The Top 10 Claims Made by Creationists to Counter Scientific Theories

[rezznor]

http://io9.com/5965884/draft-10-claims-made-by-creationists-to-counter-scientific-theories

One of the most challenging tasks for the modern day creationist to is reconcile the belief in a 6,000 year old Earth with the ever-growing mountain of scientific evidence pointing to a vastly different conclusion

[rezznor]

6. The Second Law of Thermodynamics prohibits evolution
The second law of thermodynamics states that the universe and all its systems are progressively moving towards disorder, or entropy. Evolution, on the other hand, implies the improvement of a species

[-p.tiddy-]

I think that the Christians (it's really Christians this speaks of) that believe or even give thought to this kind of stuff are a VERY small minority of the all Christians...less than 1% (my guess)

It's sad though because the ones that do believe these things give a bad name to the rest of them who are able to come to conclusions with logic...There are plenty of Christian scientists out there...

[niko]

I know tons of people who church is a very big part of their lives and literally have never heard anyone who believes this crap, or who believes the bible is a literal document, etc. I was told early on in my life the bible was a collection of stories to help teach us how to behave (how god wanted us to behave) and in no way a literal document. Maybe NY is just more modern? because this is not how we are taught...

[rezznor]

I know tons of people who church is a very big part of their lives and literally have never heard anyone who believes this crap, or who believes the bible is a literal document, etc. I was told early on in my life the bible was a collection of stories to help teach us how to behave (how god wanted us to behave) and in no way a literal document. Maybe NY is just more modern? because this is not how we are taught...
yes, that's exactly how i learned the bible as a child (In Texas). It was a collection of stories to teach one how to live a good life, not everything was meant to be taken literally.

[DonDadda59]

I think that the Christians (it's really Christians this speaks of) that believe or even give thought to this kind of stuff are a VERY small minority of the all Christians...less than 1% (my guess)

It's sad though because the ones that do believe these things give a bad name to the rest of them who are able to come to conclusions with logic...There are plenty of Christian scientists out there...

Good guess, but no.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a-_zxlsuk0mtvegl8vxiga.gif

More Demographic Breakdown (http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/evolution-creationism-intelligent-design.aspx)


This is why the U.S. is so low in math/science rankings worldwide and the problem will only get worse unless people stand up against willful ignorance :facepalm

[-p.tiddy-]

^^^ Don those 3 options are a VERY far cry from what is listed in the OP

in fact I could see believing "God created humans in present form" as well as evolution at the same time

there is also no information on that poll at all...(how many people voted, where it came from, ages, etc)




also, I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the US being poor at math...

[-p.tiddy-]

Don, find the "Humans and dinosaurs co-existed" poll

[TheMan]

I went to a Catholic school and I once asked my teacher that if God created Adam and Eve, how did they disperse without incest, she told me not to focus on such things:lol

According to creationists, we all are products of inbreeding:eek:

[-p.tiddy-]

I went to a Catholic school and I once asked my teacher that if God created Adam and Eve, how did they disperse without incest, she told me not to focus on such things:lol

According to creationists, we all are products of inbreeding:eek:
no, most don't believe you are supposed to take that story literally...

it's just all symbolic

the apple stands for temptation

the snake stands for sin

Adam's rib stands for something else forgot

etc
etc
etc


I don't think many Christians think that Adam and Eve literally existed and that story actually took place

[DonDadda59]

Don, find the "Humans and dinosaurs co-existed" poll

Done.

30% of Texans believe dinosaurs and man co-existed (http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2010/02/thirty-percent-of-texans-think-dinosaurs-lived-with-man.html)

Your state bucks your <1% theory, no? :oldlol:

[-p.tiddy-]

Done.

30% of Texans believe dinosaurs and man co-existed (http://www.progressivepuppy.com/the_progressive_puppy/2010/02/thirty-percent-of-texans-think-dinosaurs-lived-with-man.html)

Your state bucks your <1% theory, no? :oldlol:
that is such a BS site lol


in other news on that site

Catholic Church Values Discrimination More Than Unwanted Kids!!! EEEKKK

[Rasheed1]

devout christians take the Bible seriously.... They believe the stories in the Bible are literal.


They believe Jesus Really dies on a cross and resurrected 3 days later...

In catholic church, when you receive Communion, they believe you are REALLY drinking the the blood of Christ and eating his flesh when you receive the wafer.

In current American society you have alot of people who claim to be christians (mostly because they want to go to heaven) but they dont believe the stories in the Bible...

The hardcore fundamentalists & hardcore catholics believe that stuff word for word.. You cant really be christian if you dont believe the stories...

The whole religion is based on FAITH....

you cant cherry pick what believe and what you dont believe

[-p.tiddy-]

devout christians take the Bible seriously.... They believe the stories in the Bible are literal.


They believe Jesus Really dies on a cross and resurrected 3 days later...

In catholic church, when you receive Communion, they believe you are REALLY drinking the the blood of Christ and eating his flesh when you receive the wafer.

In current American society you have alot of people who claim to be christians (mostly because they want to go to heaven) but they dont believe the stories in the Bible...

The hardcore fundamentalists & hardcore catholics believe that stuff word for word.. You cant really be christian if you dont believe the stories...

The whole religion is based on FAITH....

you cant cherry pick what believe and what you dont believe
yes you def can...

the only story I think that is a must to believe in literally is that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for your sins, etc

most of the others, Noah's Ark, Adam and Eve, etc, can be taken as symbolic...

[-p.tiddy-]

I have family members who are Christian, that do not take many of the stories literally...I am sure most of the scientists who are Christian are like that as well

or they will just tell you "what is important is the lesson that the Bible teaches, not weather or not it actually happened"

many don't really focus on it like that in a literal sense...they just focus on what is trying to be taught

[Rasheed1]

yes you def can...



the only story I think that is a must to believe in literally is that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for your sins, etc

most of the others, Noah's Ark, Adam and Eve, etc, can be taken as symbolic...

You can call yourself whatever you like... But you arent really a christian if you dont even believe the book that supposed to be the word of God :oldlol:


Thats not real christianity ......that's cherry picking the stories you like and the ones you dont.


What denomination are you?

[-p.tiddy-]

You can call yourself whatever you like... But you arent really a christian if you dont even believe the book that supposed to be the word of God :oldlol:


Thats not real christianity ......that's cherry picking the stories you like and the ones you dont.


What denomination are you?
I'm not religious

it isn't cherry picking at all, some books are taken differently than others...you can read up on Christian symbolism all over the place...esp with stories like Adam and Eve

perhaps TO YOU a Christian has to take every word in the Bible as literal, but that certainly isn't the opinion of every Christian

[Rasheed1]

I have family members who are Christian, that do not take many of the stories literally...I am sure most of the scientists who are Christian are like that as well

or they will just tell you "what is important is the lesson that the Bible teaches, not weather or not it actually happened"

many don't really focus on it like that in a literal sense...they just focus on what is trying to be taught

^thats modern American christianity... in other words, its not really christianity at all

Its cherry picking certain stories and trying to have it both ways


I grew up christians just like that.. They pick and choice what is divine and what is just a story..


thats not real religion.


Most christians I have come into contact with (grew up in christian academy and was also an alter boy in catholic school), dont even know the bible that well. If I start talking about deuteronomy or leviticus, I get a blank stare.

[Rasheed1]

I'm not religious

oh then you should just STFU :oldlol:


Im wasting my time talking to you (as usual)


Serious REAL christians believe the bible literally...

Alot of the CASUAL christians cherry pick what they believe and what they dont.... they dont really attend church regularly, dont take the tenets all that seriously and they say things like "God knows what is in my heart"

[-p.tiddy-]

here is a good read Sheed:

http://scibel.com/scibel/materials_questions%20-%20did%20adam%20and%20eve%20really%20exist.html


Everyone knows the story of how “Eve” was tempted by the “serpent” in Eden. After this, God said to the “serpent” : “And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." (Genesis 3:15). But Jesus plainly did not see this as being about literal snakes. It was his human enemies that he called a “brood of vipers” (Matthew 12:34; 23:33 etc), and of whom he said they were descended from “the devil” who was a “from the beginning” the “father of all lies” (John 8:44). The serpent in Genesis 3 is a symbol of a spiritual being, the devil or Satan, not a biological snake. This identification is explicitly confirmed also in Revelation 12:9 and 20:2. Some may suggest that perhaps the Genesis serpent was both a literal snake and a symbol of Satan. But the account refers only to one serpent, not two, and it would be odd to ascribe to a biological snake all the features (intelligence, relational language and moral accountability) which are unique to humans made in God’s image. As well as the serpent the book of Revelation also speaks of the “tree of life” (Rev 22:2, 14, 19) – putting it alongside the symbols of the river of life (Rev 22:1-2 compare John 4:10,14) and the heavenly city that symbolizes the church. The New Testament, then, shows that so much of Genesis 2-3 deals in symbolic language.


So where does that leave us with “Adam” and “Eve”? We have seen that in both the Genesis creation passages and in comments on these in the New Testament, the language is highly symbolic and the main point is the theological lesson. Was it through a man or a woman that sin first came into the world? The fact that Paul’s own materials differ should make us wary of taking the account too literally. Yet, there was no sin before there were any humans – animals (including biological snakes) do not have moral responsibility. Logically, then, there must have been some first sin – a first occasion on which a clearly perceived moral law was broken. In this sense, then, there must have been an “Adam and Eve” – a humanity and life-source – in which this first came.

it's not cherry picking, the Bible is a big group of different books all thrown together and translated over time, you can't take all of them the same same way...

[hookul]

oh then you should just STFU :oldlol:


Im wasting my time talking to you (as usual)


Serious REAL christians believe the bible literally...

Alot of the CASUAL christians cherry pick what they believe and what they dont.... they dont really attend church regularly, dont take the tenets all that seriously and they say things like "God knows what is in my heart"

That you decide who is a "real" christian and who not is hilarious. You mistake one of many christian faith direction and proclaim them to be the only real christian direction. I am sure you know how many different groups and subgroups there are in any major religion - at the very least you have to know about protestants and the why/how they separated from the catholics as this is pretty much at the core what you guys are argueing about (taking bible literally vs. the spirit of the stories). Not to mention the many, many other directions the Christian faith can have. Have a look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

I am sure each and every member of those subgroups would describe theirs as the "real" christian faith. no such thing exists.

