Creationism... again.
-
I wish my father and grandfather were like that. I wouldn't have had to wait until my mid 20s until I figured out how to ask "Why" to what I was taught to believe. (That is not to say I don't love and respect them, they were amazing, highly intelligent people who simply didn't have access to all the acquired human knowledge I have)
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
My parents had it right... They made it clear from the beginning that I was free to pick any religion I wanted, and they would support me. I picked none.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Eric__V wrote:
Because there are things you cant talk about
None that we actually want to talk about.
Eric__V wrote:
and also do you not respect him or her less?
Maybe marginally, but it still leaves him way ahead of everyone else. Everyone has their faults, myself included of course.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)I had a really good friend, then she became a Christian. There were times when I felt embarraed talking to her, because she would talk about her faith and I didnt want to upset her by attacking her beliefs. It limited our openness and communication with each other. She later left, her very religious husband and pretty much got back to her old self. And we got on a lot better. :)
============================== Nothing to say.
-
Eric__V wrote:
do you not respect him or her less?
I have lots of religious friends as well. They range from fundamentalist christians, mainstream christians, fundamentalist muslims, mainstream muslims, hindus and jews. Respect from me is not earned by what you believe, it is based on how you behave.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
I do not consider myself an Atheist nor am I attached to any one religion. I believe in one's spirituality but not in God per se. I despise organized religion and all that goes with it. I don't trust anyone (completely) who follows a dogma or doctrine of faith when it comes to religion.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
Hardly an argument. They were in a world dominated by Religion. Galileo was under the cosh, Bacon was an Atheist, and Copernicus was silenced for quite a while. Scientific Methodology cannot be subject to dogma.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
They were in a world dominated by Religion
Doesn't alter the fact that they beleived in the great sky pixie, weren't stupid and were all religious. Equally there have been devout atheists throughout the last 2 millenia of European history. I've no problem with the idea that some pixie-worshippers are exactly as you described, but there is a tendancy to tar them all with the same brush and assume they are all stupid.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^] -
I have joined the rank of the Neo-Atheists. We don't just not believe, we actively denigrate and fight against any form of religiousism. We laugh at the stupidity of believers, take objection to anything that obligates us to any form of religious observance and pour scorn upon unnatural or immoral acts that are carried out in the name of a etherial sky pixie.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
:laugh:
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
Hardly an argument. They were in a world dominated by Religion. Galileo was under the cosh, Bacon was an Atheist, and Copernicus was silenced for quite a while. Scientific Methodology cannot be subject to dogma.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
Bacon was an Atheist
It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man, than by this; that atheists will ever be talking of that their opinion, as if they fainted in it, within themselves, and would be glad to be strengthened, by the consent of others.Of Atheism - Francis Bacon Are you sure he was an atheist?
ict558 - a Coward and a Fool. Dalek Dave & Hokum (Therefore it must be so, alas.)
-
I have joined the rank of the Neo-Atheists. We don't just not believe, we actively denigrate and fight against any form of religiousism. We laugh at the stupidity of believers, take objection to anything that obligates us to any form of religious observance and pour scorn upon unnatural or immoral acts that are carried out in the name of a etherial sky pixie.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
I have joined the rank of the Neo-Atheists
I've seen the Matrix. I believe that Neo exists.
Forgive your enemies - it messes with their heads
My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier - my favourite utility
-
Can religious teachings prove evolution to be true?[^] Interesting article with some of the comments even more interesting. In particular I enjoyed this snippet from one Oliver Elphick. "On the basis of my experience of God, on the evidence of the evident supernatural authorship of the bible, on the word of Jesus that authenticates it and on the verification of his claim to be God by his resurrection, I have ample evidence to believe that God is absolutely trustworthy and that his word is true. It follows then that his account of creation is true; since it contradicts the story of evolution, that must be false." You have to laugh at the mind-boggling ignorance of such drivel. He cites fantasy as evidence and then uses that evidence to argue that the rest of his evidence is true and things for which there is real evidence are false. He has ample evidence? "on the verification of his claim to be God by his resurrection" You what? What verification? There isn't even any evidence that JayCee ever existed never mind managed to die and then come back 3 days later. Thank god I'm an atheist. :)
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
I don't have a problem with religion it's what people do in the name of religion. Technology would probably be a lot further along if the church hadn't silenced/persecuted scientists of the time.
