Christian version of Darwin's Origin of Species

Hugh Freaking Dillon

Gern Blansten wrote:

pandora wrote:

Johnny Sitar
Well it appears we agree on most everything but because of a very personal life changing event I can tell you without one shred of doubt there is a God and an afterlife- some people will not except that but it is the only explanation for what I experienced. I am very comfortable in my "faith" even though you say it shouldn't be called that if it is knowledge. That again seems like its being way over thought instead of felt. Which seems to be a running theme

no man...to suggest that you are worthy of this insight from god and 99.999% of the rest of the world isn't doesn't work

when the faithful are backed into a corner they always pull out the "there is no explanation for what I experienced" junk

yes there is...it's called "your imagination"

forgive me if I already told this story, but this is part of my point; an old friend of mine from elementary school once told me to go up to his mom and ask her "when did god get there?". Her response: "He's always been there". I said "well, to get somewhere you have to arrive or be created at some point". "no honey, he's always been there". See the problem in that? There's no logical reasoning, just blind faith.

Now the vatican has started the search for extraterrestrial life. And they believe, that if there is ET out there, that he is also a product of Man's god. And they will be embraced as his children as well. How freaking arrogant can this religion get??

Gern Blansten

Johnny Sitar wrote:

Gern Blansten wrote:

pandora wrote:

Johnny Sitar
Well it appears we agree on most everything but because of a very personal life changing event I can tell you without one shred of doubt there is a God and an afterlife- some people will not except that but it is the only explanation for what I experienced. I am very comfortable in my "faith" even though you say it shouldn't be called that if it is knowledge. That again seems like its being way over thought instead of felt. Which seems to be a running theme

no man...to suggest that you are worthy of this insight from god and 99.999% of the rest of the world isn't doesn't work

when the faithful are backed into a corner they always pull out the "there is no explanation for what I experienced" junk

yes there is...it's called "your imagination"

forgive me if I already told this story, but this is part of my point; an old friend of mine from elementary school once told me to go up to his mom and ask her "when did god get there?". Her response: "He's always been there". I said "well, to get somewhere you have to arrive or be created at some point". "no honey, he's always been there". See the problem in that? There's no logical reasoning, just blind faith.

Now the vatican has started the search for extraterrestrial life. And they believe, that if there is ET out there, that he is also a product of Man's god. And they will be embraced as his children as well. How freaking arrogant can this religion get??

yeah it's insane

I remember talking to a buddy of mine several years ago and I mentioned that I had basically rejected religion...his response was "I think you just need to believe and not question it"

uh....what?

Then they always pull out the old "well if you do believe and it's true you are saved, if it isn't true than you aren't out anything....but if you don't believe and it's true, well then you'll have your flesh ripped from your bones for eternity".....yeah that makes a fuck of a lot of sense

pandora

Johnny Sitar wrote:

pandora wrote:

Johnny Sitar
Well it appears we agree on most everything but because of a very personal life changing event I can tell you without one shred of doubt there is a God and an afterlife- some people will not except that but it is the only explanation for what I experienced. I am very comfortable in my "faith" even though you say it shouldn't be called that if it is knowledge. That again seems like its being way over thought instead of felt. Which seems to be a running theme

according to Meyer's Briggs, I am too a feeler (that sounds sick, but that's what they call it). We just disagree on what it is we actually think about.

Without specifics, I will have to respectfully reject your claim of knowing there is a god without doubt. There will be doubt until we are worm food.

oh I'm going in a drawer no worms for me

Hugh Freaking Dillon

pandora wrote:

Johnny Sitar wrote:

pandora wrote:

Johnny Sitar
Well it appears we agree on most everything but because of a very personal life changing event I can tell you without one shred of doubt there is a God and an afterlife- some people will not except that but it is the only explanation for what I experienced. I am very comfortable in my "faith" even though you say it shouldn't be called that if it is knowledge. That again seems like its being way over thought instead of felt. Which seems to be a running theme

according to Meyer's Briggs, I am too a feeler (that sounds sick, but that's what they call it). We just disagree on what it is we actually think about.