[-p.tiddy-]

That you decide who is a "real" christian and who not is hilarious. You mistake one of many christian faith direction and proclaim them to be the only real christian direction. I am sure you know how many different groups and subgroups there are in any major religion - at the very least you have to know about protestants and the why/how they separated from the catholics as this is pretty much at the core what you guys are argueing about (taking bible literally vs. the spirit of the stories). Not to mention the many, many other directions the Christian faith can have. Have a look here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

I am sure each and every member of those subgroups would describe theirs as the "real" christian faith. no such thing exists.
no, you can only be a REAL Christian if you think that Eve was LITERALLY created from one of Adam ribs, and that they LITERALLY talked to an actual snake, and that the apple wasn't symbolic of anything, it was really just a fckin apple that God didn't want them to touch...:facepalm

[Rasheed1]

That you decide who is a "real" christian and who not is hilarious. You mistake one of many christian faith direction and proclaim them to be the only real christian direction. I am sure you know how many different groups and subgroups there are in any major religion - at the very least you have to know about protestants and the why/how they separated from the catholics as this is pretty much at the core what you guys are argueing about (taking bible literally vs. the spirit of the stories). Not to mention the many, many other directions the Christian faith can have. Have a look here:


It has nothing to do with subgroups .....

Each subgroup has a set of beliefs

Each subgroup expects it adherents to follow ALL of their tenets... Not just some

Any group or denomination you join will have a whole set of beliefs they expect you follow..








http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations

I am sure each and every member of those subgroups would describe theirs as the "real" christian faith. no such thing exists.

I agree, to christians each group is the real thing.... But none of those groups allow you to believe what you want and disregard what you dont believe in ...


it doesnt work like that

[hookul]

It has nothing to do with subgroups .....

Each subgroup has a set of beliefs

Each subgroup expects it adherents to follow ALL of their tenets... Not just some

Any group or denomination you join will have a whole set of beliefs they expect you follow..









I agree, to christians each group is the real thing.... But none of those groups allow you to believe what you want and disregard what you dont believe in ...


it doesnt work like that


But that's not the point. The point is that in the large set of denominations, their might either be one that already fits your believe system, including many of the very progressive protestant ones which do clearly state and recognize that the bible is written by hear-say stories from humans prone to error.

More importantly, being of a certain "faith" is not some kind of natural law that one just has to accept as a given. In the strictest sense, I can setup my own christian faith system tomorrow and start a new "religion". There is very little stopping me. Also, strictly speaking all you need to do to call yourself a christian if you want it is to believe in the central teaching of Jesus: "BE NICE"!

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Second-Coming-John-Niven/dp/0099535521


God really is coming, and he is going to be pissed. Having left his son in charge, God treated himself to a well-earned break around the height of the Renaissance. A good time to go fishing. He returns in 2011 to find things on earth haven't gone quite to plan...

The world has been rendered a human toilet: genocide; starvation; people obsessed with vacuous celebrity culture; 'and,' God points out, 'there are ****ing Christians everywhere.' God hates Christians. There's only one thing for it. They're sending the kid back.

JC, reborn, is a struggling musician in New York City helping people as best as he can. Gathering disciples along the way - a motley collection of basket cases, stoners and alcoholics - he realises his best chance to win hearts and minds may lie in a TV talent contest. American Pop Star is the number one show in America, the unholy creation of English record executive Steven Stelfox... a man who's more than a match for the Son of God




Or even if you might not even believe he was Son of God but just a smart rabbi philosopher who as a normal human being incorporated from his travels some eastern buddhist teachings into the jewish believe system. Just like some buddhist denominations do not consider buddha to be a god or supernatural but a mere human philosopher who said some really smart things

[-p.tiddy-]

Also, strictly speaking all you need to do to call yourself a christian if you want it is to believe in the central teaching of Jesus: "BE NICE"!
of the Christians I know and are close to, they would say that you have to accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, and that is all you have to do to be "saved"...(to be a Christian)

to them it comes down to that, the other stuff is details...and yes those details can decide which denom you are but they don't decide if you are a "REAL Christian" or not...

[LJJ]

This whole debate on real Christianity versus false Christianity is cracking me up. Continue.

[Nick Young]

Ancient Jews knew about the big bang 5000 years before scientists even figured it out:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Rasheed1]

But that's not the point. The point is that in the large set of denominations, their might either be one that already fits your believe system, including many of the very progressive protestant ones which do clearly state and recognize that the bible is written by hear-say stories from humans prone to error.

I think you misunderstand what I'm saying... It doesnt matter what denomination you happen to be...

Each denomination expects its followers to believe their WHOLE philosophy. If you are a catholic, and don't literally believe in the catholic bible? The catholics who do will object to your beliefs.... The religious officials will also... you probably wont get excommunicated over it, but your belief system does not jibe with the doctrine of the church..


if you look at some the other major religions, you see that most of them, whatever their sect or specific beliefs system. they follow their tenets 100%

Like I said, alot of christians are casually so. The people who believe the stuff in the OP are more fundamental hard core religious people...

You can indeed set up your own christian faith tomorrow, and then you will the arbiter of who is really an adherent to your new religion and who is not.... I'm saying the officials and serious christians believe in that stuff in OP and that is why I say they are the real christians, and casual christians are not... The religious doctrine is in line with the fundamentalists not the casual modern christians who try to differentiate between what is OK to believe and what is not...

christians will tell you word of God is divine.. They will tell you God never changes...

[Nick Young]

To all christians in this thread

Jesus was a cool guy, he taught the same shit Siddhartha Gautama, Plato and Confuscious taught.

But Christianity is a religion created 300 years after Jesus died by Roman marketing execs. They rewrote the bible adding parts, and taking out parts they didn't like. They manufactured Christianity to be a religion with the most mass appeal of any religion and reach all subjects in the roman empire. The "christian" holidays today are actually druidic and celtic holidays mostly. JESUS WAS NOT BORN ON DECEMBER 25TH SO WHY DO YOU CELEBRATE THAT DAY AS THE DAY OF HIS BIRTH WHEN ALL HISTORY AND THE BIBLE ITSELF PROVES THAT JESUS WASNT BORN DECEMBER 25TH!


IN OTHER WORDS

The religion christians follow today is not the religion of jesus, but the religion manufactured by a bunch of old roman men. It is really sad so many people have such blind belief in a religion that history tells us is manufactured bullshit.

[-p.tiddy-]

Each denomination expects its followers to believe their WHOLE philosophy. If you are a catholic, and don't literally believe in the catholic bible? The catholics who do will object to your beliefs.... The religious officials will also... you probably wont get excommunicated over it, but your belief system does not jibe with the doctrine of the church..

he is pointing out that some denoms take certain books as symbolic and not literal...

[Rasheed1]

he is pointing out that some denoms take certain books as symbolic and not literal...


My point isnt that every denomination takes every thing literal...

my point is that WHATEVER your denomination's take is? You have to accept it if you are to be a real christian (in their eyes)...

alot of christians cherry pick what they believe and what they don't within their own denomination....

[-p.tiddy-]

My point isnt that every denomination takes every thing literal...

my point is that WHATEVER your denomination's take is? You have to accept it if you are to be a real christian (in their eyes)...

alot of christians cherry pick what they believe and what they don't within their own denomination....
certainly seemed that way earlier in this thread...


Serious REAL christians believe the bible literally...

[Rasheed1]

certainly seemed that way earlier in this thread...

Thats why I initially asked you specifically what denomination YOU were.....

so we could look at from whatever angle you were coming from...

[-p.tiddy-]

Thats why I initially asked you specifically what denomination YOU were.....

so we could look at from whatever angle you were coming from...
the angle from a man who knows "real" Christians that don't take it all literal...that some of it was intended to be symbolic

[Rasheed1]

the angle from a man who knows "real" Christians that don't take it all literal...that some of it was intended to be symbolic


Yup, even when their own priest preach it to these real christians every Sunday..

This is why the Catholic church preaches against abortion, but 90% of catholics believe in some form of it...

because they are the real christians :oldlol: ... Not the Pope... Not the leaders of the churches they go to every week..

that's real American christianity in all its lazy conveinence

Its alot like Nick Young said...

[code green]

Sheed, I ain't buying your "subscribe fully or don't subscribe at all theory," although I respect it. I was raised in a very Christian household (admittedly, I don't have the strongest faith in the world) that never really put much stock into the Old Testament. We call ourselves "Christians," or "followers of Christ." I can't speak from every Christian, but I personally don't care about apples and floods, because that's not what we signed up for. Read the Nicene creed. It doesn't say anything about believing in the stories from the Old Testament. We believe in God, he had a son, he came down, died, resurrected, and destroyed Original Sin in the process. We believe in treating others like you would treat yourself. You rip on "fake Christians," but then two seconds later, you rip on the Christians that don't think gays should be together, or the ones that say birth control is evil. You really think that every "real" Christian should think that way? The world would be a worse place if that's what you really think should be the case.

[DonDadda59]

that is such a BS site lol


in other news on that site

Catholic Church Values Discrimination More Than Unwanted Kids!!! EEEKKK

Typical Primetime. You give him the proof he asks for, he continues to argue just to argue... Here's the original University of Texas Study:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/images/humansanddinos_040510_png_312x1000_q100.png

http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/documents/UTTT_Feb_2010_poll3-summary.pdf

30% is a much larger number than <1%, could you at least admit that? And this is just Texas alone.

[-p.tiddy-]

Typical Primetime. You give him the proof he asks for, he continues to argue just to argue... Here's the original University of Texas Study:

http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/images/humansanddinos_040510_png_312x1000_q100.png

http://s3.amazonaws.com/static.texastribune.org/media/documents/UTTT_Feb_2010_poll3-summary.pdf

30% is a much larger number than <1%, could you at least admit that? And this is just Texas alone.
eh...I live in Texas an NO ONE I know believes that, so it is hard for me to take that thing seriously

I'll say this after looking at the questions, the way it was asked THIS:


Please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the following statement: "The earliest humans lived at the same time as the dinosaurs.

30% Agree
41% Disagree
30% Don’t Know

that comes off as though it has nothing to do with religion and more just to do with the fact that many idiots out there think cave men and dinos coexisted...