-
I do not consider myself an Atheist nor am I attached to any one religion. I believe in one's spirituality but not in God per se. I despise organized religion and all that goes with it. I don't trust anyone (completely) who follows a dogma or doctrine of faith when it comes to religion.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
Ditto...well put!
-
You misunderstand what I mean by respect. If you have a friend who has what you consider a major psychological limitation then you do not think less of them?
============================== Nothing to say.
Actually, I don't. It would disgust me to no end if I did because everyone has different limitations, and I know mine very well. If I was to discriminate my respect based on psychological limitation then I may as well do it based on skin color, or hair color, or other things that really just don't matter.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Hardly an argument. They were in a world dominated by Religion. Galileo was under the cosh, Bacon was an Atheist, and Copernicus was silenced for quite a while. Scientific Methodology cannot be subject to dogma.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
Scientific Methodology cannot be subject to dogma.
Except when it comes to Global War --- arrrrg!
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I have joined the rank of the Neo-Atheists. We don't just not believe, we actively denigrate and fight against any form of religiousism. We laugh at the stupidity of believers, take objection to anything that obligates us to any form of religious observance and pour scorn upon unnatural or immoral acts that are carried out in the name of a etherial sky pixie.
------------------------------------ I will never again mention that I was the poster of the One Millionth Lounge Post, nor that it was complete drivel. Dalek Dave CCC Link[^] Trolls[^]
Dalek Dave wrote:
we actively denigrate and fight against any form of religiousism.
I follow no religion, my belief in anything not of the physical world is no-one's business but my own, and I freely admit I can claim no pipeline to information about things that exist or don't exist outside of space-time as I experience it. Folks that say they know there is a God, because they believe in Him, and folks who say they know there isn't a god because they don't believe in him have always struck me as being to opposite side of the same coin. When either group starts name-calling and otherwise attacking those who don't agree with them, they pretty much prove I'm right. I find it relatively easy to respect most Christians for the way they practice their religion, ditto for most other religions that do not insist on conversion as a prerequisite to surviving. I feel pretty much the same way about most atheists - except for those who need to shout their religious revelations about the lack of God's existence from the rooftops and generally being a PITA. Life, I find, is too short to worry about such things and when they do impinge on my consciousness, I either laugh at them - as I do at the creationist in the OP, or the atheist like Bertrand Russel who comes across just as pompously -- or I sic the dogs on them - which can make me laugh, too.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
I do not consider myself an Atheist nor am I attached to any one religion. I believe in one's spirituality but not in God per se. I despise organized religion and all that goes with it. I don't trust anyone (completely) who follows a dogma or doctrine of faith when it comes to religion.
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
Slacker007 wrote:
I don't trust anyone (completely) who follows a dogma or doctrine of faith when it comes to religion.
well said
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Can religious teachings prove evolution to be true?[^] Interesting article with some of the comments even more interesting. In particular I enjoyed this snippet from one Oliver Elphick. "On the basis of my experience of God, on the evidence of the evident supernatural authorship of the bible, on the word of Jesus that authenticates it and on the verification of his claim to be God by his resurrection, I have ample evidence to believe that God is absolutely trustworthy and that his word is true. It follows then that his account of creation is true; since it contradicts the story of evolution, that must be false." You have to laugh at the mind-boggling ignorance of such drivel. He cites fantasy as evidence and then uses that evidence to argue that the rest of his evidence is true and things for which there is real evidence are false. He has ample evidence? "on the verification of his claim to be God by his resurrection" You what? What verification? There isn't even any evidence that JayCee ever existed never mind managed to die and then come back 3 days later. Thank god I'm an atheist. :)
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
Of course there are points in which people become stupid... when one reaches the point of think on the start of everything... like I don't know the big-bang? the first alive thing in our planet? I guess that no one has the right answer then speaking about a GOD can be as correct as speaking about any other thing. I believe and for me it is not a problem... of course I never will say statements like those ones... I guess that any other person out there I get my perception that I'm believing in the exact and correct ratio... this is like when one is driving... all the drivers that are faster than one are mad people and all the drivers that are slower should be banned from the roads... Anyway, and once this said I'll tell something that will be not popular... All this post should be moved to the back room...