Without specifics, I will have to respectfully reject your claim of knowing there is a god without doubt. There will be doubt until we are worm food.

oh I'm going in a drawer no worms for me

me too. just an expression.

pandora

really- never "met" another person planning on going in a drawer

soulsinging

Gern Blansten wrote:

Then they always pull out the old "well if you do believe and it's true you are saved, if it isn't true than you aren't out anything....but if you don't believe and it's true, well then you'll have your flesh ripped from your bones for eternity".....yeah that makes a fuck of a lot of sense

such nonsense. i'm out plenty... all those acts of wanton hedonism i have to skip in order to get saved... no more banging hot drunk girls, no more drinking to excess during college football games... that's not a life worth living if you ask me!

my philosophy has been the opposite. if i don't believe and show up at the pearly gates and god wants me in hell for not worshiping him enough, that's a god i'm not interested in spending eternity with anyway. you all can have fun dealing with the ego and vanity of this petty god.

Gern Blansten

soulsinging wrote:

Gern Blansten wrote:

Then they always pull out the old "well if you do believe and it's true you are saved, if it isn't true than you aren't out anything....but if you don't believe and it's true, well then you'll have your flesh ripped from your bones for eternity".....yeah that makes a fuck of a lot of sense

such nonsense. i'm out plenty... all those acts of wanton hedonism i have to skip in order to get saved... no more banging hot drunk girls, no more drinking to excess during college football games... that's not a life worth living if you ask me!

my philosophy has been the opposite. if i don't believe and show up at the pearly gates and god wants me in hell for not worshiping him enough, that's a god i'm not interested in spending eternity with anyway. you all can have fun dealing with the ego and vanity of this petty god.

exactly my belief....If he turns me down then fuck him because I've been a lot more moral than the majority of christians I know

catefrances

hes not gonna turn you away. how can he??? he doesnt exist. there is no heaven. there is no hell. there is this life were living. so live it well... in whatever way you think that means.

Random_Wookie

Gern Blansten wrote:

exactly my belief....If he turns me down then fuck him because I've been a lot more moral than the majority of christians I know

I would like to think I am in the same boat as I will always try to do the right thing, and if by some chance their was a heaven/hell I think most christians would end up in hell any way as they can not even follow their on religous doctrine correctly anyway.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

pandora wrote:

really- never "met" another person planning on going in a drawer

I was assuming you meant getting cremated.

he still stands

catefrances wrote:

he still stands wrote:

personally, i think it is pathetic that you call her beliefs pathetic. Why are your beliefs in non-theism any more rationale than a person's theist beliefs?

You're right that nobody knows what happens. Of course. But is seems that you claim to know what happens (nothing). Seems awfully hypocritical to me is all.

im gonna assume you meant to say rational here... and ask you if you know what rational actually means.

theism isnt based on logic or reason... its based on faith. therefore a non theist has come about their 'beliefs' in a more rational way than a thiest who requires no proof in anything yet who seeks it in the most irrational manner and in the absence of any real substantiated evidence.

sheesh I knew I should have edited that. Yes I know what rational means. So sorry for the malapropism.

Science is the faith of the non-theist. Most of science from the 19th century is now extinct or has been at least changed. And the science that does remain intact breaks down at the "grand" level (level of the universe) and the atomic level. It only works in our little version of space and time we call "reality."

Have you ever heard of Bell's Theorem? It basically says that all scientific theories on the localized level are false, and it hasn't been disproven.

So the "faith of science" has inherent flaws and changes over time - just like religion. It is almost as irrational to believe that science can explain everything as it is to believe that religion and god(s) can explain everything.

