Two things.
Ordering tons of stuff to keep yourself in the MLM is called being Garage Qualified.
There is a book called Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time, by Michael Shermer. He makes the point that people involved in conspiracies, cults, etc., aren't stupid. They aren't usually poorly educated. It is an interesting read, and your library probably has a copy.
I read it years ago, and it has kept me humble - none of us are above being sucked in by dangerous beliefs or people.
Kind of a combination of things - but in general the age old adage "if it ain't, broke don't fix it" applies here.
See about 500 million years ago the basic body plan for tetrapods was decided upon. From this basic body plan very few modifications have been made. For whatever reason four limbs, two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, two kidneys, two lungs, two ovaries/testes, but one heart and one liver worked for it so it works for us.
Its not just humans that have these basic structures - birds, fish, reptiles, amphibians, and other mammals all have this basic body plan. Yes some have lost their limbs - like snakes, and others have lost an ovary - like birds...but underlying it all is that same basic blueprint. You may be interested in the book your inner fish.
Neither. The Hebrew word for "day" there definitely means 24-hour time period, but that doesn't mean the universe was made in 6 literal days.
Genesis 1 is complex and beautiful, but ancient Near-Eastern people don't think like modern Western people, and ancient Near-Eastern people wrote Genesis 1. It's way too much to explain here. Read The Lost World of Genesis One, by John Walton.
Good for you! It's funny that what you're saying can even be understood as a joke, when reading those books should be utterly unremarkable.
BTW, since you seem to be interested in reading about evolution you should definitely check out Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne. It's the single best popular book I've read on evolution -- clear and well-written, and really makes the case in an irrefutable way. It's worthwhile on its own, but if you're dealing with skeptics it'll also give you plenty of ammunition.
The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True
I don't know which age groups it's for.
Alternatively you can give them books about lots of different myths and legends. Greek mythology is great.
I read,”Why Evolution Is True “ by Jerry Coyne.
It’s an easy read and lays out an argument that I can’t find flaw with.
Only the most obtuse could peruse this scientific aggregate and still try to deny the age of the earth and evolution.
I like "Your Inner Fish". It's totally non-confrontational and just matter of fact about our evolution and the ways we can see that we are evolved from lobe-finned fish.
It also explains a really excellent test case where the author wanted to find an intermediate species, knew the right age, looked in a geology book for exposed sedimentary rock of that age, picked a spot that hadn't already been pored over by paleontologists, and went.
He mounted 2 or 3 (3 I think) expeditions to Canada's Ellesmere Island and found the fossil he was looking for. He let the Innuit name it Tiktaalik.
The last time Dawkins said he was writing a "children's book" he wrote "The Magic of Reality" which was mostly a science book and introduction to empiricism, but clocked in at almost 300 pages and was definitely more geared for teenagers than young kids. It was the kind of book and intelligent young person might find in a library and decide to read, but not as dumbed-down as you'd think from hearing him talk about a "children's book."
Seeing the listing for this new one, a 304 page hardcover in the 'rationalist philosophy' section at amazon, I suspect that again, he's writing what he would have enjoyed reading himself when he was 15 years old, rather than creating a true children's book for kids who wait at home for their parents to pick library books for them.
Same here! A really scientific & great (although heady) response is: Finding Darwin’s God
And this books breaks more into scripture and how to interpret Genesis. The Evolution of Adam
I think those will both be helpful for you on your journey. Peace, friend.
To start this off I’m not religious at, but all faith is definitely compatible with science. Anyone who says otherwise is plain wrong.
The creation story in Genesis is not meant to be read literally. Even some of the Fathers of the Church, like Saint Augustine, didn’t take Genesis literally. Instead, he thought everything was created in an instant. Of course this position isn’t really taken seriously anymore, but it goes to show that young-earth creationism is not and has never been the traditional position of Christians. Augustine said that if one’s interpretation of the Bible conflicted with well-established scientific findings, that interpretation must be revised.
Likewise, anyone who says that Christians cannot be successful scientists is also wrong. Nicolas Steno, the founder of stratigraphy, was a devout Catholic. Georges Lemaître, who devised the Big Bang Theory which is the foundation of modern astronomy, was a priest. Einstein was a pantheist. And to top it off the man who led the Human Genome Project, Francis Collins, is a Christian. Many faithful scientists believe that science can enhance, not deteriorate, faith.
The philosopher Thomas Aquinas believed that faith and reason could never conflict, since the same God created them. If God exists, he would likely create a world that people could study and interpret.
Why People Believe Weird Things by Michael Shermer, while not specifically about the coC or Christianity, is a great read on, well, exactly what it says.
Michael Shermer was also on an episode of Mr. Deity some years ago and made some interesting points on skepticism and faith. edit: And honestly, go look through the Mr. Deity Youtube channel. It's an interesting, often satirical look at organized religion and the dumb things people do in the name of religion, featuring: Mr Deity (god), Jesus, Lucy (satan), and Larry (god's PA).
