Ouch! Creationists Take A Beating?

[DigDug]

They are ridculous because they are ridculous, not because they are christian

As if there is a consensual definition on what "ridiculous" is. Rather, its that we CAN'T agree on what and what isn't "truth" that lead to Waco, 9/11 and most every other large-scale human conflict this world has seen. And therein lies the problem doesn't it? How can an absolute truth - as the Christianity defines the bible to be - be open to interpretation? And if so, who decides what interpretation is correct? See why its so dangerous to call something so ambiguous and intepretable, an absolute truth? All it serves to do is give each and every interpreter license to act upon his interpretations without reservation and reevaluation since he believes his/her interpretation to be the undeniable, absolute truth! Can you think of a few examples?

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: DigDug

They are ridculous because they are ridculous, not because they are christian

As if there is a consensual definition on what "ridiculous" is. Rather, its that we CAN'T agree on what and what isn't "truth" that lead to Waco, 9/11 and most every other large-scale human conflict this world has seen. And therein lies the problem doesn't it? How can an absolute truth - as the Christianity defines the bible to be - be open to interpretation? And if so, who decides what interpretation is correct? See why its so dangerous to call something so ambiguous and intepretable, an absolute truth? All it serves to do is give each and every interpreter license to act upon his interpretations without reservation and reevaluation since he believes his/her interpretation to be the undeniable, absolute truth! Can you think of a few examples?

In the end, its a mind-boggling, fallacious, circular loop that if scrutinized enough, falls apart because it is not a cohesive whole. Luckily for some, its so mind-boggling that most don't even attempt to do so, thereby creating the need for the "shepherd to lead his flock", and the concept of faith.

 

[DigDug]

Luckily for some, its so mind-boggling that most don't even attempt to do so, thereby creating the need for the "shepherd to lead his flock", and the concept of faith.

...and full manipulation by those in power.

 

[cheapgoose]

Originally posted by: TheBDB

Originally posted by: Injury

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
i dont get why ppl who DONT believe something feel the need to go out of their way to poke at ppl who do? Especially at holiday time. Why not just leave them alone and let them enjoy themselves?

Why be so bothered about it that they need stir the pot?

:thumbsup:

It's not like we're all going to read a post and say to ourselves...

"MY WORD! WHAT THE HELL HAVE I BEEN DOING???? TIME TO GO BREAK SOME 'COMMANDMENTS'!"

Even if a superior being was proven false, I would still go to church because it helps me get in touch with my morales and ethics. You don't need to be a christian to understand and agree with the values that it teaches.

So why not just be a moral person and skip the god/church part? 😉

of course he can't. don't you see, all the good values and morals and ethics belongs to the church. It's taught by the christians, and look, how nice, they're even willing to let non-christians believe in them. /sarcasm

and Karenmarie, I really do wish there were more people like you. live and let live.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: IGBT
Topic Title: Ouch! Creationists Take A Beating?
Topic Summary: April isn?t turning out to be a very good month for creationists.

They still rule the U.S. so it wasn't a bad enough month.......yet.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: zanieladie
Blech! I don't buy any of that evolution mumbo jumbo.

God said it. I believe it. That settles it.

Then you're the exact opposite of your sig. You are completely normal. Normal people believe in magic and gods and fairies.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: BD2003


Id certainly say theyre evolving away from the bible. Some interpret this is an indication that the bible is just a book like any other, written by people with a set of beliefs they deemed to be valid and truth at the time they were written; thats certainly how I see it. You'll have to figure out that one for yourself.

As far as faith being independent of religious text, I see no need for contradiction or confusion. You were taught how to add at school by counting apples, but your ability to add is now second nature and you have no need to count apples anymore, now that you've long left first grade.

Also, in the case the bible is indeed metaphorical, that any reference contained in the bible to its absolute truth would be metaphorical as well.

Although in the end, isn't the entire concept of faith basically an unwavering belief in its truth in the face of all contradictory evidence?