[Just2McFly]

yes, that's exactly how i learned the bible as a child (In Texas). It was a collection of stories to teach one how to live a good life, not everything was meant to be taken literally.
Exactly, the bible is a great book when used properly.

[lakers_forever]

P.Diddy, don't waist your time. Rasheed is one of those atheist bigots who claim only fundamentalists are real christians. They do that because they actually disprove creationists claims with science. And they want to creat this false dicotomy that you can't be a christian and believe in Evolution at the same time when Darwin himself said: " "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent theist & an evolutionist."


I think you misunderstand what I'm saying... It doesnt matter what denomination you happen to be...

Each denomination expects its followers to believe their WHOLE philosophy. If you are a catholic, and don't literally believe in the catholic bible? The catholics who do will object to your beliefs.... The religious officials will also... you probably wont get excommunicated over it, but your belief system does not jibe with the doctrine of the church..

.

You don't know anything about what you are talking about. The catholic church itself teaches not to take everything in the Bible literally. The church never condemned evolution and the big band theory. They have said on paper since the 50's that you can "believe" in evolution and still be a christian.
Those guys don't understand that creationism is actually recent in christian history. It only started with real force in the 19th century, because some felt threatned by science. In the 4th century, Augustine of Hippo was already saying not to take genesis Literally, but in an allegorical interpretation.

And this creationist thing is mostly an american thing. Catholic schools all over the world teach evolution in science classes. But according to Rasheed's criteria, I guess the more than one billion catholics in the world are not really christians. :facepalm

[Rasheed1]

Sheed, I ain't buying your "subscribe fully or don't subscribe at all theory," although I respect it. I was raised in a very Christian household (admittedly, I don't have the strongest faith in the world) that never really put much stock into the Old Testament. We call ourselves "Christians," or "followers of Christ." I can't speak from every Christian, but I personally don't care about apples and floods, because that's not what we signed up for. Read the Nicene creed. It doesn't say anything about believing in the stories from the Old Testament. We believe in God, he had a son, he came down, died, resurrected, and destroyed Original Sin in the process. We believe in treating others like you would treat yourself. You rip on "fake Christians," but then two seconds later, you rip on the Christians that don't think gays should be together, or the ones that say birth control is evil. You really think that every "real" Christian should think that way? The world would be a worse place if that's what you really think should be the case.

Im not personally judging christians.. I'm saying that the christians who adhere very closely to the tenets of their denomination or sect are the REAL christians because they take it very seriously.. When you see muslims, whatever their sect, they take it with the upmost seriousness (most of them)... You have alot of black guys who say they are muslim, but they still drink and chase women, eat pork... The Muslims that take their religion seriously look down on that..

The christians who just casually go to church or only believe parts of their book, they can say, "Yeah Imma christian, I believe in Jesus... I took my sacraments" but the people who believe in the intricacies of the passion, and stations of the cross would disagree.


I dont personally believe in any of it anymore..but I am very familiar with the casual attitude alot of christians have towards being a christian

[Rasheed1]

P.Diddy, don't waist your time. Rasheed is one of those atheist bigots who claim only fundamentalists are real christians. They do that because they actually disprove creationists claims with science. And they want to creat this false dicotomy that you can't be a christian and believe in Evolution at the same time when Darwin himself said: " "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent theist & an evolutionist."

:roll: I never said any of that :roll: nice try tho..




You don't know anything about what you are talking about. The catholic church itself teaches not to take everything in the Bible literally. The church never condemned evolution and the big band theory. They have said on paper since the 50's that you can "believe" in evolution and still be a christian.


I was a catholic matter of fact I was an alter boy...I know that catholic take the Bible very literally... They even have additional aspects that they expect people to take seriously like Saints and rosary beads and all kinds of stuff...

They take their sacraments very literal...





And this creationist thing is mostly an american thing. Catholic schools all over the world teach evolution in science classes. But according to Rasheed's criteria, I guess the more than one billion catholics in the world are not really christians. :facepalm

The Pope is your leader? Right? What's the church's position on abortion?

[DonDadda59]

eh...I live in Texas an NO ONE I know believes that, so it is hard for me to take that thing seriously

Yeah, lucky thing the survey was a statewide endeavor and not the 'people P.Tiddy knows' survey. The numbers might've been a bit skewed that way :oldlol:


I'll say this after looking at the questions, the way it was asked THIS:



that comes off as though it has nothing to do with religion and more just to do with the fact that many idiots out there think cave men and dinos coexisted...

Those 'idiots' (your term not mine) think that cavemen and dinosaurs existed because they think that the Earth is only 6-10,000 years old and that the dinosaurs died during Noah's ark expedition because they believe the nonsense in Genesis.

Again, you asked for the proof, I provided it to you. It's done. Just admit you were wrong and move on. Plenty of other subjects you can ignorantly argue about.

[lakers_forever]

To all christians in this thread

Jesus was a cool guy, he taught the same shit Siddhartha Gautama, Plato and Confuscious taught.

But Christianity is a religion created 300 years after Jesus died by Roman marketing execs. They rewrote the bible adding parts, and taking out parts they didn't like. They manufactured Christianity to be a religion with the most mass appeal of any religion and reach all subjects in the roman empire. The "christian" holidays today are actually druidic and celtic holidays mostly. JESUS WAS NOT BORN ON DECEMBER 25TH SO WHY DO YOU CELEBRATE THAT DAY AS THE DAY OF HIS BIRTH WHEN ALL HISTORY AND THE BIBLE ITSELF PROVES THAT JESUS WASNT BORN DECEMBER 25TH!

IN OTHER WORDS

The religion christians follow today is not the religion of jesus, but the religion manufactured by a bunch of old roman men. It is really sad so many people have such blind belief in a religion that history tells us is manufactured bullshit.


Christianity was not created 300 years after Christ. You have absolutely no knowledge whatsover of history. The fist gospels were written decades after Jesus death. And he had followers since his death. Nero persecuted christians in 64 ad, but somehow Christianity only began to exist 200 years later? :facepalm
300 years after Christ the persecution of Christians stopped in Rome because of the Edict of Milan.

Every christian scholar and anyone christian who serious study knows that Jesus wasn't born in December 25th.

Will you pull Zeitgeist and Religulous bs (denied by all historians) next about how Jesus was a copy of Horus? :lol

[lakers_forever]

I was a catholic matter of fact I was an alter boy...I know that catholic take the Bible very literally... They even have additional aspects that they expect people to take seriously like Saints and rosary beads and all kinds of stuff...

They take their sacraments very literal...

The Pope is your leader? Right? What's the church's position on abortion?

Since you were a catholic, does the church take Genesis literally? If they don't, you were lying (our just ignorant) when you said catholics take the whole bible literally.

The Church is against abortion. There's a great philosophical debate if abortion is morally right or not. And why is that? Because science itself can't tell when life really begins. There are atheists against abortion as well. Even atheists groups on the matter.

[lakers_forever]

Yeah, lucky thing the survey was a statewide endeavor and not the 'people P.Tiddy knows' survey. The numbers might've been a bit skewed that way :oldlol:



Those 'idiots' (your term not mine) think that cavemen and dinosaurs existed because they think that the Earth is only 6-10,000 years old and that the dinosaurs died during Noah's ark expedition because they believe the nonsense in Genesis.

Again, you asked for the proof, I provided it to you. It's done. Just admit you were wrong and move on. Plenty of other subjects you can ignorantly argue about.

A lof of christians (not the really creationists) don't believe in evolution because they are ignorant about it. They have this absurd idea that evolution claims we actually came from monkeys.

[DonDadda59]

Christianity was not created 300 years after Christ. You have absolutely no knowledge whatsover of history. The fist gospels were written decades after Jesus death. And he had followers since his death. Nero persecuted christians in 64 ad, but somehow Christianity only began to exist 200 years later? :facepalm
300 years after Christ the persecution of Christians stopped in Rome because of the Edict of Milan.

Every christian scholar and anyone christian who serious study knows that Jesus wasn't born in December 25th.

Will you pull Zeitgeist and Religulous bs (denied by all historians) next about how Jesus was a copy of Horus? :lol

Ok, so why is his 'birthday' celebrated on that specific day and not say August 7th? December 25th in 'pagan' religious history is very significant. How did the venerable day of the sun end up being Jesus' birthday on the Roman calendar?


A lof of christians (not the really creationists) don't believe in evolution because they are ignorant about it. They have this absurd idea that evolution claims we actually came from monkeys.

You won't hear any arguments from me on this point.

[lakers_forever]

Ok, so why is his 'birthday' celebrated on that specific day and not say August 7th? December 25th in 'pagan' religious history is very significant. How did the venerable day of the sun end up being Jesus' birthday on the Roman calendar?

Because it was already part of pagan traditions.
The church set the date there so that it kind of overcome the pagan sentiment. It was an strategic move. :lol It was done like it the 4th century. The bible does not say anything about it.

[Rasheed1]

Since you were a catholic, does the church take Genesis literally? If they don't, you were lying (our just ignorant) when you said catholics take the whole bible literally.

I hear catholics try to disassociate with most of the old testament from time to time... They like to pick and choose what to take literal and what not to take literal...Its still apart of their bible which is supposedly God's word... But I havent heard anything official..

Did the Pope deliver some edict?


The Church is against abortion. There's a great philosophical debate if abortion is morally right or not. And why is that? Because science itself can't tell when life really begins. There are atheists against abortion as well. Even atheists groups on the matter.


The church is against abortion.... But most catholics support some form of abortion..

My point isnt whether or not abortion is right... My point is that alot of religious people believe whatever they want and still call themselves real...

[lakers_forever]

You won't hear any arguments from me on this point.

We agree on something. :cheers: :D

[Nick Young]

Christianity was not created 300 years after Christ. You have absolutely no knowledge whatsover of history. The fist gospels were written decades after Jesus death. And he had followers since his death. Nero persecuted christians in 64 ad, but somehow Christianity only began to exist 200 years later? :facepalm
300 years after Christ the persecution of Christians stopped in Rome because of the Edict of Milan.

Every christian scholar and anyone christian who serious study knows that Jesus wasn't born in December 25th.