Here is the book.
<em>50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God - Guy P. Harrison</em>
Not 100% certain it was the #1 argument, but very very high up.
Not necessarily the direct beginning, but a neat fact apropos to your time frame is that the Tiktaalik was uncovered around 2006. This creature bridged the gap between fish and land animal, and is widely regarded as one of the biggest breakthroughs in evolution. It was discovered by a team, and one of its members, Neil Shubin, wrote a book on both his discovery, and evolution.
Here is the book, and I would 100% recommend reading it, or at least giving it a try with the free sample :)
Motivated reasoning plays a strong role in why people persist in believing in bad ideas, even well after they should've discarded them. And faith itself is a powerful amplifier of motivated reasoning. If you already believe in an idea; and the entire idea of faith is to get people to believe in certain ideas strongly; every thought you have about that idea is filtered through layers of motivation and complexes of belief about the world.
When inside a system of beliefs, you see the world very differently than when outside it. That's the entire purpose of systems of belief.
There's a decent book that covers this sort of topic in detail; from people believing in scams, cults, pseudo-science, to holocaust deniers. Why People Believe Weird Things, by Michael Shermer. One insight I pulled from the book is: smart people aren't necessarily less likely to believe in false ideas, or to divest themself of bad beliefs. Smart people are more capable, after all, of coming up with intelligent-sounding reasons to believe in bad ideas. So it's really important to learn skills to test your ideas, and to find trustworthy sources for your information.
Natural selection is not defined as "survival of the fittest," that's just a colloquialism to help people understand the basic idea. The basic idea is that there is some process by which organisms who are more fit than others will reproduce more often, outcompeting those who are less fit. Natural selection is simply the mechanism that takes genetic mutation and environmental conditions and outputs organisms that succeed. It also outputs organisms that don't, hence the idea of 'out competing.'
I'm on mobile, so here's an ugly link to a good definition and high level overview:
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_25
The phrase "survival of the fittest" reduces the idea down by trimming away the details to make a nice, intuitive catch phrase. However, that loss of information does lead people to misunderstand what natural selection really is.
As for your link, I'll respond with one of my own, if you're interested. I'm not an expert and don't keep the details of evolution handy. The book "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry Coyne goes into great detail about why the Theory of Evolution does make predictions and that those predictions are testable and verifiable. That will suffice as my rebuttal to Dr. Henry Peters' forced "tautology." After all, wouldn't you rather hear it from an expert than some internet stranger?
There are plenty of other books like Dr. Coyne's that would do just as well, however. I was able to check out his book for free at my local library, but here is the Amazon link ($14), so you have the details:
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0143116649
Your Inner Fish is a wondrous book about how we evolved to be the way we are.
The Five Ages of the Universe is the most mind-expanding book I have ever read, about how the universe began, how it got to be the way it is, and how it will eventually end. Compulsively readable and accessible even to a non-scientist.
Neil Shubin's book <em>Your Inner Fish</em> is word-for-word about this exact subject, and works through all the features of our bodies that provide evidence. If you're interested in our connection to our fish ancestors, it's the perfect book for you. There's also a short series about it you can watch, I'm not sure where it's available now.
InspiringPhilosophy has many videos on Genesis which collate and summarize some relevant Biblical scholarship on this issue. Check them out!
We of course need to realize that Genesis is an ancient text, written by ancient prescientific people for prescientific people. If we think Genesis is teaching modern science, we are missing the point and missing what God is trying to show us through the text today. Biblical scholar John Walton's The Lost World of Genesis One should be required reading for Christians in my opinion and will also more than adequately answer your question.
Two books I would recommend on this topic: The Lost World of Genesis One and Genesis Unbound.
One author was a professor of Old Testament studies at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary and was president of the Evangelical Theological Society. The other author is an Old Testament scholar and professor at Wheaton College/Moody Bible Institute. Serious, Jesus-loving Bible scholars, who are doing some really in-depth exegesis and work with the original language and cultural context and not some fringe YouTube wingnuts.
Genesis Unbound dives into the opening of Genesis 1 and explores why it might not be talking about the planet as it is modernly understood. The Lost World of Genesis One dives more into the cultural context of Genesis and how ancient audiences might have understood and comprehended it.
Good article. I suggest everyone read Michael Shermer's book Why People Believe Weird Things. Shermer is a well-respected skeptic author, and he's very easy to read. He does a monthly column in Scientific American as well.
Maybe later, here's one that is more philosophical/sociological;
50 Reasons People Give for Believing in a God -- by Guy P. Harrison (Amazon link, not a referral link)
You might want to take a look at Why Evolution Is True by evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne. It's an entertaining, clear, well-written overview--the single best book I've read on the topic of evolution (and in the running for the best popular science book I've read, period). Based on the Amazon reviews of Mayr's book it sounds like Coyne's is the better and more approachable book.