I find it difficult to compare faith to a skill that I learned in school. I still think that even though you are comfortable in your knowledge of something, the source of that knowledge is it's essential foundation. A person who decides that the bible is either partially or entirely in error, yet maintains the core belief of the religion surrounding the bible is entirely different from a person who forgets that they once counted apples in order to learn how to add. After all, I may no longer use "apples" to perform addition, but I still use the numbers that the apples were meant to represent.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

Originally posted by: BD2003


Id certainly say theyre evolving away from the bible. Some interpret this is an indication that the bible is just a book like any other, written by people with a set of beliefs they deemed to be valid and truth at the time they were written; thats certainly how I see it. You'll have to figure out that one for yourself.

As far as faith being independent of religious text, I see no need for contradiction or confusion. You were taught how to add at school by counting apples, but your ability to add is now second nature and you have no need to count apples anymore, now that you've long left first grade.

Also, in the case the bible is indeed metaphorical, that any reference contained in the bible to its absolute truth would be metaphorical as well.

Although in the end, isn't the entire concept of faith basically an unwavering belief in its truth in the face of all contradictory evidence?

I find it difficult to compare faith to a skill that I learned in school. I still think that even though you are comfortable in your knowledge of something, the source of that knowledge is it's essential foundation. A person who decides that the bible is either partially or entirely in error, yet maintains the core belief of the religion surrounding the bible is entirely different from a person who forgets that they once counted apples in order to learn how to add. After all, I may no longer use "apples" to perform addition, but I still use the numbers that the apples were meant to represent.

Which is exactly what I'm saying. The book is just the book....its the faith you have that is the core of your belief, not the tools or institutions that taught you so.

 

[DukeN]

Bible talk = gay. Dumbass book was written by man, clearly well after a lot of time had passed.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: DukeN
Bible talk = gay. Dumbass book was written by man, clearly well after a lot of time had passed.

I fail to see the relation between bible talk and homosexuality or cheerfulness.

Originally posted by: BD2003

Which is exactly what I'm saying. The book is just the book....its the faith you have that is the core of your belief, not the tools or institutions that taught you so.

Ack, but surely you must see that that core would never have formed had it not been for the tools and institutions that preceded it. I feel that makes it impossible to separate your faith from the things that brought it about. I can't see how the faith is an entity unto itself if it's very existence is dependent upon the things that you feel can later be disavowed.

 

[Greyd]

The funny thing is that I can almost guarantee that the majority of people who slam the Bible have never read it in its entirety, even once. In addition to that, i can pretty much guarantee that a higher percentage of people slamming the bible here have never taken the time to study the historical, archaeological and cultural aspects of the Bible. Yet there are so many of the same people that BLINDLY follow the belief that the bible is false and/or fake.

Then there's that tiny, tiny percentage of people that have done all of the above. Taking that one religious studies class in college does not count. Neither does visiting those skeptic forums that many seem to run to. I'm talking real genuine study - for at least SOME period of years. When those people disagree with the validity with the Bible - I am more likely to respect their opinion.

Many people slam Christianity because of the same reason they slam other people/things in society. It gives them a sense of purpose, a moral "soap box" to stand on, to put it lightly.
It's interesting that so many people claim that Christianity is "nothing" yet expend vast amounts of energy to deride it. If it was really "nothing," why so much effort? Because it makes people feel superior as they try to enlarge their intellectual "e-penis."

There have been a few, VERY few times that religious debate has actually been intellectual and rigorous here on ATOT. I loved debating in those posts because it challenged me and I thought about questions that I had never encountered or knew the answer to. The more I looked into the answers to these questions, the more it strengthened my faith.

Unfortunately, most "debates" here on the forums are not that at all. Rather just bickering, baiting and mocking. This attitude, in the absence of true genuine intellectual debate, just goes to show that most "anti-Christians" can follow their "beliefs" just as blindly as Christians are accused of doing.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

Originally posted by: DukeN
Bible talk = gay. Dumbass book was written by man, clearly well after a lot of time had passed.