Will you pull Zeitgeist and Religulous bs (denied by all historians) next about how Jesus was a copy of Horus? :lol
The first christians were zealot jews.

The christianity that you follow is completely different from what the early christians before the council of nicosia were doing.

Learn the history of your religion

[lakers_forever]

I hear catholics try to disassociate with most of the old testament from time to time... They like to pick and choose what to literal and what not to take literal...Its still apart of their bible which is supposedly God's word... But I havent heard anything official..

Did the Pope deliver some edict?




The church is against abortion.... But most catholics support some form of abortion..

My point isnt whether or not abortion is right... My is that alot of religious people believe whatever they want and still call themselves real...

I don't know everything about the old testament acceptance. But I know the catholic dogma tells that only some codes (the moral ones, but not the judicial and ceremmonial - like stonning a woman who cheat on her husband to death) of the old testament applies to catholics.

Early church fathers like Augustine, 1500 years ago already defended an allegorical interpretation of Genesis. He basically straight up told not to use the Bible to explain explain science (natural events):



It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.

— De Genesi ad literam 1:19–20, Chapt. 19 [408]

With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation.

— De Genesi ad literam, 2:9


BTW, this is Pope Benedict speaking:

"According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the 'Big Bang' and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5–4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution"




I don't know if most american catholics support abortion (i'm not american). But I know that some do. And I don't think think they aren't catholics because of that.

[Balla_Status]

Good guess, but no.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a-_zxlsuk0mtvegl8vxiga.gif

More Demographic Breakdown (http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/evolution-creationism-intelligent-design.aspx)


This is why the U.S. is so low in math/science rankings worldwide and the problem will only get worse unless people stand up against willful ignorance :facepalm

This is not why. People don't want to do math/science because they actually have to work hard. Or they just suck at it.

Went to school with tons of christians who went to small town schools in Texas that graduated with an engineering degree.

All comes down to work ethic in my opinion...which may be an issue in the US.

[Nick Young]

Christianity was not created 300 years after Christ. You have absolutely no knowledge whatsover of history. The fist gospels were written decades after Jesus death. And he had followers since his death. Nero persecuted christians in 64 ad, but somehow Christianity only began to exist 200 years later? :facepalm
300 years after Christ the persecution of Christians stopped in Rome because of the Edict of Milan.

Every christian scholar and anyone christian who serious study knows that Jesus wasn't born in December 25th.

Will you pull Zeitgeist and Religulous bs (denied by all historians) next about how Jesus was a copy of Horus? :lol
the roman manufactured jesus that you follow is an amalgram of Krishna, Cuchulaihn, Horus, Apollo and Baldr.

[DonDadda59]

Because it was already part of pagan traditions.
The church set the date there so that it kind of overcome the pagan sentiment. It was an strategic move. :lol It was done like it the 4th century. The bible does not say anything about it.

Yes, exactly. So you admit that it was a way for officials to strategically fuse Christian and pagan religious beliefs... so why do you think it's so far-fetched to think that they did the same with other pagan conventions in relation to Jesus?

[lakers_forever]

The first christians were zealot jews.

The christianity that you follow is completely different from what the early christians before the council of nicosia were doing.

Learn the history of your religion

WTF is the Council of Nicosia? That never even existed.

You must be talking about the talking of Nicea. And no book of the bible was changed there like you previously claimed. They discussed the nature of Jesus and rejected Arianism (who believed that the jesus was the Son of God, but did not exist before being begotten of God in the beginning).

[lakers_forever]

the roman manufactured jesus that you follow is an amalgram of Krishna, Cuchulaihn, Horus, Apollo and Baldr.

See. Zeitgeist crap debunked by any serious historian.

Read it. Written by skeptics. http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/


Yes, exactly. So you admit that it was a way for officials to strategically fuse Christian and pagan religious beliefs... so why do you think it's so far-fetched to think that they did the same with other pagan conventions in relation to Jesus?

Maybe. But Jesus life (born of a virgin mother, being crucified, dying for our sins and ressurecting after 3 days) and teachings were not copied from any pagan myth. Don't believe Zeitgeist and Religulous pseudohistory.


http://hnn.us/articles/6641.html

[Rasheed1]

[QUOTE=lakers_forever]I don't know everything about the old testament acceptance. But I know the catholic dogma tells that only some codes (the moral ones, but not the judicial and ceremmonial - like stonning a woman who cheat on her husband to death) of the old testament applies to catholics.

Early church fathers like Augustine, 1500 years ago already defended an allegorical interpretation of Genesis. He basically straight up told not to use the Bible to explain explain science (natural events):



It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation.

[lakers_forever]

I remember in Catholic school, I received a very good foundation in Math and science. The Religious teachings (in class) was more in line with those passages you posted.... They priest let you grow out of whatever former beliefs you had, so long and you understood scripture and doctrine.

But that is very different from the culture of Catholic Church. The culture of the church itself and the parishioners is much more traditional. These practices were sacred, and literal.. You were really drinking jesus blood when you took communion... it wasnt just symbolism.. God was really inside the tabernacle.. It was a just a symbol... The culture was different in that way.

I know a few catholics who take all of that very seriously and they frown at people who don't..

that was some good info you posted tho.. Reminded me of Bonner


The thing even one parish is different from the other. You might even have a catholic priest who denies evolution out of pure ignorance. That might happen. There are even atheists who denies evolution out of ignorance*. The pratices are sacred and literal indeed. But that does not mean the church takes the whole bible literally in anyway.

Thanks. :cheers:


*http://www.examiner.com/article/atheists-attack-darwinian-evolution-new-book

[lakers_forever]

P.Diddy, don't waist your time. Rasheed is one of those atheist bigots who claim only fundamentalists are real christians. They do that because they actually disprove creationists claims with science. And they want to creat this false dicotomy that you can't be a christian and believe in Evolution at the same time when Darwin himself said: " "It seems to me absurd to doubt that a man may be an ardent theist & an evolutionist."


And since you said you did not say this, I apologize. I misunderstood it.

[DonDadda59]

See. Zeitgeist crap debunked by any serious historian.

Read it. Written by skeptics. http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/



Maybe. But Jesus life (born of a virgin mother, being crucified, dying for our sins and ressurecting after 3 days) and teachings were not copied from any pagan myth. Don't believe Zeitgeist and Religulous pseudohistory.


http://hnn.us/articles/6641.html

I had a lengthy discussion with another poster about this point. Don't feel like rehashing, but here is the thread:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282212

You already admitted that Roman officials fused the pagan holiday(s) to coincide with Jesus' life story, so you'll agree that it's not a stretch to think they took other pagan conventions and syncretised them with the new Christian orthodoxy.

[-p.tiddy-]

Those 'idiots' (your term not mine) think that cavemen and dinosaurs existed because they think that the Earth is only 6-10,000 years old and that the dinosaurs died during Noah's ark expedition because they believe the nonsense in Genesis
No, I don't believe that at all...I think they just see cavemen and dinosaurs together in movies and thus they think they coexisted.

I refuse to believe that 30% of the population here thinks the Earth is just 10,000 years old because of what Genesis says...I bet 30% haven't even read Genesis

[lakers_forever]

I had a lengthy discussion with another poster about this point. Don't feel like rehashing, but here is the thread:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=282212

You already admitted that Roman officials fused the pagan holiday(s) to coincide with Jesus' life story, so you'll agree that it's not a stretch to think they took other pagan conventions and syncretised them with the new Christian orthodoxy.

Yep. But I don't think the actual date of Jesus birth means that much to be compared with his actually life meaning and teachings.

If Christ was just another deity for Christians like Pagan deities, he could easily be incorporated into roman pagan religion like other foreign deities.

Fair enough, I will read it. Now you please read the links I posted as well. :D
:cheers:

[DonDadda59]

No, I don't believe that at all...I think they just see cavemen and dinosaurs together in movies and thus they think they coexisted.

So you're saying that 30% of the people surveyed who say man/dinosaur coexisted watch the Flintstones as if it were a documentary? :lol

http://epguides.com/Flintstones/cast.jpg


I refuse to believe that 30% of the population here thinks the Earth is just 10,000 years old because of what Genesis says...I bet 30% haven't even read Genesis

Facts say it does not matter what you believe. These are scientific studies. The one where 46% claim they believe in creationism/reject evolution has been tracking this subject since the 80s.

[-p.tiddy-]

There was a study saying 30% believe the Earth is 10,000 years old?

Let's see it?


Until then I will just think they are uneducated about when humans came about...




Ah, Don and his war on Christianity lol

[miller-time]

I refuse to believe that 30% of the population here thinks the Earth is just 10,000 years old because of what Genesis says...I bet 30% haven't even read Genesis

Dude, A LOT of people believe in genesis literally. It isn't that they analyzed it and evaluated it. They are just told a bunch of lies and propaganda and now accept it as fact because they don't know any better. It is up in the 40 and 50 percent range in America.

[-p.tiddy-]

Are not even sure 30% of Texans even Christian...might be though

[Balla_Status]

30% of people are dumb...I guess that's about right.

[Balla_Status]

Are not even sure 30% of Texans even Christian...might be though

What kind of christianity we talking here? Real christianity or half-assed christianity?

[-p.tiddy-]

Dude, A LOT of people believe in genesis literally. It isn't that they analyzed it and evaluated it. They are just told a bunch of lies and propaganda and now accept it as fact because they don't know any better. It is up in the 40 and 50 percent range in America.
I don't think the study Don posted has anything to do with Genesis...much more to do with people thinking cavemen and dinosaurs just lived together because they are uneducated on the subject.

[DonDadda59]

Dude, A LOT of people believe in genesis literally. It isn't that they analyzed it and evaluated it. They are just told a bunch of lies and propaganda and now accept it as fact because they don't know any better. It is up in the 40 and 50 percent range in America.

46% to be exact, I provided the study link. But tiddy doesn't believe that, so obviously it can't be true :confusedshrug:

[miller-time]

I don't think the study Don posted has anything to do with Genesis...much more to do with people thinking cavemen and dinosaurs just lived together because they are uneducated on the subject.

Well if they accept a 6 or 10 thousand year earth history they would have to believe that dinosaurs and man coexisted because it couldn't be any other way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uaz9Ks338c4

unless they think fossils were put there by the devil to mislead us, or by god to challenge our faith.