[www.tamelectromecanica.com] Robots, CNC and PLC machines for grinding and polishing.
-
Actually, I don't. It would disgust me to no end if I did because everyone has different limitations, and I know mine very well. If I was to discriminate my respect based on psychological limitation then I may as well do it based on skin color, or hair color, or other things that really just don't matter.
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Tut tut tut. Nope, not letting you get away with this one. I take it you mean such stupid people as : Copernicus, Sir Francis Bacon, Kepler, Galileo Galilei, Descartes, Newton, Boyle, Faraday, Mendel, Lord Kelvin, Max Planck and (arguably) Einstein. All beleived in the sky-pixie. Even ignoring the pre-modern ones the list is impressive and this is just the scientists. Mendel is interesting, his work filled many of the gaps in Darwin's theory of evolution, to do with inheritance and the passing on of traits. He was also a monk. Of course it could be argued that the society we live in is the result of the rennaisance (which lead to the Enlightenment), itself started in the context of Christian religous thought.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]It might also have something to do with the fact that openly being an Atheist, or even having a less radical opinion that deviated from the norm, could cost your career as a scientist. I know Newton was very religious, not so sure about the others (also due ignorance on my part). But, we take free speech for granted, so we're not likely question whether someone is honest about his religious views. Maybe some of them just wrote something improve their image, so he could focus on his work. But if lying could mean the difference between being a highly respected citizen, making a living by doing groundbreaking research and live in poverty as a hermit, like Nietzsche and Tesla. I would probably lie too.
Giraffes are not real.
-
I don't have a problem with religion it's what people do in the name of religion. Technology would probably be a lot further along if the church hadn't silenced/persecuted scientists of the time.
Mike Hankey wrote:
Technology would probably be a lot further along if the church hadn't silenced/persecuted
scientists of the time.:thumbsup:
----------------------------- Just along for the ride. -----------------------------
-
I've never considered that I might be a liberal Christian. LOL. :) I am Christian, go to church every Sunday, lead the church's youth group and yet, I love science and believe it can coexist. There's more than enough proof of evolution that we can't deny it. As for being Christian, it's how I choose to live my life, and don't force my views on anyone else (what a boring world that would be), and don't talk religion unless someone else starts it. Even then, I always put in the clause "this is what I believe, and I could be way wrong". I'm not into converting people. I find it very frustrating the bad name "Christians" have given Christians. :) It's supposed to be about the love, and all it seems to be anymore is nothing but a religion of hate. :(
Caydence wrote:
I find it very frustrating the bad name "Christians" have given Christians.
It's because reasonable Christians, like yourself, understand it's counterproductive (and obnoxious) to go around loudly proclaiming you're right and everyone else is going to hell. So of course we don't hear much from you. Then there are those that believe it is their god appointed duty to be obnoxious, condescending and as loud as possible about their religion. Guess who gets noticed more.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
-
Caydence wrote:
I find it very frustrating the bad name "Christians" have given Christians.
It's because reasonable Christians, like yourself, understand it's counterproductive (and obnoxious) to go around loudly proclaiming you're right and everyone else is going to hell. So of course we don't hear much from you. Then there are those that believe it is their god appointed duty to be obnoxious, condescending and as loud as possible about their religion. Guess who gets noticed more.
And sometimes when you're on, you're really f***ing on And your friends they sing along and they love you But the lows are so extreme that the good seems f***ing cheap And it teases you for weeks in its absence Rilo Kiley - "A Better Son/Daughter"
David Kentley wrote:
Then there are those that believe it is their god appointed duty to be obnoxious, condescending and as loud as possible about their religion
You're talking about Dalek Dave? He's seems to be as much a true believer as the ones who are sure that God told them to eat with their right and wipe with their left.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