I think the only honest answer is to say "I don't know" and to condemn or try to prove false anyone else's beliefs is futile.

pandora

Johnny Sitar wrote:

pandora wrote:

really- never "met" another person planning on going in a drawer

I was assuming you meant getting cremated.

well I will probably get cremated but yes the drawers are for those who don't usually. We have ours cause my husbands Dad passed suddenly and well we decided to be next to Cap and aleady bought ours. Theres no place else I'd rather be. He was a most wonderful man. Really miss him.

he still stands

soulsinging wrote:

he still stands wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

then you are no more a christian than some college kid with a few che guevera posters was part of the revolution. you're just using the bible as a glorified self help book, like AA's big book or the 7 habits of highly effective people.

you finding peace doesnt bother me. i find it kinda pathetic that you claim to know your future, becos nobody knows what happens when we die. you believe or have faith that the book you picked to be your self help guide got it right, that's the extent of your knowledge. but this is what bothers me... the dumbing down of humanity and our unwillingness to let go of outdated superstitions becos we're too weak and scared to face death on real terms. we're still like children aafraid of the boogie man. in the end, it's not that big a deal though, so long as you keep your quaint myths to yourself.

personally, i think it is pathetic that you call her beliefs pathetic. Why are your beliefs in non-theism any more rationale than a person's theist beliefs?

You're right that nobody knows what happens. Of course. But is seems that you claim to know what happens (nothing). Seems awfully hypocritical to me is all.

i don't recall claiming to know what happens when we die. i have no clue. i was referring to the fact that we can't handle the thought of not being around our loved ones, so we invent stories where we all get together for one big happy reunion somehow. perhaps pathetic was too strong a word, but the fact is that the bible and all other sacred texts/self help books are nothing more than collections of cultural mythology. we laugh at what native americans believed, we laugh at what the romans believed, then we tell people we know OUR myths are fact! it's intellectually laughable to convince yourself that somehow the current vogue mythology is any different or more substantive than the hundreds that have gone before.

Okay I apologize for assuming you were proposing you knew what happens. I was just going off of your posts that are anti-religion and anti-faith to assume that meant you were an atheist. So you're agnostic then?

quoting myself:

Again, most of science from the 19th century is now extinct or has been at least changed. And the science that does remain intact breaks down at the "grand" level (level of the universe) and the atomic level. It only works in our little version of space and time we call "reality." Bell's Theorem says that all scientific theories on the localized level are false, and it hasn't been disproven. So the "faith of science" has inherent flaws and changes over time - just like religion.

soulsinging

he still stands wrote:

So the "faith of science" has inherent flaws and changes over time - just like religion.

your argument fails right here, becos this is exactly what religion not does. science is not faith. faith is what allows religion to say "everything we thought was true then, we have faith is true now, and we will not consider any new developments." thus, gay marriage bans and the like. science is not faith, becos when new information replaces the old, the old is discarded. there is no "faith" that what is known now is conclusive, only that it is the best explanation we have so far.

he still stands

soulsinging wrote:

he still stands wrote:

So the "faith of science" has inherent flaws and changes over time - just like religion.

your argument fails right here, becos this is exactly what religion not does. science is not faith. faith is what allows religion to say "everything we thought was true then, we have faith is true now, and we will not consider any new developments." thus, gay marriage bans and the like. science is not faith, becos when new information replaces the old, the old is discarded. there is no "faith" that what is known now is conclusive, only that it is the best explanation we have so far.

The way you describe religion to me seems like a pretty fundamentalist depiction - the true bible thumpers who take the entire bible literally. I don't know of any religious people who would think that no "new developments" would be considered, whatever that means. I'm sure they're out there, but I think the people you are describing are a small minority.

Religion certainly does disgust me sometimes in that the morality that people preach allows disgusting behavior and sometimes even glorifies it (hate of "taboo" groups, wars, executions, etc). But most of the religious people I know have moved beyond this reptilian way of thinking.