[-p.tiddy-]

What kind of christianity we talking here? Real christianity or half-assed christianity?
HARD CORE if they beleive that lol

[-p.tiddy-]

I can believe that 30% of the country thinks cavemen and dinos coexisted together because they are uneducated (yes like the Flinstones Don lol)

But I don't for a second think that they all believe the Earth is only 10k years old because of what Genisis says...sorry...I don't even think 30% of the country has read Genisis...

[miller-time]

I can believe that 30% of the country thinks cavemen and dinos coexisted together because they are uneducated (yes like the Flinstones Don lol)

But I don't for a second think that they all believe the Earth is only 10k years old because of what Genisis says...sorry...I don't even think 30% of the country has read Genisis...

It doesn't matter if they have read it, they are told what to believe. That is the entire problem!

[-p.tiddy-]

http://lotl.popapostle.com/images/episodes/LOTL09/1-Million-BC.jpg
yes exactly

these type images and movies are why 30% of the people answered "yes" to that...not because they think the Earth is only 10k years old

they are just uneducated on the history of the Earth...

[-p.tiddy-]

It doesn't matter if they have read it, they are told what to believe. That is the entire problem!
I think that is a small part of that 30%...I don't think most people believe what you are saying and you want to know why? Because in my 30+ years on this planet I have yet to meet one person that believes that...literally NONE of my freinds growing up through all of school and work places has ever claimed that the Earth is only 10k years old. If there are so many of these people then where are they?

[miller-time]

I think that is a small part of that 30%...I don't think most people believe what you are saying and you want to know why? Because in my 30+ years on this planet I have yet to meet one person that believes that...literally NONE of my freinds growing up through all of school and work places has ever claimed that the Earth is only 10k years old. If there are so many of these people then where are they?

I know you don't think it. But that isn't what data analysis is. Just because you've never met anyone like that doesn't mean the statistics are wrong. It is actually weird that you haven't met people like that because I live in Australia and I have.

[DonDadda59]

http://lotl.popapostle.com/images/episodes/LOTL09/1-Million-BC.jpg

This is what our history books will look like if the Sarah Palins of the world get their way :oldlol:


But I don't for a second think that they all believe the Earth is only 10k years old because of what Genisis says...sorry...I don't even think 30% of the country has read Genisis...

Jesus Christ you are one stubborn, ignorant motherf*cker :facepalm

AGAIN, the question posed to these people was- word for word- Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings? 46% responded affirmatively to "God created Human Beings pretty much in their present form at one time during the last 10,000 years or so"

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/mtmhrggv0u278tchtddptw.gif

That number has been consistent (40-47%) for the 30 years or so that Gallup has conducted this survey. It does not matter what you personally believe or who you know personally regarding this subject. It's a national survey, the Texas survey I linked you to regarding the 30% of people who think man/dinosaur coexisted was a statewide scientific survey.

And learn how to spell Genesis goddammit.

[Is He Ill]

1 million bc was a very influential movie.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XZVauMSKuTk/Ttu0bXp67hI/AAAAAAAAZdw/SUapjXczaIo/s400/tumblr_l59l568Ykx1qzb1rlo1_400.jpg

:eek:

[-p.tiddy-]

This is what our history books will look like if the Sarah Palins of the world get their way :oldlol:



Jesus Christ you are one stubborn, ignorant motherf*cker :facepalm

AGAIN, the question posed to these people was- word for word- Which of the following statements comes closest to your views on the origin and development of human beings? 46% responded affirmatively to "God created Human Beings pretty much in their present form at one time during the last 10,000 years or so"

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/mtmhrggv0u278tchtddptw.gif

That number has been consistent (40-47%) for the 30 years or so that Gallup has conducted this survey. It does not matter what you personally believe or who you know personally regarding this subject. It's a national survey, the Texas survey I linked you to regarding the 30% of people who think man/dinosaur coexisted was a statewide scientific survey.

And learn how to spell Genesis goddammit.
to me that just means they think God put humans on this planet within the last 10k years and that we didn't evolve...that doesn't mean they think the world is only 10k years old

:confusedshrug:

again, where is the poll asking people how old the Earth is?...I think most would say something to the effect of "a gazzzillllllion billion years"

[-p.tiddy-]

Is there anyone here at ISH that beleives the Earth 10k years old?

surely there is one of you out there? I mean, 30% of the population believes this so, yeah...please step forward to prove DonDadda right

I'd like to meet you




Superboy left so...:oldlol:

[niko]

I have family members who are Christian, that do not take many of the stories literally...I am sure most of the scientists who are Christian are like that as well

or they will just tell you "what is important is the lesson that the Bible teaches, not weather or not it actually happened"

many don't really focus on it like that in a literal sense...they just focus on what is trying to be taught
This.

[miller-time]

Is there anyone here at ISH that beleives the Earth 10k years old?

surely there is one of you out there? I mean, 30% of the population believes this so, yeah...please step forward to prove DonDadda right

I'd like to meet you




Superboy left so...:oldlol:

Doesn't matter. You are asking a very niche group of people, we don't represent the real population.

[Patrick Chewing]

The Bible is full of verses of large land giants/lizards/dragons.

[miller-time]

This.

The problem is that for the religious aspect to work it has to be literal. If original sin doesn't exist then there was no reason for Jesus to die on the cross. Christianity isn't a collection of philosophies that may or may not work for you. The Christians that are taking it literally are the only ones doing it right. When you get into wish-washy apologetics and metaphorical explanations it makes the entire premise pointless. If you want to just accept the philosophical aspects then this should be your bible.

http://ethicalstl.org/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/TheJeffersonBible.jpg

[shlver]

We already know that a large majority of this country doesn't have much science education. What would be more interesting would be to see the portion that believe in evolution as a result of their philosophical position or actually know the science behind it.

[DonDadda59]

Doesn't matter. You are asking a very niche group of people, we don't represent the real population.

But tiddy doesn't know those people personally, so it doesn't count. :confusedshrug:

Also, if I recall correctly, my man Shiver is a young earth bible thumper. Amirite Shiv?

[Clifton]

Although the evidence for biological evolution is overwhelming, and nobody with any intellectual credibility would deny it, the difference between someone who believes in biological evolution and someone who doesn't is very small. Just like the person who understands quantum mechanics vs. someone who doesn't. It doesn't make you stupid or bad. It has very little to say about how worthwhile a person you are, morally.

Really, what difference does it make? It's just scientific arcana that has no bearing on anyone's everyday experience.

Intellectually, the concept of evolution does explain a lot, a lot more fully. If you're a philosopher or a thinker and you don't understand that everything has a past and a future that is essential to really understanding it, you're seriously behind. But for most people? There are 10,000 more important things.

[miller-time]

Really, what difference does it make? It's just scientific arcana that has no bearing on anyone's everyday experience.

get back at me when antibiotics stop working. then we will talk about everyday experience.

[KingBeasley08]

get back at me when antibiotics stop working. then we will talk about everyday experience.
Thats for the people that make it. You think someone taking medicine thinks about the processes through which it was made and what not.. nah they get prescribed and take it

[shlver]

But tiddy doesn't know those people personally, so it doesn't count. :confusedshrug:

Also, if I recall correctly, my man Shiver is a young earth bible thumper. Amirite Shiv?
Yep, the earth was formed 6000 years ago with all radioactive decay products and minerals in place. I don't know why God did it, but I believe it.

[miller-time]

Thats for the people that make it. You think someone taking medicine thinks about the processes through which it was made and what not.. nah they get prescribed and take it

But they will have to think about it soon. Once people are dropping like flies because their antibiotics don't work anymore they will understand what evolution is very quickly. We aren't going to have antibiotics forever, unless some new discoveries are made in the very near future shit is going to hit the fan.

[miller-time]

Yep, the earth was formed 6000 years ago with all radioactive decay products and minerals in place. I don't know why God did it, but I believe it.

Seriously? Or are you having a laugh?

[shlver]

Seriously? Or are you having a laugh?
No I'm not serious. I'm not religious at all anymore. Safe to say, I lost faith. Just too busy with school.

[lefthook00]

Isn't it obvious that every culture has experienced the same "God/Infinite Intelligence/Connectedness" and that each religion is each culture's semi-retarded way of trying to explain it? Even science is slowly proving the same sh*t.

Can't you fools see that we are all connected? Science has already proven this, you just aren't connecting the dots! You think that all of this energy somehow can't become conscious? We are connected to each other and the universe, we are all made up of the same sh*t and energy. WE, HUMANS, are CONSCIOUS. If WE are conscious, what the f*ck makes you think that this whole UNIVERSE isn't CONSCIOUS! It's the SAME SH*T, our ability to become conscious is coming from the matter/energy in THIS UNIVERSE!!! Ultimately, we are a SINGULARITY!!!

As for Jesus, it doesn't matter if he is God or if Christianity is true. You SHOULD read the bible, as well as all other important religious texts you dummies. Jesus is a man that SHOULD be followed. He was a better man than you, and he was smarter than you. Learn from him you peasants. He told you the answers to life! He TOLD you the game, not SOLD but TOLD. As did many others, but I'm just using him as an example. It Was Written!!!!!! No NaS. The answers to everything have been given to us. The answer is LOVE. Love, Light, Truth, all the same thing. The more you deviate from that, the more you're f*cking up, or "sinning", or whatever you want to call it. It all comes back to being connected. You hate your neighbor, you're hating yourself.

[DonDadda59]

Yep, the earth was formed 6000 years ago with all radioactive decay products and minerals in place. I don't know why God did it, but I believe it.

There you go tiddy, hope you're satisfied now you goof.

Thank you, shiver. Where you been? Haven't seen you post in a while.

[shlver]

There you go tiddy, hope you're satisfied now you goof.

Thank you, shiver. Where you been? Haven't seen you post in a while.
Med school. I'm taking a reprieve from studying for finals.

[DonDadda59]

Med school. I'm taking a reprieve from studying for finals.

Cool, good luck with finals :cheers:

[shlver]

Cool, good luck with finals :cheers:
Thanks, I should get back to studying.

[d.bball.guy]

I'm Catholic and I know the Bible is not supposed to be taken literally. Some idiots are just too stupid to understand what the Bible means no matter how many times they read it.