I fail to see the relation between bible talk and homosexuality or cheerfulness.

Originally posted by: BD2003

Which is exactly what I'm saying. The book is just the book....its the faith you have that is the core of your belief, not the tools or institutions that taught you so.

Ack, but surely you must see that that core would never have formed had it not been for the tools and institutions that preceded it. I feel that makes it impossible to separate your faith from the things that brought it about. I can't see how the faith is an entity unto itself if it's very existence is dependent upon the things that you feel can later be disavowed.

I wouldnt be able to read if it wasnt for school, but my ability to read is certainly independent of the school. They taught me how to read, but I read on my own now. Honestly, I can't see how it can be any more clear than that.

Say youre stranded on a desert isle with no bible. You no longer have the ability to attend church anymore, nor read scripture...does that now invalidate your faith? Id certainly think not.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: BD2003

I wouldnt be able to read if it wasnt for school, but my ability to read is certainly independent of the school. They taught me how to read, but I read on my own now. Honestly, I can't see how it can be any more clear than that.

Say youre stranded on a desert isle with no bible. You no longer have the ability to attend church anymore, nor read scripture...does that now invalidate your faith? Id certainly think not.

The fact that I continue to be able to read after my formal schooling doesn't invalidate the role my formal schooling had in enabling me to read. If I were not taught how to read then I would not be able to read, thus I cannot separate my current ability from the means by which I aquired it.

Your faith isn't independent of the bible simply because the book is unavailable to you, but your faith is inextricably tied to the book because the bible is where its roots lie. Your example implies that the inability to access the physical aspects of christianity would somehow separate you from it, or at least that the notion applies to the argument that I presented.

 

[dxkj]

Lol riight.. they have never found any proof of evolution, hence its a Theory, Im sure the creationists arent worried too much.

A fish gets eaten by a small land animal, and they find some bones together that are similar sizes, and jump to conclusions,

KNEE JERK! lol

 

[dxkj]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
bible doesn't mention school prayer either. actually denounces public prayer. go figure. doesn't stop the christian fundies....

Those who want the state to engage in public worship, or even to have prayer in schools, are defying his injunction: "When you pray, be not like the pretenders, who prefer to pray in the synagogues and in the public square, in the sight of others. In truth I tell you, that is all the profit they will have. But you, when you pray, go into your inner chamber and, locking the door, pray there in hiding to your Father, and your Father who sees you in hiding will reward you" (Matthew 6:5-6). He shocked people by his repeated violation of the external holiness code of his time, emphasizing that his religion was an internal matter of the heart.http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/09/opinion/09wills.html?_r=1&hp

What a moronic statement. The point of that verse is to show that you shouldnt pray with the desire of people seeing you and thinking you holy. Its kinda like saying, if you are afraid that you have something in your heart that makes you want to pray in public for recognition, just do it in your chambers so that you dont risk sinning in that manner.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: Greyd
The funny thing is that I can almost guarantee that the majority of people who slam the Bible have never read it in its entirety, even once. In addition to that, i can pretty much guarantee that a higher percentage of people slamming the bible here have never taken the time to study the historical, archaeological and cultural aspects of the Bible. Yet there are so many of the same people that BLINDLY follow the belief that the bible is false and/or fake.

Then there's that tiny, tiny percentage of people that have done all of the above. Taking that one religious studies class in college does not count. Neither does visiting those skeptic forums that many seem to run to. I'm talking real genuine study - for at least SOME period of years. When those people disagree with the validity with the Bible - I am more likely to respect their opinion.

Many people slam Christianity because of the same reason they slam other people/things in society. It gives them a sense of purpose, a moral "soap box" to stand on, to put it lightly.
It's interesting that so many people claim that Christianity is "nothing" yet expend vast amounts of energy to deride it. If it was really "nothing," why so much effort? Because it makes people feel superior as they try to enlarge their intellectual "e-penis."