All I'm saying (and i'm not talking about you here) is that people who claim that science can explain everything, the non-existence of god(s),that the human mind can understand ANYTHING, and that people who believe in a "boogie man under the bed" are stupid - are practicing their own sort of dogma. Maybe its not "faith" but they believe it (I don't really know what the difference is, between belief and faith).

Hugh Freaking Dillon

he still stands wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

he still stands wrote:

So the "faith of science" has inherent flaws and changes over time - just like religion.

your argument fails right here, becos this is exactly what religion not does. science is not faith. faith is what allows religion to say "everything we thought was true then, we have faith is true now, and we will not consider any new developments." thus, gay marriage bans and the like. science is not faith, becos when new information replaces the old, the old is discarded. there is no "faith" that what is known now is conclusive, only that it is the best explanation we have so far.

The way you describe religion to me seems like a pretty fundamentalist depiction - the true bible thumpers who take the entire bible literally. I don't know of any religious people who would think that no "new developments" would be considered, whatever that means. I'm sure they're out there, but I think the people you are describing are a small minority.

Religion certainly does disgust me sometimes in that the morality that people preach allows disgusting behavior and sometimes even glorifies it (hate of "taboo" groups, wars, executions, etc). But most of the religious people I know have moved beyond this reptilian way of thinking.

All I'm saying (and i'm not talking about you here) is that people who claim that science can explain everything, the non-existence of god(s),that the human mind can understand ANYTHING, and that people who believe in a "boogie man under the bed" are stupid - are practicing their own sort of dogma. Maybe its not "faith" but they believe it (I don't really know what the difference is, between belief and faith).

the inherent problem with religion is exactly what you describe, you can take what you want from it and make it your own fact. you can't do that with science. when any given theorem is proven/disproven, you can't go back and say "well this is still what I believe". It's fact.

Of course science is flawed in the way that we don't know everything. We never will. Scientists admit that. It's obvious. Many religious people and groups, including some folks on here however, claim to "know" things that are far from proven based solely on their own personal experiences, which is ridiculously flawed. I don't know any scientist that claims to know everything. I do know the equivalent in the religious community (priests) that do, however.

Religion has its place. It is what it is for different people, and if it helps someone get through the day, then that's fabulous. But when people start preaching it as fact in direct contravention to scientific fact, that's when it crosses the line.

soulsinging

he still stands wrote:

The way you describe religion to me seems like a pretty fundamentalist depiction - the true bible thumpers who take the entire bible literally. I don't know of any religious people who would think that no "new developments" would be considered, whatever that means. I'm sure they're out there, but I think the people you are describing are a small minority.

you live in a strange place if the small minority of christians there are the ones believe that jesus was the son of god (in a diff way from the rest of us), mary was a virgin, jesus performed miracles, and he died and came back. you don't have to be a fundamentalist bible thumper to believe those fairy tales that fit well within the sort of faith i described. 99% of christians believe those things, aside from whatever pseudo-neo-christian cult you and pandora subscribe to where jesus was just another hippy that got famous. science does not have texts like that... that have had their stories unchanged and unevaluated for thousands of years. even the backbone of evolutionary theory is maybe 200 years old and has already been corrected and revised in further research. darwin didn't nail evolution in one book and nobody out there is shutting down science labs to say "nope, darwin spoke and this is how the story goes, period." they are all working in their labs to improve what came before, not halt any further discovery in the name of it being sacred or divinely inspired.

pandora

soulsinging wrote:

he still stands wrote:

The way you describe religion to me seems like a pretty fundamentalist depiction - the true bible thumpers who take the entire bible literally. I don't know of any religious people who would think that no "new developments" would be considered, whatever that means. I'm sure they're out there, but I think the people you are describing are a small minority.