[Balla_Status]

I know you don't think it. But that isn't what data analysis is. Just because you've never met anyone like that doesn't mean the statistics are wrong. It is actually weird that you haven't met people like that because I live in Australia and I have.

Same. It sorta caused a rift in our relationship. We got into some argument and I said, "dude...the bible's bullshit."

Dude wouldn't talk to me until I apologized. I eventually did (kind of dude that will literally admit nothing is wrong with him..wanted to save the friendship). He believed LITERALLY every word of it. He was part of the church of christ. They believe everything literally. It was a pretty inflammatory thing to say I guess...don't really care for him anymore though.

[Timmy D for MVP]

Intelligent design? Fine. I can live with that.

But if someone tells me they believe in the out right creationism, and the age of the Earth being less than billions of years I can't understand that. There's too much evidence to the contrary.

[Jackass18]

People believe in all kinds of shit whether there's actual evidence for it or not.

[Patrick Chewing]

But Christianity is a religion created 300 years after Jesus died


Why would the Romans create this religion some 300 years later though? I have a problem with this reason due to that immense gap in history.

What I will say is that people don't run away from the truth, they embrace it.

[hookul]

The problem is that for the religious aspect to work it has to be literal. If original sin doesn't exist then there was no reason for Jesus to die on the cross. Christianity isn't a collection of philosophies that may or may not work for you. The Christians that are taking it literally are the only ones doing it right.

I do not understand why you and Rasheed are so persistent about this part. Is it because you have to generate an absurd enemy image that you can argue against with science and logic?

Despite everything mentioned in this thread - and common logic might I add - you insist that the REAL christians who got it RIGHT are the ones that take everything in the bible literally. This, despite the known fact that in every century, even at the very beginning of christianity, there have been very influential christian philosophers that clearly state that these stories are NOT to be taken literally. There are e.g. many interesting letter exchanges and written records of old greek vs. christian philosophers who deal with this issue. What you are doing is - again - taking what YOU believe constitutes a real christian and label with a broad brush because you need to argue that way so that you have it easier to label a christian "real" as a whacko nutjob. It is not that simple.

Christianity like other religions has a long and wide history with many directions, teachings etc. Just because one current direction that exists epecially in todays USA (hardcore creatonism) claims stupid things does not mean this represents christian believes. Neither historically nor logically.

This is similiar to claiming that e.g. the current ethical believe system of "the republican party" is the only real one for an american citizen ever, when in fact not only did the people and believes of the republican party changed over the decades/centuries but also that the republican party has at no point ever in time represented the believes of ALL american citizen or a REAL (whatever that means) american citizen.

Again, strictly speaking, to be a christian one should believe in the central teaching of a guy named thereafter as Jesus Christ. He himself did at no point ever indicated - at least as far as we know - that he takes the teachings of the old testament literally! Ironically, the revolutionary thing about him (if he existed in this manner) would be that he as a jew on purpose BROKE with many teachings of old jewish believe system!

[miller-time]

Again, strictly speaking, to be a christian one should believe in the central teaching of a guy named thereafter as Jesus Christ. He himself did at no point ever indicated - at least as far as we know - that he takes the teachings of the old testament literally! Ironically, the revolutionary thing about him (if he existed in this manner) would be that he as a jew on purpose BROKE with many teachings of old jewish believe system!

If Christianity was specifically about the moral teachings of Jesus then why not just lose the rest of the book? Why include everything about original sin and the concepts of heaven, hell, and salvation? What is the point of genesis if it is just allegory? If it didn't happen then it makes no sense to have Jesus die for our sins. It means that God didn't need to send his son to die but rather just have another messenger like Moses. The whole narrative and point falls apart.

[lakers_forever]

If Christianity was specifically about the moral teachings of Jesus then why not just lose the rest of the book? Why include everything about original sin and the concepts of heaven, hell, and salvation? What is the point of genesis if it is just allegory? If it didn't happen then it makes no sense to have Jesus die for our sins. It means that God didn't need to send his son to die but rather just have another messenger like Moses. The whole narrative and point falls apart.

The point is Jesus moral teachings are important not because he was a very smart man, but because he was God incarnated.

The point of Genesis is not to make a scientific explanation of universe's origin. It's a theological explanation. It makes us know that God created the world ex nihilo.

Pope John Paul II on the matter:

Cosmogony and cosmology have always aroused great interest among peoples and religions. The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise, but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred Scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer. The Sacred Book likewise wishes to tell men that the world was not created as the seat of the gods, as was taught by other cosmogonies and cosmologies, but was rather created for the service of man and the glory of God. Any other teaching about the origin and make-up of the universe is alien to the intentions of the Bible, which does not wish to teach how heaven was made but how one goes to heaven.

"What is the point of genesis if it is just allegory? If it didn't happen then it makes no sense to have Jesus die for our sins. It means that God didn't need to send his son to die but rather just have another messenger like Moses. The whole narrative and point falls apart."

What does Genesis being an allegorical description of world's origin have anything to do with Jesus not dying for us sins? Genesis is a book from the Old Testament. Jesus's life is told to us in the New Testament. I failed to see this online atheist logic that because there are some weird/obscure passages in the OT, somehow Jesus and Christianity become false.

[lakers_forever]

I do not understand why you and Rasheed are so persistent about this part. Is it because you have to generate an absurd enemy image that you can argue against with science and logic?

Despite everything mentioned in this thread - and common logic might I add - you insist that the REAL christians who got it RIGHT are the ones that take everything in the bible literally. This, despite the known fact that in every century, even at the very beginning of christianity, there have been very influential christian philosophers that clearly state that these stories are NOT to be taken literally. There are e.g. many interesting letter exchanges and written records of old greek vs. christian philosophers who deal with this issue. What you are doing is - again - taking what YOU believe constitutes a real christian and label with a broad brush because you need to argue that way so that you have it easier to label a christian "real" as a whacko nutjob. It is not that simple.

Christianity like other religions has a long and wide history with many directions, teachings etc. Just because one current direction that exists epecially in todays USA (hardcore creatonism) claims stupid things does not mean this represents christian believes. Neither historically nor logically.

This is similiar to claiming that e.g. the current ethical believe system of "the republican party" is the only real one for an american citizen ever, when in fact not only did the people and believes of the republican party changed over the decades/centuries but also that the republican party has at no point ever in time represented the believes of ALL american citizen or a REAL (whatever that means) american citizen.

Again, strictly speaking, to be a christian one should believe in the central teaching of a guy named thereafter as Jesus Christ. He himself did at no point ever indicated - at least as far as we know - that he takes the teachings of the old testament literally! Ironically, the revolutionary thing about him (if he existed in this manner) would be that he as a jew on purpose BROKE with many teachings of old jewish believe system!

Exactly. The old law told people to stone to death a woman who cheated on her husband. What the Jesus do? He told the angry crowd: "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone".

And I guess all the Christians who had an allegorial interpretation of Genesis since the beggining of Christianity, the Catholic Church and several other Christian church who also defend allegorical interpretations are not real Christians. :facepalm

Like I said catholics don't think everything of the OT apllies to Christians. And some christians (inspired by St. Paul) thinks that with the coming of Jesus, Christians should not obey the old law, because it was perfected by Christ.

[miller-time]

What does Genesis being an allegorical description of world's origin have anything to do with Jesus not dying for us sins? Genesis is a book from the Old Testament. Jesus's life is told to us in the New Testament. I failed to see this online atheist logic that because there are some weird/obscure passages in the OT, somehow Jesus and Christianity become false.

I didn't say they become false, that is a different debate. I'm saying that for the story to be internally consistent Genesis needs to be literal. The whole point is that the fall occurred and subsequently accepting Jesus takes that away from us. I honestly don't see any point in Genesis if it is only supposed to be symbolic or allegorical? I don't see why the message could not be conveyed with actual details instead of made up stuff.

Also how is Genesis obscure? I'm not talking about some bizarre passage in Leviticus. I'm talking about passages dealing with the overall story arc.

[Rasheed1]

I do not understand why you and Rasheed are so persistent about this part. Is it because you have to generate an absurd enemy image that you can argue against with science and logic?

Despite everything mentioned in this thread - and common logic might I add - you insist that the REAL christians who got it RIGHT are the ones that take everything in the bible literally. This, despite the known fact that in every century, even at the very beginning of christianity, there have been very influential christian philosophers that clearly state that these stories are NOT to be taken literally. There are e.g. many interesting letter exchanges and written records of old greek vs. christian philosophers who deal with this issue. What you are doing is - again - taking what YOU believe constitutes a real christian and label with a broad brush because you need to argue that way so that you have it easier to label a christian "real" as a whacko nutjob. It is not that simple.


For the umpteenth time I will say it again..... My point is not that christians must take everything literal...

the point is they obviously need to accept ALL the tenets of their denomination.. not only the ones they personally choose to believe in

there is a difference...

if you think there isnt a difference? then that is where we disagree..

[hookul]

For the umpteenth time I will say it again..... My point is not that christians must take everything literal...

the point is they obviously need to accept ALL the tenets of their denomination.. not only the ones they personally choose to believe in

there is a difference...

if you think there isnt a difference? then that is where we disagree..

And I responded to it that a) it is possible that oe of the many, many denominations out there might already completely match ones personally believes or b) that one might just as readily start their own "denomination" and still call oneself a christian...how do you think did all those denominations come into existence in the first place?

[Rasheed1]

And I responded to it that a) it is possible that oe of the many, many denominations out there might already completely match ones personally believes

Those people dont belong in the conversation if they accept all the tenets of their own religion







or b) that one might just as readily start their own "denomination" and still call oneself a christian...how do you think did all those denominations come into existence in the first place?

^like I already said... How many denominations there are and how they get started is totally irrelevant to my point

if you start your own denomination then you would expect the people who follow you to accept ALL of your religious philosophy, not just the parts they want to..

[hookul]

if you start your own denomination then you would expect the people who follow you to accept ALL of your religious philosophy, not just the parts they want to..

No I don't. Why should I...it would be my denomination...my rules...if the rules are very broad (a.k.a. be nice like jesus said but I do not care what else you do or believe in) then that is how it is. Obviously one would have to follow some CORE philosophies of mine but not ALL.

