Freeze and Dabo negative religious recruit UT

#702
#702
2 Timothy 4:3 - For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#703
#703
Big Orange Jeff said:
This thread reminds me of the creation debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham. The final question was something like, "Now that both of you have stated your cases, what could change your minds?"

HAM: Nothing.

NYE: Evidence.

It's obvious that you aren't going to change each other's minds, because the religious have their faith and the non-religious are looking for evidence.
Click to expand...

I'd just like to say, it was never my intention to change anyone's religious beliefs necessarily. Just to provide a different perspective, as I personally love finding new perspectives on life. I have found nothing in life more satisfying than those rare aha! moments, the epiphany of something that has long lingered in front of my face, yet I was blind to see it.

For the record, IMO, there is nothing wrong with christianity as a system of belief, so long as it is structured for personal growth. There are many integral christians out there that have moved beyond the traditional mythical perspective of holding firm to the literal translations. They tend to see less importance in the actual people, places, and events of the stories of the bible, and focus more on the higher concepts, which I agree with. When one does this, the Bible seems to tell the story of the evolution of human consciousness.

But the old fundamentalist church-driven doctrine serves only to stunt personal growth IMO, by building psychological barriers to the natural processes of development. It's past time to ditch this outdated egocentric system of control and exclusivism, used by so many for personal gain, and work toward the advancement of humanity as a global collective.

May the force be with you. J/K :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#704
#704
Btw, there's an excellent movie out on this subject called I Origins.

If you haven't seen it, do yourself a favor. You won't regret it. :hi:
 
#705
#705
JBondVol said:
I'd just like to say, it was never my intention to change anyone's religious beliefs necessarily. Just to provide a different perspective, as I personally love finding new perspectives on life. I have found nothing in life more satisfying than those rare aha! moments, the epiphany of something that has long lingered in front of my face, yet I was blind to see it.

For the record, IMO, there is nothing wrong with christianity as a system of belief, so long as it is structured for personal growth. There are many integral christians out there that have moved beyond the traditional mythical perspective of holding firm to the literal translations. They tend to see less importance in the actual people, places, and events of the stories of the bible, and focus more on the higher concepts, which I agree with. When one does this, the Bible seems to tell the story of the evolution of human consciousness.

But the old fundamentalist church-driven doctrine serves only to stunt personal growth IMO, by building psychological barriers to the natural processes of development. It's past time to ditch this outdated egocentric system of control and exclusivism, used by so many for personal gain, and work toward the advancement of humanity as a global collective.

May the force be with you. J/K :p
Click to expand...

I appreciate your approval/disapproval of how I should view/practice Christianity. I think it's OK too for one to believe they came from apes as long as they realize it's all fantasy and view it as such as there is zero links between the monkeys and man.

So great that us Christians have your guidelines to proper Christianity.

:hi:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#707
#707
InVOLuntary said:
I appreciate your approval/disapproval of how I should view/practice Christianity. I think it's OK too for one to believe they came from apes as long as they realize it's all fantasy and view it as such as there is zero links between the monkeys and man.

So great that us Christians have your guidelines to proper Christianity.

:hi:
Click to expand...

Sulky.

Who's talkin bout apes? Maybe it's further back in the thread...?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#708
#708
Big Sun said:
Sulky.

Who's talkin bout apes? Maybe it's further back in the thread...?
Click to expand...

Not sulky at all. I find it personally insulting when one calls the Bible mythology and tell s Christians it's OK to be a Christian as long as you believe the Bible to be a fairy tell. Evolution was mentioned extensively earlier.

That's why it's impossible to have a discussion like this because most atheist believe anybody that believes in the Bible is gullible and less intelligent. His post was demeaning and condescending and disrespectful. If he were in Iran or another Muslim state he would have his head chopped off for similar statements about Muhammad. I am not Muslim but out of respect I would never speak about their religion in a disrespectful way. That would apply to Budist, Jews,or whatever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#709
#709
volfan_89 said:
I'm sure that article is totally unbiased.