There have been a few, VERY few times that religious debate has actually been intellectual and rigorous here on ATOT. I loved debating in those posts because it challenged me and I thought about questions that I had never encountered or knew the answer to. The more I looked into the answers to these questions, the more it strengthened my faith.

Unfortunately, most "debates" here on the forums are not that at all. Rather just bickering, baiting and mocking. This attitude, in the absence of true genuine intellectual debate, just goes to show that most "anti-Christians" can follow their "beliefs" just as blindly as Christians are accused of doing.

I have indeed read the bible multiple times. Though my research into its history is ongoing I prefer to focus my arguments on peoples views of the bible. I don't think I've ever "slammed" the bible or christianity, but I contest the you have placed yourself on quite a "moral soap-box" in this post.

 

[chuckywang]

Go Science!!!

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: Greyd
I'm talking real genuine study - for at least SOME period of years.

Do you eat beef?

If so I'm curious as to how many years you studied Hinduism before rejecting, and insulting, their faith by eating their sacred animal? There are more Hindus on the planet than Christians and the Hindu faith is thousands of years older. Surely their faith deserves the same respect and effort that you are demanding of others?

Me? I reject all matters of faith equally.

Science, reason and logic ftw! 😛

 

[JasonSix78]

Originally posted by: BD2003

The inherent problem is that the bible itself is contradictory. If one would believe in it literally, then they would have the double duty of killing all non-believers (I forget the verse, but its DEFINIETLY there), as well as loving their fellow man and giving the other cheek when they are struck.

Regardless, there are extremists that choose to ignore certain passages and take certain other passages literally. They are ridculous because they are ridculous, not because they are christian, and their very existence should not serve to tarnish the entire religion of christianity. I also think it is fallacious to assume that unless one takes the bible or any other religious scripture non-literally, or does not accept it without question, will make them considered to be "non-believers."

In reality, christianity, along with all the other major religious entities, are essetially living, breathing organizations and institutions that gasp....EVOLVE with the times. Its as absurd to criticize modern christians as not being "real" christians as it is to criticize a modern american for not believing and professing the absolute truth of the founding fathers.

My not hating the british should not serve as an excuse to call me less of an american, which is why I used such an infantile analogy to demonstate my point. Perhaps I could have worded it differently, as it stands it seems to imply that all christians are retards, but believe it or not, it was meant to be neutral and was the first thing that came to mind. 😛

It definitely would seem contradictory for those who have read a bit of the Old Testament and then skipped to the New Testament. If you really took a look at the Bible as a whole then you would see that, instead of it being a contradictory, it would be more of how the relationship between God and man evolved over time. All Christians have to take the Bible as a whole or not at all.

I assure you that Christianity, in and of itself, is not evolving and it never will. People are the ones evolving and for a Christian that should never happen.

One other thing I'd like to point out is that it is a Christians duty to share Christ with others. Going about it in a pushy, salesman-type way, is wrong and it should never happen like that.

Happy Easter,
-Jason

 

[Kipper]

Satan put it there, obviously.

 

[b0mbrman]

Ouch! Creationists Take A Beating?April isn?t turning out to be a very good month for creationists.

As if any amount of "proof" is going to change what hardcore Christians believe

 

[alien42]

Originally posted by: dxkj
Lol riight.. they have never found any proof of evolution, hence its a Theory, Im sure the creationists arent worried too much.

A fish gets eaten by a small land animal, and they find some bones together that are similar sizes, and jump to conclusions,

KNEE JERK! lol

wow, just wow

 

[Tobolo]

Originally posted by: Fritzo

Originally posted by: KarenMarie

Originally posted by: joedrake

Originally posted by: classy
I laugh when folks say stuff like this. Let me help you, the bible never talks about the beginning of the world. As a matter of fact in many places it mentions a time before Adam. The bible only gives a detailed account of Adam on, but clearly speaks in many passages that a pre-adam era existed.

