Sign in to follow this  
cuchulain

value of religion

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dan56 said:

[...] There's absolutely no evidence of macro-evolution (one species changing into another).. Its all speculative conjecture with no fossil records to substantiate the gradual transformation of any species evolving into a completely different or new creature..  Micro-evolution is observable, but imo macro-evolution is a myth. [...]

 

I'll take the word of scientists over yours at any time...:

 

Quote

Among scientists connected to the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 98% say they believe humans evolved over time. 

 

Source: For Darwin Day, 6 facts about the evolution debate, by the Pew Research Center.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Key said:

[...]     Creationism has not yet been proven, but hasn't been eliminated as a possibility, thus is based on faith, and not a science. [...]

 

Just saying: 

 

Quote

The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that intelligent design "and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life" are not science because they cannot be tested by experiment, do not generate any predictions, and propose no new hypotheses of their own.[30] In September 2005, 38 Nobel laureates issued a statement saying "Intelligent design is fundamentally unscientific; it cannot be tested as scientific theory because its central conclusion is based on belief in the intervention of a supernatural agent."[31] In October 2005, a coalition representing more than 70,000 Australian scientists and science teachers issued a statement saying "intelligent design is not science" and calling on "all schools not to teach Intelligent Design (ID) as science, because it fails to qualify on every count as a scientific theory".[

 

Source: Wikipedia on the Level of support for evolution

 

But don't bother, Dan still believes an ancient book should be taken literally... :wall:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Both Jesus and the apostles prayed in public, so it would be hypocritical for them to call others who do likewise hypocrites.. They didn't.. Jesus was not condemning people for praying aloud, but for putting on a public display for their own benefit. Their motive was to be seen of men, not a sincere prayer, but empty words meant for the ears of other people. After the verses you quoted, Jesus prayed in public (Matthew 6:9)

 

 

There's absolutely no evidence of macro-evolution (one species changing into another).. Its all speculative conjecture with no fossil records to substantiate the gradual transformation of any species evolving into a completely different or new creature..  Micro-evolution is observable, but imo macro-evolution is a myth.

 

Isaiah 40:22 mentions "the circle of the earth", which would indicate the earth is round.

 

 

I'm impressed.  Twisting plain meaning out of words -- that completely.  You have a wondrous skill.  Truly incredible.

:blink:

:rolleyes:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan wants to discuss evolution theory.  It's part of a larger pattern.  Fundamentalists love preaching Creationism -- and explaining to scientists, why evolution is impossible.  Why is that?  Is it because Fundamentalists are so in love with science?  Because they truly believe that Creationism is science?  Or is it because they are consumed by a deep terror?

 

It's terror.

 

Without a literal, historic Adam and Eve; there is no "Fall" from "Grace".  No "Original Sin".  There is nothing to be Saved from.  Nothing to be "Redeemed" from.  No need for a "Savior".  No need for a "Redeemer".  No need to be "washed clean in the Blood of the Lamb".  No need for Christ.

 

Without "The Fall" -- the whole of Fundamentalist theology and ideology, falls apart like a rotten house of cards, in a strong wind.  It is pointless to discuss evolution theory with a Fundamentalist.  Or any other science.  Creationism was never about science.  Never about correcting flaws in science theory or methodology.  Nor science fact.  That is a huge fraud and a lie.

 

Creationism was always about fear.  When the first domino falls -- the rest follow.  If you're a Fundamentalist.

 

:mellow:

 

 

 

I almost forgot to say it.  Genesis is not a science text!

There is a reason why it's called "FAITH".  Because it's not "FACTS".

 

:mellow:

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

Just saying: 

 

 

Source: Wikipedia on the Level of support for evolution

 

But don't bother, Dan still believes an ancient book should be taken literally... :wall:

 

 

 

It is the nature of Faith to a Fundamentalist.  Only faith matters.  Not evidence.  Not reason.  Not facts.  Not external reality.  Faith uber alles.  They choose what they believe first; then attempt to justify it.  Then call the rest of fools, when we don't buy what they're selling.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

 

No, it isn't... evolution has a substantial base in empiric science. There is ample of proof to sustain the hypothesis (both through carbon dating evidence from the past as well as through observation of evolution in progress). This proof has been published in peer reviewed scientific journals and has a +98% consensus rate in scientific circles.

Or do you also have a geocentric astronomical view? Flat Earth too, maybe? Hey, it's all just "as much of a hypothesis", right...?