Hopefully no bluefont was needed.
Click to expand...
as unbiased as the school of thought that never mentions it, ignorance of a fact is no excuse if the facts are true. the messenger does not affect the fact that assemblage of 20 amino acids out of nothing, and the subsequent assemblage of only left hand acids into a useful protein that must be collected from only the right hand folders is way beyond possible. you run into a combinatorial problem of mathematics. there haven't been that many seconds since the beginning of the universe

the 2nd most cited chemist in the world agrees (James M. Tour)

finally expecting to find open discussion in scientific literature is difficult considering how any dissent sponsors intimidation by the atheist scientific community. would you expect to find it from an unbiased source? i know you cant be claiming that the status quo is unbiased, because they most certainly are not

i dont just read things i agree with, and i dont expect unbiased opinions in a room full of people who all hold the same view due to fear
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#710
#710
StoVol said:
as unbiased as the school of thought that never mentions it, ignorance of a fact is no excuse if the facts are true. the messenger does not affect the fact that assemblage of 20 amino acids out of nothing, and the subsequent assemblage of only left hand acids into a useful protein that must be collected from only the right hand folders is way beyond possible. you run into a combinatorial problem of mathematics. there haven't been that many seconds since the beginning of the universe

the 2nd most cited chemist in the world agrees (James M. Tour)

finally expecting to find open discussion in scientific literature is difficult considering how any dissent sponsors intimidation by the atheist scientific community. would you expect to find it from an unbiased source? i know you cant be claiming that the status quo is unbiased, because they most certainly are not

i dont just read things i agree with, and i dont expect unbiased opinions in a room full of people who all hold the same view due to fear
Click to expand...


I will not go any further in this discussion beyond one point of contention.
I have seen an usually high number of pro creationism - scientifically based questions. "Science has no answer for how this particle/chemical/"etc.. was able to come together/perform and so on.

Then immediately follow with a proclamation of or from a god completely unexplained.
I have zero issues with any faith or religion as long as I lose no one close due to such things.
I do wish that when someone chooses to use 'science' to debunk science, they at least include their wisdom of how god came to be - What chemistry constitutes his being and where they came from.

Faith is the common answer and I am perfectly ok with such. However, if you don't have a scientific explanation with complementary data for his origin, but condemn science for the same, seems somewhat, well "hypocritical".


And now I shall bow out gracefully :hi:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#711
#711
InVOLuntary said:
Not sulky at all. I find it personally insulting when one calls the Bible mythology and tell s Christians it's OK to be a Christian as long as you believe the Bible to be a fairy tell. Evolution was mentioned extensively earlier.

That's why it's impossible to have a discussion like this because most atheist believe anybody that believes in the Bible is gullible and less intelligent. His post was demeaning and condescending and disrespectful. If he were in Iran or another Muslim state he would have his head chopped off for similar statements about Muhammad. I am not Muslim but out of respect I would never speak about their religion in a disrespectful way. That would apply to Budist, Jews,or whatever.
Click to expand...

I sincerely apologize. I was not trying to be disrespectful, but can see now how it went a little too far. I do not look down on Christians at all, most of my family and friends are Christian and I love and respect them all. Forgive my poor choice of words.

For the record, I am not atheist, and don't necessarily believe we evolved from apes.
 
#712
#712
JBondVol said:
I sincerely apologize. I was not trying to be disrespectful, but can see now how it went a little too far. I do not look down on Christians at all, most of my family and friends are Christian and I love and respect them all. Forgive my poor choice of words.

For the record, I am not atheist, and don't necessarily believe we evolved from apes.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your apology, I think it was sincere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#713
#713
chargervol said:
I will not go any further in this discussion beyond one point of contention.
I have seen an usually high number of pro creationism - scientifically based questions. "Science has no answer for how this particle/chemical/"etc.. was able to come together/perform and so on.

Then immediately follow with a proclamation of or from a god completely unexplained.
I have zero issues with any faith or religion as long as I lose no one close due to such things.
I do wish that when someone chooses to use 'science' to debunk science, they at least include their wisdom of how god came to be - What chemistry constitutes his being and where they came from.

Faith is the common answer and I am perfectly ok with such. However, if you don't have a scientific explanation with complementary data for his origin, but condemn science for the same, seems somewhat, well "hypocritical".