I’m a 64 y/o man who went through that phase about 50 years ago, so I identify with what he’s gets going through. Hard times.
This is a bit of a weird recommendation but I’d recommend the following from Richard Dawkins;
The Magic of Reality: How We Know What's Really True https://www.amazon.com/dp/1451675046/
It won’t provide the ANSWER but it will help build a framework of understanding that he can build on.
I hear Matt Dillahunty referring this book
https://www.amazon.com/Reasons-People-Give-Believing-God/dp/1591025672
for idiots.
A great book that delves into this while making it palatable to someone without a science background is Your Inner Fish. Granted this is what I studied but I think it's very easy to understand for the average reader.
The same as Old Testament Scholar John Walton. He argues that Genesis 1 is actually about God assigning function to the cosmos in a 7 day period, and not about an actual material creation. By comparing the creation account in Genesis 1 with these other accounts, including those from Egypt, Babylon, and Mesopotamia, we can see some big similarities between Genesis 1 and the creation myths of Israel’s neighbors.
His main arguments are 1. Ancient Near Eastern creation accounts are typically concerned with function, rather than material origins. 2. The Hebrew term bāra͗ (“to create”) refers to the assignment of functions. 3. The beginning state of Gen 1:2 is one that lacks function, not materiality 4. The first three days establish the major life-sustaining functions of time, weather, and food. 5. In days four through six God assigns functions to plants and animals. 6. The refrain, “It was good,” is a comment on function. 7. God’s rest on the seventh day implies that he is taking up residence in his temple, since “everyone” in the ancient world knew that “deity rests in a temple, and only in a temple” (p. 72).
Unless humans haven't always written everything to appear to be either a scientific fact, or so poetic/​metaphorical/​whatever that you can make it say whatever you want. For an alternative way for how people 2500–3500 years ago would have thought about this stuff, check out John H. Walton 2009 The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate. As it turns out, there is exceedingly strong reason to think that you are engaged in serious anachronism.
If you want an example of something that is neither scientific fact, nor poetic/metaphorical, consider what you will encounter in Physics 101: "Consider a charged point particle hovering above an infinite sheet of uniform charge." We don't know that point particles exist, and we definitely don't think that infinite sheets exist, uniformly charged or not. And yet, that is actually a useful way to introduce people to physics. It's an idealization. Well, why can't the temptation narrative function in a similar way? Idealizations by their very nature ignore many aspects of reality, to focus your attention on a few of them, generally in a simple fashion. For example, if you make the connection that the ancient Hebrews would have, that 'nakedness' is a symbol for 'vulnerability', then you will read the temptation narrative as teaching Adam & Eve that "vulnerability is shameful". This in fact would be the only concrete "knowledge of good and evil" that Adam & Eve would have obtained. We could then ask whether it is true knowledge, or false knowledge. If it turns out that this is a powerful analytical tool for fighting evil and promoting human flourishing, the temptation narrative would serve a very important purpose. And it would serve this purpose regardless of whether it is "historically true" or "literally true" or what have you.
I thought the Second Coming would have happened around 2000. Now that it hasn't I have no idea when it will be. But life is short, so the judgement day is never far off. The best plan is to keep trying to be more like Christ - learning, growing, loving, serving.
In my mind Genesis is not a literal science or history book. It's clearly the creation story of an ancient people. That doesn't mean that the people mentioned (Adam, etc) couldn't have been real people.
A great and mind-blowing book about Genesis:
The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate, John H. Walton, https://www.amazon.com/Lost-World-Genesis-One-Cosmology/dp/0830837043/
I'd also recommend Why people Believe Weird Things. Really fascinating stuff.
It’s literal but not how we understand the meaning of “literal”
Many scholars like Old Testament Scholar John Walton argues that Genesis 1 is actually about God assigning function to the cosmos in a 7 day period, and not about an actual material creation. By comparing the creation account in Genesis 1 with these other accounts, including those from Egypt, Babylon, and Mesopotamia, we can see some big similarities between Genesis 1 and the creation myths of Israel’s neighbors.
His main arguments are 1. Ancient Near Eastern creation accounts are typically concerned with function, rather than material origins. 2. The Hebrew term bāra͗ (“to create”) refers to the assignment of functions. 3. The beginning state of Gen 1:2 is one that lacks function, not materiality 4. The first three days establish the major life-sustaining functions of time, weather, and food. 5. In days four through six God assigns functions to plants and animals. 6. The refrain, “It was good,” is a comment on function. 7. God’s rest on the seventh day implies that he is taking up residence in his temple, since “everyone” in the ancient world knew that “deity rests in a temple, and only in a temple” (p. 72).