probably should have used the word "questioned" instead of "delved."

He did touch upon up, but not to question it, only to analyze it.
Click to expand...

Oh he definitely questioned the religious ideas of creation. According to Spinoza's conception of "God or Nature" (and he usually referred to the concept in that way specifically) creation was not a matter of God's will but followed necessarily. That is, God is cause not creator.

"That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists" - Spinoza
 
Dick from the Internet said:
Oh he definitely questioned the religious ideas of creation. According to Spinoza's conception of "God or Nature" (and he usually referred to the concept in that way specifically) creation was not a matter of God's will but followed necessarily. That is, God is cause not creator.
Click to expand...

Spinoza:

"things could have been produced by God in no other way, and in no other order than they have been produced”
Click to expand...
 
Taft2016 said:
The quote is pretty clear.

Why do you reject direct quotes?

But let's play: Where then did Spinoza think everything came from? Was he the first proponent of the Big Bang Theory? Evolution?
Click to expand...


It is crystal clear and you are trying to misrepresent it.

"That eternal and infinite being we call God, or Nature, acts from the same necessity from which he exists" - Spinoza

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza

What is your source?
 
Dick from the Internet said:
And??? Your quote supports my claim. "God or Nature" could not will creation, it followed as a necessary cause of "God's or Nature's" existence.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/spinoza/
Click to expand...

I'll try again:

Where then did Spinoza think everything came from? Was he the first proponent of the Big Bang Theory? Evolution?

Since you obviously don't know I'll tell you. Spinoza, who was clearly not physicist, believed there was only one element and that everything was God. Diving into it is like the children's question "Who made God?"

Clearly he accredited it to a supernatural creation, as opposed to a natural evolution, which was an unknown thought at the time.
 
Taft2016 said:
I have been. Repeatedly.

One can believe that species evolve and at the same time man is not part of that equation.
Click to expand...

I asked for proof. You've proved nothing.

You have the lowest standard for what constitutes proof that I have ever seen.
 
Taft2016 said:
I'll try again:

Where then did Spinoza think everything came from? Was he the first proponent of the Big Bang Theory? Evolution?

Since you obviously don't know I'll tell you. Spinoza, who was clearly not physicist, believed there was only one element and that everything was God. Diving into it is like the children's question "Who made God?"

Clearly he accredited it to a supernatural creation, as opposed to a natural evolution, which was an unknown thought at the time.
Click to expand...

Damn you are dense.

According to Spinoza, it necessarily followed from "God or Nature." That's not creationism and could easily include the theory of evolution (the real theory not your fraudulent version).

He pretty clearly would have rejected your idea of special creation. According to Spinoza, man and any other existent reached it's present form not by any conscience act or the will of God but simply as a result of the causes in effect by the existence of "God or Nature."
 
Nomad said:
I asked for proof. You've proved nothing.

You have the lowest standard for what constitutes proof that I have ever seen.
Click to expand...

You asked for proof of what I believe?

Where's your proof that man evolved from a lesser being? Which being was it?

Can you prove what you believe?
 
Dick from the Internet said:
Damn you are dense.

According to Spinoza, it necessarily followed from "God or Nature." That's not creationism and could easily include the theory of evolution (the real theory not your fraudulent version).

He pretty clearly would have rejected your idea of special creation. According to Spinoza, man and any other existent reached it's present form not by any conscience act or the will of God but simply as a result of the causes in effect by the existence of "God or Nature."
Click to expand...

I'm not so dense that I can't follow a single sentence...

I never said he would have accepted my idea of Creation. In fact, my thoughts never would have occurred to him because evolution was not a theory until 200 years after his life. It wasn't even until near the end of his life that paleontology began as a science, and people began to believe that fossils might be the remains of living organisms.

For God's sake, is your head made out of oak?
 
Taft2016 said:
I'm not so dense that I can't follow a single sentence...

I never said he would have accepted my idea of Creation. In fact, my thoughts never would have occurred to him because evolution was not a theory until 200 years after his life. It wasn't even until near the end of his life that paleontology began as a science, and people began to believe that fossils might be the remains of living organisms.

For God's sake, is your head made out of oak?
Click to expand...

I think you are.

Spinoza was NOT a creationist and neither was Einstein. Quit smearing the two in an attempt to claim some credit for your attacks on science.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top