And now I shall bow out gracefully :hi:
Click to expand...
straw man argument


who has condemned science here?
I have no responsibility to you nor anyone else to justify one side of a theory or the other. The origin of life could be the result of random and blind chance or it might be the result of a guiding agent.

Using science to "debunk" prior science is the scientific method. we thought newton was right for 200 years but he was proven wrong. the laws of motion dont induce motion, but they can be derived from equations of relativity. so yes newtons equations work when spacetime is not distorted due to gravity or speed, so a better theory replaced and enveloped an older theory

if extreme cases of gravity cause newtons laws to break down whos to say that microevolution is not like the laws of motion? and that macroevolution, where the theory breaks down might later be replaced by a more complete theory

describing chirality, irreducible complexity, and the origin of information as being caused only by a rational agent, i.e. a guided process is a fact here and now. The only appearance of such that humans know of due to causes now in operation

your slow attempt at an attack with:

at least include their wisdom
What chemistry constitutes
if you don't have a scientific explanation
condemn science for the same
well "hypocritical"

is intellectually weak.
The point is that we dont know, but one side or the other can get very hostile just discussing the matter. I would advise you to examine what makes you feel that way before demanding evidence from me. I have given countless evidence in this thread trying to sponsor discussion of the subject attempting to infer to the best explanation due to causes now in operation.

if my worldview and attempt at understanding makes you uncomfortable then put me on ignore, but the five year old unjustified attempt to color me as a hypocrite is just a mirror my brother, one you need to gaze upon
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#714
#714
StoVol said:
straw man argument


who has condemned science here?
I have no responsibility to you nor anyone else to justify one side of a theory or the other. The origin of life could be the result of random and blind chance or it might be the result of a guiding agent.

Using science to "debunk" prior science is the scientific method. we thought newton was right for 200 years but he was proven wrong. the laws of motion dont induce motion, but they can be derived from equations of relativity. so yes newtons equations work when spacetime is not distorted due to gravity or speed, so a better theory replaced and enveloped an older theory

if extreme cases of gravity cause newtons laws to break down whos to say that microevolution is not like the laws of motion? and that macroevolution, where the theory breaks down might later be replaced by a more complete theory

describing chirality, irreducible complexity, and the origin of information as being caused only by a rational agent, i.e. a guided process is a fact here and now. The only appearance of such that humans know of due to causes now in operation

your slow attempt at an attack with:

at least include their wisdom
What chemistry constitutes
if you don't have a scientific explanation
condemn science for the same
well "hypocritical"

is intellectually weak.
The point is that we dont know, but one side or the other can get very hostile just discussing the matter. I would advise you to examine what makes you feel that way before demanding evidence from me. I have given countless evidence in this thread trying to sponsor discussion of the subject attempting to infer to the best explanation due to causes now in operation.

if my worldview and attempt at understanding makes you uncomfortable then put me on ignore, but the five year old unjustified attempt to color me as a hypocrite is just a mirror my brother, one you need to gaze upon
Click to expand...

Lol, no.
No insults intended or otherwise, I was actually referencing the author of the article. (Which I believe flips the straw man narrative)

The closest I will come to insulting a difference of opinion in this matter, the hostility in your answer has been a common denominator in my experience with the discussing the subject.

Personally, I just hope either side is able to provide true origin data at some point.
Science has some catching up to do. Less time to practice freely. "Free will" doesn't progress as fast when imprisoned for acting accordingly. Galileo would imply that your will v your freedom are not the same.
 
#715
#715
chargervol said:
Lol, no.
No insults intended or otherwise, I was actually referencing the author of the article. (Which I believe flips the straw man narrative)

The closest I will come to insulting a difference of opinion in this matter, the hostility in your answer has been a common denominator in my experience with the discussing the subject.

Personally, I just hope either side is able to provide true origin data at some point.
Science has some catching up to do. Less time to practice freely. "Free will" doesn't progress as fast when imprisoned for acting accordingly. Galileo would imply that your will v your freedom are not the same.
Click to expand...
my apologies then sir... for real
 
#719
#719
IndianaVolunteer said:
Does anybody know where I can find the Hugh Freeze/Drew Richmond/Khalil McKenzie gif?

TIA
Click to expand...

y2x6T0s.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top