Vedic Creationism

Considering we're all rather familiar with the Christian brand of this stupidity, here's something different.

mcremo.com
realhumanhistory.weebly.com/100-million-years-history-of-human-being.html

christian creationists are mostly retards who dont understand their religion, but people who criticize them are cancer as well since most of them as well believes in myths, just scientific-looking ones and not biblical

devolution is actually an interesting idea if you dont take it too literally

Good band too

>most of them as well believes in myths, just scientific-looking ones and not biblical
Anything in particular? I've seen some weird shit in my day.

>hey you know those guys are retards, but since you're criticizing them doesn't that make you retards as well? After all the truth always lies in a neutral third position somewhere in the middle.
Someone post the smuggy for this, I never saved it.

i thought of how most of those "rational" people instead of critically thinking about the world and taking religion as it is - a separate realm and being able to separate physical from the metaphysical like a normal human being, they instead replace the judaic myth with another created by a belgian priest and supported by today's authorities

>aristotel is dumb
ok

>replace the judaic myth with another created by a belgian priest and supported by today's authorities
>belgian priest
Wat? Who?

He's trying to refer to the big bang but he's a retarded faggot

Ah, he's a looney. Got it.

>christian creationists are mostly retards who dont understand their religion
Please explain.

>interesting idea

You mean utter nonsense right? There is zero evidence of "devolution." Devolution is not even a thing. There is no one species that is "more evolved" than any other. Organisms just adapt to particular niches over time due to selective pressures. We are unique in that we have grown wildly out of our niche because of our brain capacity.

...

They don't understand the intent behind the Creation stories in the Bible; they're moral myths to teach lessons about the sacredness of life, not "literal" descriptions of what happened.

so are orthodox jews and most christians including clergy before the 1800s also retards that misinterpreted scripture?

You know people who say that aren't always wrong?

I find it interesting that the Ramayana relates interactions between humans and monkey people. I interpret that as interactions between sapiens and other hominids.

These websites are horrendously inaccurate and don't mention anything accurately describing Vedic thought, they've merely slapped the term Vedic onto them to add legitimacy.

If you really want to understand Vedic thought read the Srimad Bhagavad and Bhagavad Gita, actual Vedic texts containing authority on the matter

Maybe. The era before Darwin's On the Origin of Species lacked much of the modern scientific evidence that refutes the creation myth. There were a few authors and some evidence that came immediately before Darwin, like Spencer and the geologist William Smith. But can you blame a person for not knowing what was then unknowable? I think not.

The modern creationist actively rejects the overwhelming body of scientific evidence in support of evolution and the formation of the Earth, so I think a better case can be made for calling them dumb.

>But can you blame a person for not knowing what was then unknowable? I think not.
>The modern creationist actively rejects the overwhelming body of scientific evidence in support of evolution and the formation of the Earth, so I think a better case can be made for calling them dumb.
None of this I disagree with. what i have an issue with is interpretting the scripture to be metaphorical in light of this when it was obviously intended to be taken literally originally. making genesis metaphorical is more logical as a believer than creationism knowing what we know now, but it's simply ahistorical and has no basis in the text itself.

I´m pretty sure Michael Cremo is the official "science guy" for ISKCON. If you think that ISKCON is not Vedic, and I understant that there are criticisms of it, that´s another story.

>If you really want to understand Vedic thought read the Srimad Bhagavad and Bhagavad Gita, actual Vedic texts containing authority on the matter
those aren't vedic?
the only thing that's vedic is the vedas, it's right there in the name.

ISKCON is a vaishnava sect and afaik they are not particularly concerned with vedic practices

>devolution
The very use of the word devolution means that you don't understand evolution.

...

Ook

>Some white guy trying to make a quick buck by using exotic terminology.