 

You're talking to Dan.  It's like water off a duck's back.    :birgits_giggle:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2019 at 11:40 AM, Key said:

As plausible as that possibility might be, one would think that a species capable of deep space travel may have overcome the necessity of needing humans for food.

Greetings to you my brother,

 

Who knows, we may be their pizza.

 

Or, a more frightening thought, we may be,  in their view at least, so far beneath them on the evolutionary scale that we are unworthy of life.  If some humans look down on others like that, perhaps it would only be fair play for beings from another world to view us the same way.  

 

In solidarity,

Rev. Calli

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

 

There's absolutely no evidence of macro-evolution (one species changing into another).. Its all speculative conjecture with no fossil records to substantiate the gradual transformation of any species evolving into a completely different or new creature..  Micro-evolution is observable, but imo macro-evolution is a myth.

 

 

3

Greetings to you my brother,

 

My dear brother really now, Macroevolution is about as robust a theory as one can find in science.  To be a person of faith does not mean we have to deny the clear evidence of the magnificence of how our Creator carefully designed the natural order of the universe simply because we are trying to uphold a  beautiful creation myth.  It does God an injustice and does the bible an injustice (for in fact the Bible is not a book of Science).  We learn the ultimate meaning of why from the Holy Scriptures.  Science teaches us how God works in the Universe.

 

Your brother in Christ,

Rev. Calli

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Rev. Calli said:

Greetings to you my brother,

 

My dear brother really now, Macroevolution is about as robust a theory as one can find in science.  To be a person of faith does not mean we have to deny the clear evidence of the magnificence of how our Creator carefully designed the natural order of the universe simply because we are trying to uphold a  beautiful creation myth.  It does God an injustice and does the bible an injustice (for in fact the Bible is not a book of Science).  We learn the ultimate meaning of why from the Holy Scriptures.  Science teaches us how God works in the Universe.

 

Your brother in Christ,

Rev. Calli

 

 

Welcome to the thread.  It just got a lot better.

 

:drinks:

 

:clap2:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Rev. Calli said:

Greetings to you my brother,

 

My dear brother really now, Macroevolution is about as robust a theory as one can find in science.  To be a person of faith does not mean we have to deny the clear evidence of the magnificence of how our Creator carefully designed the natural order of the universe simply because we are trying to uphold a  beautiful creation myth.  It does God an injustice and does the bible an injustice (for in fact the Bible is not a book of Science).  We learn the ultimate meaning of why from the Holy Scriptures.  Science teaches us how God works in the Universe.

 

Your brother in Christ,

Rev. Calli

 

I can live with that... or, as Jonathan said: :cheers:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RevBogovac said:

 

I can live with that... or, as Jonathan said: :cheers:

 

 

In my comments on evolution; I was careful to focus on Fundamentalists.  Not Christians.  It's an important distinction.  I hope that nobody was confused by my intentions.

 

:friends:

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, RevBogovac said:

I'll take the word of scientists over yours at any time...:

 

Yes, I presumed your faith would lie in unprovable science

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I'm impressed.  Twisting plain meaning out of words -- that completely.  You have a wondrous skill.  Truly incredible.

 

 

You need to look at the over-all context of what's being said, not just pull out a couple words and contort them to reinforce and fit your opinion.. Its not incredible, its just reading the whole paragraph to gain a correct understanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

Yes, I presumed your faith would lie in unprovable science

 

 

 

 

 

Seriously?     :birgits_giggle:     :lol:     :rofl:

 

You prefer unprovable faith?     :grin:

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

You need to look at the over-all context of what's being said, not just pull out a couple words and contort them to reinforce and fit your opinion.. Its not incredible, its just reading the whole paragraph to gain a correct understanding.

 

 

I did read all of it.  What do you want me to say?  That Jesus and the Apostles were inconsistent?  That Jesus and the Apostles were hypocrites?  That the words of Jesus don't match his actions?  Is that what you wanted to hear?

 

Or -- Jesus was telling people like you -- not to get in everybody's face with public prayer.  That was my original assertion -- before you decided to correct me.  In which case -- you're the hypocrite.  Jesus said so.

 

 

:mellow:

 

 

Edited by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Key said:

    When obvious bias is displayed, it is showing a practice of inequality.

 

    Can science be proven wrong? Yes. Science is ongoing, which is why it is peer reviewed. But science is also used to prove or discredit, isn't it?