Edit: That is just similiar to the laws of a nation...there would be some key rules (do not kill etc.) but underneath this very broad umbrella the people of the nation are quite free to express themsleves

[Rasheed1]

but I do not care what else you do or believe in


:roll: I guess you can just have a religion where the goal is to believe whatever you want and just do whatever feel like...

but who creates a religion and is too lazy to even draw up a real set of beliefs?

Is there a real denomination that says "f*ck it, believe whatever you want"?

serious question..


If thats the case? I can create my own little 1 man religion in my heart and say Im real because in my own little religion, I am doing the right thing..

I mean people are free to do it..........but .......:oldlol:

it starts to cheapen the value of being a christian... Its starts to bring up the questions that Millertime was asking..

[-p.tiddy-]

The problem is that for the religious aspect to work it has to be literal. If original sin doesn't exist then there was no reason for Jesus to die on the cross. Christianity isn't a collection of philosophies that may or may not work for you. The Christians that are taking it literally are the only ones doing it right. When you get into wish-washy apologetics and metaphorical explanations it makes the entire premise pointless. If you want to just accept the philosophical aspects then this should be your bible.

I disagree with this entire post 100%, just had a long ass debate with Rasheed over this so no need to repeat that, but who are you to tell them "they are doing it wrong"?

IMO some of the stories in the Bible are BLATANTLY symbolic and the ONLY way they can be taken is as such. (I won't tell the ones who take it literal they are doing it wrong though) For the religious aspect to work it doesn't have to be taken literal at all, and I don't see why you would think such a thing, the important part is what is being taught, not what really did or didn't happen.

Also, the words in the Bible will never change, but the way humans interpret those words certainly can change and evolve for the better. When something is glaringly wrong then Christians shouldn't be hard headed about it IMO, they should evolve their beliefs around what is now seen as more logical. There isn't isn't wrong with them doing so IMO. They aren't "doing it wrong" if they think Adam and Eve is symbolic rather than literal.



edit: just ignore this post, I didn't catch up to see this was already being debated

[-p.tiddy-]

No I'm not serious. I'm not religious at all anymore. Safe to say, I lost faith. Just too busy with school.
When you were religious did you believe that the Earth was only 6,000 years old?

[-p.tiddy-]

Doesn't matter. You are asking a very niche group of people, we don't represent the real population.
males of every race in a very large age range, like 15-40 which is pretty much prime years.

it really isn't that niche at all IMO...pretty much just males in general

oh, males of all types that watch the NBA lol



seriously though if 30% of the population believed the Earth is 6,000 years old there would definitely be a handful of them in here...

[DonDadda59]

When you were religious did you believe that the Earth was only 6,000 years old?

He and I used to get into long debates about religion when he used to post here regularly. I definitely remember him being a young Earth creationist (world being 6-10K years old, dinosaurs died out during the flood, same flood created the grand canyon, etc). But good to see he has become wiser with age.

I think the poster BugzBunny also believes that, and of course that lunatic superboy does. There's probably more here but they are in the closet. Despite you not wanting to believe it based on your personal circles, there is a large portion of this country who believe the Earth is max 10k years old. Some of them are among the most powerful and influential people, which is scary:


Soon after Sarah Palin was elected mayor of the foothill town of Wasilla, Alaska, she startled a local music teacher by insisting in casual conversation that men and dinosaurs coexisted on an Earth created 6,000 years ago -- about 65 million years after scientists say most dinosaurs became extinct -- the teacher said.

After conducting a college band and watching Palin deliver a commencement address to a small group of home-schooled students in June 1997, Wasilla resident Philip Munger said, he asked the young mayor about her religious beliefs.

Palin told him that "dinosaurs and humans walked the Earth at the same time," Munger said. When he asked her about prehistoric fossils and tracks dating back millions of years, Palin said "she had seen pictures of human footprints inside the tracks," recalled Munger, who teaches music at the University of Alaska in Anchorage and has regularly criticized Palin in recent years on his liberal political blog, called Progressive Alaska.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/sep/28/nation/na-palinreligion28

And there was recently a big controversy over possible GOP presidential nominee Marco Rubio dodging the question about Earth's age (he since clarified). It's ridiculous that someone who wants to be the defacto leader of the free world has to answer a silly question like that.

[-p.tiddy-]

Don, I do not debate that there are many out there that believe that...certainly there are a lot of religious fanatics out there...but 30% seems way out there to me, that is 1 out of 3...I know many Christians and I don't think any of them buy into the whole 6k year thing with humans and dinos together and all that...Why weren't all these kids objecting during school when we were learning of the Jurassic period and all that? From what I witnessed, everyone was accepting of it.

Perhaps my guess of "less than 1%" is off, I'll give you that, but I still don't think it is close to 30%...

[miller-time]

seriously though if 30% of the population believed the Earth is 6,000 years old there would definitely be a handful of them in here...

this isn't true. the number could be 90% and it doesn't mean there would have to definitely be some of them here.

or some of them could be here and are simply not talking about it.

[-p.tiddy-]

this isn't true. the number could be 90% and it doesn't mean there would have to definitely be some of them here.

or some of them could be here and are simply not talking about it.

it would mean there is an astoundingly good chance there is...nearly impossible there wouldn't be unless somehow being an NBA fan correlated with reading the Bible a certain way but it doesn't at all...

there are more insidehoops members than there are people that participated in that poll lol

[miller-time]

yes you def can...

the only story I think that is a must to believe in literally is that Jesus is the son of God, died on the cross for your sins, etc

most of the others, Noah's Ark, Adam and Eve, etc, can be taken as symbolic...

Well they have to be taken as symbolic because they are logically absurd. But as I said before, the narrative doesn't make sense if the fall isn't a literal part of the bible. Normally I don't bother debating scripture because you can't really pin anything down. It is essentially left up to interpretation so once I make a definitive statement a Christian can just say I am interpreting it wrongly.

Additionally I think this highlights to stupidity of God if this is how he decided to reveal his message - through a highly subjective and interpretive literary style. The very fact that Christianity has different denominations reveals the problem with the allegorical approach and overall style. Even the most concise and simple allegory can easily be misunderstood.

Edit - I thought this was your last post, but I was looking at page one lol.

[-p.tiddy-]

Well they have to be taken as symbolic because they are logically absurd. But as I said before, the narrative doesn't make sense if the fall isn't a literal part of the bible. Normally I don't bother debating scripture because you can't really pin anything down. It is essentially left up to interpretation so once I make a definitive statement a Christian can just say I am interpreting it wrongly.

Additionally I think this highlights to stupidity of God if this is how he decided to reveal his message - through a highly subjective and interpretive literary style. The very fact that Christianity has different denominations reveals the problem with the allegorical approach and overall style. Even the most concise and simple allegory can easily be misunderstood.

Edit - I thought this was your last post, but I was looking at page one lol.
here:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8015976&postcount=20

[hookul]

Well they have to be taken as symbolic because they are logically absurd. But as I said before, the narrative doesn't make sense if the fall isn't a literal part of the bible. Normally I don't bother debating scripture because you can't really pin anything down. It is essentially left up to interpretation so once I make a definitive statement a Christian can just say I am interpreting it wrongly.

Additionally I think this highlights to stupidity of God if this is how he decided to reveal his message - through a highly subjective and interpretive literary style. The very fact that Christianity has different denominations reveals the problem with the allegorical approach and overall style. Even the most concise and simple allegory can easily be misunderstood.

Edit - I thought this was your last post, but I was looking at page one lol.

Let me point out that I am not christian, that I certainly do not believe that a person named Jesus was the son of god. So I am not argueing with you because I disagree with you because we have basic fundamental believe differences. I just think that you take a too narrow view on these things and see this issue in mostly black-and-white when there are many shades of grey. The bolded sentence above symbolizes this in my opinion.

To put it simply: Assuming that a powerful being such as god exists, a being which I assume by your theoretical interpretation would then be more knowledgeable and "wiser" than any human, who would you be to judge that his actions are stupid? Quite frankly we as humans have poblems to proclaim the action of other humans as stupid or wise as we all come from different experiences, motivations etc...and you have the "arrogance" to assume that god has to think like you (arrogance for a lack of a better word, not meant as an insult)? Don't you see that this logically does not work?
Of the top of my head, I could assume that this god does not give a big shit about people worshipping him according to a sricpture made by other people but that the most important thing to him would be the free-will of humans. If so, if free will is the most important principle to him and god basically put humans on earth as an experiment for himself, than he might be just fine with humans doing "their own thing and interpretations". That would not make him stupid.
Moreover, if we assume that the "free will" of humans and their "free development" without major interference by him is very important to god, then I would claim that he actually did quite a good job in explaining the beginning of things in words that the humans at their development level back then would allow to understand.

What I mean is, assume you know come in contact with a native tribe in the amazone jungle and you want to explain how everything came into existing according to newest scientific knowledge about big bang, etc....wouldn't you also talk about the big bang in terms such as "there was nothing at first, not even time...then there was a huge bang, a huge light and in the immediate time afterwards was chaos...then small things began to form and from then larger land was generated...". To be honest, when talking to such a hypothetical tribe, I know I would try to explain it this way to them at first. And this sounds quite similiar to genesis in a way.

And then you let this tribe be...and at first they just communicate these stories verbally until they develop writing...and by then these stories changed a little bit through times and it begins to be written down. And then other tribes with other worldviews and languages begin to get in contact with them...and they do not have words for some of the things the other tribes want to say...so they use or invent some new words...and the original message that you a few centuries ago told the original tribe becomes even more modified.etc.etc. To me, this could be a logical development starting from how God wanted to explain the universe to humans and how everything including religion developed from it. This would not make god stupid, this would just mean that he values free will and development of his/her/its creation over a dictatorship. And again, starting from the assumption that this god being is wiser, more knowledgable etc, than any human...what logical reason would you then have to question god's values?

[miller-time]

Let me point out that I am not christian, that I certainly do not believe that a person named Jesus was the son of god. So I am not argueing with you because I disagree with you because we have basic fundamental believe differences. I just think that you take a too narrow view on these things and see this issue in mostly black-and-white when there are many shades of grey. The bolded sentence above symbolizes this in my opinion.

i don't take such a narrow view in real life. i just find the generic conversations from apologetic christianity kind of boring and useless. if god existed then he can do what he wants and his methods are probably sound. but that is presuppositionalist.