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

:thumbsup:

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

Originally posted by: BD2003

I wouldnt be able to read if it wasnt for school, but my ability to read is certainly independent of the school. They taught me how to read, but I read on my own now. Honestly, I can't see how it can be any more clear than that.

Say youre stranded on a desert isle with no bible. You no longer have the ability to attend church anymore, nor read scripture...does that now invalidate your faith? Id certainly think not.

The fact that I continue to be able to read after my formal schooling doesn't invalidate the role my formal schooling had in enabling me to read. If I were not taught how to read then I would not be able to read, thus I cannot separate my current ability from the means by which I aquired it.

Your faith isn't independent of the bible simply because the book is unavailable to you, but your faith is inextricably tied to the book because the bible is where its roots lie. Your example implies that the inability to access the physical aspects of christianity would somehow separate you from it, or at least that the notion applies to the argument that I presented.

Well, in that case, you could make those inextricable connections back to the very beginning of time. The bible is dependent upon writing, which is dependent upon the existence of humans, depending upon the existence of earth, one could go on forever ad nauseum. In a sense your faith isnt independent of the book, but since the existence of the book itself is contingent upon other factors, then your faith is likewise tied to all the things that were necessary to produce the book, essentially, contingent on existence itself. The church can certainly attempt to justify itself by drawing the line at their door or the bible, but if you logicially follow the consequences of that line of thinking, you can choose to draw the line wherever you wish, even at the start of it all.

It definitely would seem contradictory for those who have read a bit of the Old Testament and then skipped to the New Testament. If you really took a look at the Bible as a whole then you would see that, instead of it being a contradictory, it would be more of how the relationship between God and man evolved over time. All Christians have to take the Bible as a whole or not at all.

I assure you that Christianity, in and of itself, is not evolving and it never will. People are the ones evolving and for a Christian that should never happen.

If anything seems contradictory to me, its those two paragraphs, one after another. For one, I've been to church maybe three times in my whole life, and I certainly seen priests take verse from the bible and use them on their own. It would seem fairly ridiculous to me to have to take every other verse into account in order to properly discuss a single one.

On the one hand you state the bible is a record of the evolution between man and god, and right afterwards, you state that christianity, the institution which is to a christian, the middleman between man and god, does not evolve, it is the people that are evolving, but good christian is exempt from that, so what accounts for the "evolution" of the relationship between man and god if neither the people nor the faith have any ability to change over time?

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: Greyd
The funny thing is that I can almost guarantee that the majority of people who slam the Bible have never read it in its entirety, even once. In addition to that, i can pretty much guarantee that a higher percentage of people slamming the bible here have never taken the time to study the historical, archaeological and cultural aspects of the Bible. Yet there are so many of the same people that BLINDLY follow the belief that the bible is false and/or fake.

Then there's that tiny, tiny percentage of people that have done all of the above. Taking that one religious studies class in college does not count. Neither does visiting those skeptic forums that many seem to run to. I'm talking real genuine study - for at least SOME period of years. When those people disagree with the validity with the Bible - I am more likely to respect their opinion.

Many people slam Christianity because of the same reason they slam other people/things in society. It gives them a sense of purpose, a moral "soap box" to stand on, to put it lightly.
It's interesting that so many people claim that Christianity is "nothing" yet expend vast amounts of energy to deride it. If it was really "nothing," why so much effort? Because it makes people feel superior as they try to enlarge their intellectual "e-penis."

There have been a few, VERY few times that religious debate has actually been intellectual and rigorous here on ATOT. I loved debating in those posts because it challenged me and I thought about questions that I had never encountered or knew the answer to. The more I looked into the answers to these questions, the more it strengthened my faith.

Unfortunately, most "debates" here on the forums are not that at all. Rather just bickering, baiting and mocking. This attitude, in the absence of true genuine intellectual debate, just goes to show that most "anti-Christians" can follow their "beliefs" just as blindly as Christians are accused of doing.

:thumbsup: I plan to read the Bible over the summer, any advice?