    Creationism has not yet been proven, but hasn't been eliminated as a possibility, thus is based on faith, and not a science. (Main reason it is debated to be taught in public schools.)

 

3. The holidays in question were appropriated. So, you can say they weren't being celebrated as their own holidays, either. Their intent was to show hypocrisy, and worked for the most part. 

     If one group can have a public display on a given day, so can another. Yet, one group seems to have a problem with it, just like the other that is presenting the mirror.

     Btw, I recall, I had stated before somewhere, a belief can not be disrupted or interfered with unless an individual changes their own beliefs.

 

Bias can also show a dislike for something, a disagreement, repulsion, intolerance, or a simple preference for something different.. A person can have their biases without denying equality.

 

I agree, science can and has been proven wrong.. Science has not proved or discredited creationism, so imo its as much of a possibility as unproven macro-evolution, which is speculation at best.

 

Your correct, true belief cannot be disrupted, but it doesn't prevent others from running constant interference.

 

9 hours ago, Rev. Calli said:

 

My dear brother really now, Macroevolution is about as robust a theory as one can find in science.  To be a person of faith does not mean we have to deny the clear evidence of the magnificence of how our Creator carefully designed the natural order of the universe simply because we are trying to uphold a  beautiful creation myth.  It does God an injustice and does the bible an injustice (for in fact the Bible is not a book of Science).  We learn the ultimate meaning of why from the Holy Scriptures.  Science teaches us how God works in the Universe.

 

I'd disagree with your view of macro-evolution, there's no robust evidence to even suggest that we evolved from pond scum to apes to humans. It doesn't do God an injustice to believe the story of creation, I don't believe its a myth. And while I appreciate your faith in science, I don't think its reached a level of sophistication which teaches us how God works, and I sincerely doubt it ever will.  But hey, I'm a fundamentalist, so I don't expect others here to think or interpret things like I do. It would be a boring place if we all had the same point of view.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

I did read all of it.  What do you want me to say?  That Jesus and the Apostles were inconsistent?  That Jesus and the Apostles were hypocrites?  That the words of Jesus don't match his actions?  Is that what you wanted to hear?

 

Or -- Jesus was telling people like you -- not to get in everybody's face with public prayer.  That was my original assertion -- before you decided to correct me.  In which case -- you're the hypocrite.  Jesus said so.

 

 

For what's its worth, I don't think Christians should pray in public either... Pray aloud in church or among other Christians, sure.. My only point was that Jesus was teaching not to pray as a public spectacle or towards the admiration of men. The purpose of a prayer is what distinguishes it from being sincere of hypocritical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Yes, I presumed your faith would lie in unprovable science

 

 

 

 

Yeah, a youtube video to counter peer reviewed empiric science... says more about your "faith" than mine, I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

In my comments on evolution; I was careful to focus on Fundamentalists.  Not Christians.  It's an important distinction.  I hope that nobody was confused by my intentions.

 

:friends:

 

 

 

Yup, heard you loud and clear! :cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Bias can also show a dislike for something, a disagreement, repulsion, intolerance, or a simple preference for something different.. A person can have their biases without denying equality.

 

I agree, science can and has been proven wrong.. Science has not proved or discredited creationism, so imo its as much of a possibility as unproven macro-evolution, which is speculation at best.

 

Your correct, true belief cannot be disrupted, but it doesn't prevent others from running constant interference.

 

 

I'd disagree with your view of macro-evolution, there's no robust evidence to even suggest that we evolved from pond scum to apes to humans. It doesn't do God an injustice to believe the story of creation, I don't believe its a myth. And while I appreciate your faith in science, I don't think its reached a level of sophistication which teaches us how God works, and I sincerely doubt it ever will.  But hey, I'm a fundamentalist, so I don't expect others here to think or interpret things like I do. It would be a boring place if we all had the same point of view.  

Your comment on bias is also true to a certain extent. To have bias, however, is to deny equality. Having preference of one thing over another is never equality.

 

I said as much in regards to what science has or hasn't proven. As for the speculation comment, the same could and has been said of creationism.

 

As for the "running constant interference", isn't that part of testing one's faith? Clearly that point has been made many times in the Bible. And, again, it is only truly interference if one's faith is obstructed, which, again, can only be done by the one holding onto that faith.

Edited by Key
word omission

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this