To put it simply: Assuming that a powerful being such as god exists, a being which I assume by your theoretical interpretation would then be more knowledgeable and "wiser" than any human, who would you be to judge that his actions are stupid? Quite frankly we as humans have poblems to proclaim the action of other humans as stupid or wise as we all come from different experiences, motivations etc...and you have the "arrogance" to assume that god has to think like you (arrogance for a lack of a better word, not meant as an insult)? Don't you see that this logically does not work?
Of the top of my head, I could assume that this god does not give a big shit about people worshipping him according to a sricpture made by other people but that the most important thing to him would be the free-will of humans. If so, if free will is the most important principle to him and god basically put humans on earth as an experiment for himself, than he might be just fine with humans doing "their own thing and interpretations". That would not make him stupid.
Moreover, if we assume that the "free will" of humans and their "free development" without major interference by him is very important to god, then I would claim that he actually did quite a good job in explaining the beginning of things in words that the humans at their development level back then would allow to understand.

i don't disagree with that. but i'm not talking about god's existence, i'm talking about the literal nature of genesis. literally it is wrong. allegorically it is too subjective. if this actually is god's best effort then i can only conclude that i am failing to see the big picture.


What I mean is, assume you know come in contact with a native tribe in the amazone jungle and you want to explain how everything came into existing according to newest scientific knowledge about big bang, etc....wouldn't you also talk about the big bang in terms such as "there was nothing at first, not even time...then there was a huge bang, a huge light and in the immediate time afterwards was chaos...then small things began to form and from then larger land was generated...". To be honest, when talking to such a hypothetical tribe, I know I would try to explain it this way to them at first. And this sounds quite similiar to genesis in a way.

i wouldn't lie to them either. if i am talking to a 5 year old about how the universe began or the earth form i don't need to tell him about the specifics of red shifting or accretion disks, i'd just need to state who, what, when, where, and make it accurate. they can figure the rest out on their own - but at least what they discover won't be inaccurate.


And then you let this tribe be...and at first they just communicate these stories verbally until they develop writing...and by then these stories changed a little bit through times and it begins to be written down. And then other tribes with other worldviews and languages begin to get in contact with them...and they do not have words for some of the things the other tribes want to say...so they use or invent some new words...and the original message that you a few centuries ago told the original tribe becomes even more modified.etc.etc. To me, this could be a logical development starting from how God wanted to explain the universe to humans and how everything including religion developed from it. This would not make god stupid, this would just mean that he values free will and development of his/her/its creation over a dictatorship. And again, starting from the assumption that this god being is wiser, more knowledgable etc, than any human...what logical reason would you then have to question god's values?

at the expensive of millions of lives throughout the ages because groups of people wanted to add, reinterpret, or remove parts of the original message? i'm not questioning god's values, i am indirectly questioning peoples belief that this book is really the best the guy could do.

sorry if my answers aren't very good (or even make sense) i am tired and in the middle of cooking dinner.

[-p.tiddy-]

if this actually is god's best effort then i can only conclude that i am failing to see the big picture.

the big picture is very simple, do onto others as you would yourself, understand you need to be forgiven for your sins, BE A GOOD PERSON, etc

it's the same "big picture" as every other major religion on the planet


all the other stuff is details for the most part and is debated heavily by Christian scholars...again it is a big mix of different books written by different people, and rewritten by people, etc...it isn't read the same way as normal story book.

[ROCSteady]

bump.

I couldn't sleep becuz I was pondering on all those 'deep, profound' questions so I went to this bookmark of mine to make some factual sense of existence while still wanting to adhere to a connection of benevolent faith and understanding of the possible divine and supernatural roots of it all.

I hope people have taken some time to look through this thread at some point instead of the minute, monotonous wanderings of an era of negativity, narcissism and overall ignorance or disregard to things that have plagued the earliest thinker.

[Take Your Lumps]

the big picture is very simple:
do onto others as you would yourself
understand you need to be forgiven for your sins
BE A GOOD PERSON

♫ One of these is not like the other ♫

[boozehound]

I think that the Christians (it's really Christians this speaks of) that believe or even give thought to this kind of stuff are a VERY small minority of the all Christians...less than 1% (my guess)

It's sad though because the ones that do believe these things give a bad name to the rest of them who are able to come to conclusions with logic...There are plenty of Christian scientists out there...
go look at the polls. Nearly half of people in the US dont accept the law of evolution. They may not be young earth creationists, but they are creationists. and they are pushing to incorporate their religious agenda into scientific textbooks. You should know this, you live in texas. Look up your state board of eduction or even your governor's stance on this.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx

Creationists are a much larger % of our society than you (and niko and rezznor) realize. There are tons of them.
http://ncse.com/rncse/24/5/creationists

[-p.tiddy-]

go look at the polls. Nearly half of people in the US dont accept the law of evolution. They may not be young earth creationists, but they are creationists. and they are pushing to incorporate their religious agenda into scientific textbooks. You should know this, you live in texas. Look up your state board of eduction or even your governor's stance on this.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx

Creationists are a much larger % of our society than you (and niko and rezznor) realize. There are tons of them.
http://ncse.com/rncse/24/5/creationists
well that is sad if true

I can say with 100% honesty though that growing up in Dallas and having gone to school here at every level never once was "creationism" (is that even a word?) pushed on me...ever. The theory of Evolution was brought up numerous times in classrooms though.

I know most of the colleges here are prestigious as well...and would never throw that at people...

I'm sure this nonsense can be found in rural parts of Texas but I myself have never witnessed it and I have lived here my whole life...

You grew up in Houston right? Both Dallas and Houston are very big cities...were you taught Adam and Eve in fcking school???

[Miss Bella]

devout christians take the Bible seriously.... They believe the stories in the Bible are literal.


They believe Jesus Really dies on a cross and resurrected 3 days later...

In catholic church, when you receive Communion, they believe you are REALLY drinking the the blood of Christ and eating his flesh when you receive the wafer.

In current American society you have alot of people who claim to be christians (mostly because they want to go to heaven) but they dont believe the stories in the Bible...

The hardcore fundamentalists & hardcore catholics believe that stuff word for word.. You cant really be christian if you dont believe the stories...

The whole religion is based on FAITH....

you cant cherry pick what believe and what you dont believe

I have done communion and I am pretty sure all of the Christians I done it with knew that wine only symbolizes the blood of Christ.

I do not believe a lot of Americans longer are Christians, more cultural Christians. Which is a great thing. Christian cultures are the best.

[OldSkoolball#52]

Good guess, but no.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/a-_zxlsuk0mtvegl8vxiga.gif

More Demographic Breakdown (http://www.gallup.com/poll/21814/evolution-creationism-intelligent-design.aspx)


This is why the U.S. is so low in math/science rankings worldwide and the problem will only get worse unless people stand up against willful ignorance :facepalm


:ohwell:


Im sure it has nothing to do with the dissolution of the family structure, unsupervised and minimally encouraged children, lack of incentive due to economic stability and so forth.


Im sure the kids who never do homework, never have a book put in their hands at a young age, have no guidance or support... Im sure those are the ones who go to church with their family on Sunday and thats why they cant learn to multiply fractions.



Lets blame big easy targets like "the church" so we dont have to be big mean bullies and point the finger at billy bob or leshawn who skipped town on their child and baby mama to go drink and smoke meth and make more kids somewhere else. Individuals can never do anything wrong, right? Its just one person, how harmful can they be?? Its these big stupid establishments like the church and the media and the corporations and the government, arrrgghh! Its never people.

[Rasheed1]

I have done communion and I am pretty sure all of the Christians I done it with knew that wine only symbolizes the blood of Christ.

Are you catholic? Catholics believe it is literally the body and blood of christ they are ingesting.. Catholics believe God is truly present in the tabernacle that sits up behind the alter...I was a catholic and this was specified to me when I asked.. Baptists and some other denominations who perform communion, do it symbolically.. but Catholics take it literally.

[OldSkoolball#52]

Are you catholic? Catholics believe it is literally the body and blood of christ they are ingesting.. Catholics believe God is truly present in the tabernacle that sits up behind the alter. I was a catholic and this was specified to me when I asked.. ..


Black people believe going to prison makes you respectable. Black people believe they deserve reparations. Black people believe fighting is how to solve disputes and crime is how you earn a living.


I talked to a black guy and he explained this to me.

[Rasheed1]

Black people believe going to prison makes you respectable. Black people believe they deserve reparations. Black people believe fighting is how to solve disputes and crime is how you earn a living.


I talked to a black guy and he explained this to me.


:lol you're dumb and irrelevant as always.. troll on

[OldSkoolball#52]

:lol you're dumb and irrelevant as always.. troll on


Both of our posts were trolling bro. Except mine was on purpose.

[Rasheed1]

Both of our posts were trolling bro. Except mine was on purpose.


I wasn't trollin.. My post is true.. Yours is another sad attempt at getting attention

[OldSkoolball#52]

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]I wasn't trollin.. My post is true.. Yours is another sad attempt at getting attention

[Rasheed1]

Whats different about your blanket statement to mine?

The difference between my statement and your trolling is that I went to catholic school and I was taught by priests and nuns that the sacraments and their belief in God is literal

[OldSkoolball#52]

[QUOTE=Rasheed1]The difference between my statement and your trolling is that I went to catholic school and [B]I was taught by priests and nuns that the sacraments and their belief in God is literal

[Rasheed1]

You were not taught this by every catholic in America and you know full well that not everyone in a religion of millions of people interprets things the same way.


You are trolling. Because youre black. Trust me, I grew up in an area with black people. They were all loud, ghetto, obnoxious trolls. Thats how I know you are too.

you're a dumb ass

[DukeDelonte13]

Are you catholic? Catholics believe it is literally the body and blood of christ they are ingesting.. Catholics believe God is truly present in the tabernacle that sits up behind the alter...I was a catholic and this was specified to me when I asked.. Baptists and some other denominations who perform communion, do it symbolically.. but Catholics take it literally.


there are some things that the catechism says and there are some things that catholic people actually believe.

Catholics don't take the bible literally. Many protestant denominations do.

[Rasheed1]

there are some things that the catechism says and there are some things that catholic people actually believe.

Catholics don't take the bible literally. Many protestant denominations do.

I understand that