you live in a strange place if the small minority of christians there are the ones believe that jesus was the son of god (in a diff way from the rest of us), mary was a virgin, jesus performed miracles, and he died and came back. you don't have to be a fundamentalist bible thumper to believe those fairy tales that fit well within the sort of faith i described. 99% of christians believe those things, aside from whatever pseudo-neo-christian cult you and pandora subscribe to where jesus was just another hippy that got famous. science does not have texts like that... that have had their stories unchanged and unevaluated for thousands of years. even the backbone of evolutionary theory is maybe 200 years old and has already been corrected and revised in further research. darwin didn't nail evolution in one book and nobody out there is shutting down science labs to say "nope, darwin spoke and this is how the story goes, period." they are all working in their labs to improve what came before, not halt any further discovery in the name of it being sacred or divinely inspired.

funny you should mention cult in the same sentence as my name cause my husband has always said- "Pandora, you should be a cult leader!" maybe you have premonitions like I do too! He also thinks I should write a book but it wouldn't be on religion cause I know nothing of that. I think I could write a fantasy book though with the subject being on fulfilling ones needs in life. We all have needs- for some its nothing more than the basic neanderthal- ho hum- but then there are those with spiritual needs. Could be a lovely book with pretty pictures, high hopes and perhaps even a moral. By God I think I have it! Hey someone's b-day is coming

soulsinging

pandora wrote:

soulsinging wrote:

you live in a strange place if the small minority of christians there are the ones believe that jesus was the son of god (in a diff way from the rest of us), mary was a virgin, jesus performed miracles, and he died and came back. you don't have to be a fundamentalist bible thumper to believe those fairy tales that fit well within the sort of faith i described. 99% of christians believe those things, aside from whatever pseudo-neo-christian cult you and pandora subscribe to where jesus was just another hippy that got famous. science does not have texts like that... that have had their stories unchanged and unevaluated for thousands of years. even the backbone of evolutionary theory is maybe 200 years old and has already been corrected and revised in further research. darwin didn't nail evolution in one book and nobody out there is shutting down science labs to say "nope, darwin spoke and this is how the story goes, period." they are all working in their labs to improve what came before, not halt any further discovery in the name of it being sacred or divinely inspired.

funny you should mention cult in the same sentence as my name cause my husband has always said- "Pandora, you should be a cult leader!" maybe you have premonitions like I do too! He also thinks I should write a book but it wouldn't be on religion cause I know nothing of that. I think I could write a fantasy book though with the subject being on fulfilling ones needs in life. We all have needs- for some its nothing more than the basic neanderthal- ho hum- but then there are those with spiritual needs. Could be a lovely book with pretty pictures, high hopes and perhaps even a moral. By God I think I have it! Hey someone's b-day is coming

if i could pull it off, i'd start a cult too. good money maker!

what's the basic neanderthal ho hum?

he still stands

soulsinging wrote:

99% of christians believe those things, aside from whatever pseudo-neo-christian cult you and pandora subscribe to where jesus was just another hippy that got famous.

what's with the hate man? I keep saying I believe in nothing... I just think that believing in non-theism is dogmatic and thoughtless, almost as much as belief in theism, and your response ^^^ is a good example of how beliefs cause people to act out aggressively and recklessly... whether it is a belief in god or science or whatever. I don't "subscribe" to any sort of "pseudo-neo-christian cult" or any other belief system because beliefs are the birth of ignorance. Once you believe in something, in anything, all other points of view are ignored.

"I believe in everything, nothing is sacred.... I believe in nothing, everything is sacred"

soulsinging wrote:

science does not have texts like that... that have had their stories unchanged and unevaluated for thousands of years. even the backbone of evolutionary theory is maybe 200 years old and has already been corrected and revised in further research. darwin didn't nail evolution in one book and nobody out there is shutting down science labs to say "nope, darwin spoke and this is how the story goes, period." they are all working in their labs to improve what came before, not halt any further discovery in the name of it being sacred or divinely inspired.

I understand the differences between religion and science and I'm not saying that science is "like relgion" in that includes incredulous tales of super-human powers. I don't really know what the point is that you're trying to make.