01 Apr 09
Originally posted by FabianFnasSure he did. Sin and suffering go hand in hand, therefore, the question is why was sin allowed into the world?
[b]Your pastor didn't answer your question: "Why are there suffering in the world?". By this non-answer, he answered it anyway: "Because god is not good."
Scripture says that God is a God of love. Does not love require an element of risk? Does it not invite heartache? In short, to love requires the risk of being rejected, otherwise we are just puppets on a string.
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by twhiteheadSo we have a whopping 54%!!
You may be correct that they are in the majority, but 'far outnumber' is an exaggeration.
The first site on the matter I found on google:
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
gives Abrahamic religions 54%
I obviously don't believe everything I see on the internet, but I very much doubt that Abrahamic religions exceed 60% and I seriou ...[text shortened]... ey are actually agnostic and are playing a just in case game or simply enjoy going to church.
Now does that indicate that Darwin has killed the God of Abraham?
01 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadMy only point here is to refute the notion that Darwin has caused the majority of the world to favor the notion of atheism over faith.
What does 'less than a minority' mean? I think you will find that there are more atheists in the world than you would like to believe.
01 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou mean that you include moslems by the christians? Oh, my god!
You may be correct that they are in the majority, but 'far outnumber' is an exaggeration.
The first site on the matter I found on google:
http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html
gives Abrahamic religions 54%
I obviously don't believe everything I see on the internet, but I very much doubt that Abrahamic religions exceed 60% and I s ...[text shortened]... ey are actually agnostic and are playing a just in case game or simply enjoy going to church.
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by whodeyYou could start here:
Do you have stats on this?
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominations_by_number_of_members
As far as I can tell, Catholicism constitutes about half of all Christians. Last I heard the Pope said he had nothing against evolution.
I was brought up in the Anglican Church and my parents have nothing against evolutionary theory, and as far as I know neither does the Anglican Church. I was under the impression that creationism was mostly restricted to a minority of US Churches - and their branches overseas, but I am open to correction. I have only encountered it in Zambia in relation to Churches based in America.
Zambia claims to be a Christian Nation yet our schools teach evolution, not creationism.
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by ZahlanziI've never denied scriptue has to be taken on faith, my position on all
AHA! so you glean the possibility that noah's ark may be just a message. a metaphor. it didn't rain for 40 days, god invented a story to make the stupid humans realize he can save those that are righteous. that he will not let mankind die. that he will punish the wicked(well at least until he stopped given a damn pardon the pun and told us to take care of o ...[text shortened]... make a story true, a story that [b]doesn't need to be true for the message to be heard.[/b]
of it remains the same, it has not changed. Simply acknowledging it is
faith is not denying I believe it to be true, only that it is a matter of
faith. As such of course I could be wrong, of course it may not be true,
absolutly it could just be message a metaphor, again never denied
that. What typically frosts some of the people here is that I also view
other people's beliefs about our distant past the same way, from the
story about abiogensis, to evolution taking life from that point until
now with the difference being one could be a metaphor the other is
just sprung up from an hypothesis where other people talk about
things to explain them away and others run with that story and setup
their views of right, wrong, and veiws of how we should value some
things over others.
Kelly
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by divegeesterI'm not fond of beliefs.
Thank you for sharing that, I'm so sorry to hear about your son. That tragedy puts perpestive on this debate and life generally for that matter.
I thought you were anti spiritual beliefs from reading your post earlier, although I could tell from previous threads that you thought deeply about things. Although I hold a christian belief i am not part ...[text shortened]... I believe they are life. I'd be interested in hearing more about your beliefs at some point.
What has Buddhism, as a philosophy with a deeply spiritual dimension taught me?
simply this:
Do NOT believe everything you think.
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by Zahlanziin Robbie I find a keen intellect and a highly developed sense of humor.
be careful when talking to the robbie. he has the sith power of annoying the hell out of you.
if the force is not strong in you or if your blood pressure is high, you should avoid this activity.
Thus, if he wants to jerk my chain, I'll probably enjoy it.
If he wants to thrash me at chess -- well, I could surprise him -- but even if not, I'll probably enjoy it.
So far, he does NOT annoy me, make me feel like putting the keyboard thru the monitor, or simply abandoning this silly waste of time.
I only do this to avoid doing the real world tasks I am putting off ...
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI've read that the proper translation of the word "sin" from the words used in the original scrolls is a word that also means "debt."
you know i asked a similar question in the science forum, i wanted to know why we grow old and if, under the correct conditions its possible that the regeneration of cells could go on perpetually. you know like we cut our finger, the body produces the necessary components and we heal up. why should this not go on perpetually I was wondering, and re ...[text shortened]... erfect state, sin (which means imperfection) and death! sorry Swissgambit, its a bit vague!
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by KellyJayevolutionists do not try to do moral values. at least they shouldn't. why do creationists try and do science?
I've never denied scriptue has to be taken on faith, my position on all
of it remains the same, it has not changed. Simply acknowledging it is
faith is not denying I believe it to be true, only that it is a matter of
faith. As such of course I could be wrong, of course it may not be true,
absolutly it could just be message a metaphor, again never denied ...[text shortened]... their views of right, wrong, and veiws of how we should value some
things over others.
Kelly
are you trying to say that ultimately every knowledge is to some degree faith? because scientists do agree there is no ultimate proof, that we should question our knowledge constantly and try to improve it. however what are the creationists ever question about their "knowledge"?
religion and science deal with two different concepts. they aren't and shouldn't be at odds. you couldn't say one contradicts the other anymore than you could compare oranges with donkeys. as such why do you hold religion to be something other than morals? why do you hold events used to illustrate spiritual lessons to be necessarily absolute true? as long as the lesson gets through why is it necessary for jonah to be actually eaten by a whale? or noah to actually exist and build a boat?
science is different. for science, and for the material side of humans it isn't enough to observe an effect and to invent a story as to how it came to be. we need facts, verifiable facts which we could use to learn new facts and so on.
01 Apr 09
1 edit
The Smithsonian Institution's Museum of Natural History is less than a block away from my office. I go there often to look at the Pueblo Indian pottery exhibited there. I also like their new ocean room, although I miss the old salt water reef they had for many years.
I have visited the collections of fossils there for many years. My late father was a volunteer in the paleontology dept of that museum after he retired. So I've been back there behind the exhibits helping on a few occasions to do the painstaking work of preparing samples, labeling items, cleaning fossil bones, etc. My dad was a research chemist and a senior VP of a major international chemical conglomerate. He headed the team which invented shrink wrapping, photo-sensitive plastic used in modern printing, as well as a host of other basic research on polymerization.
This is why I hold in contempt people who blithely cite or quote propaganda about religious-based, faith-based nonsense as fact without any understanding of their own about how the universe we inhabit actually works.
I think it is fine to contemplate the idea that the universe that actually exists was in all its complexity a deliberate, intelligent, designed system put in motion and left to operate as designed. No point in basing anything we do in our lives on that thought, however, for there is no way for us to confirm the idea.
And unless such an idea can be confirmed, it shall have no real world application in terms of do this, don't do that, say this, don't say that, for example,
I therefore resent and will oppose anyone who tries to manipulate me and the world I live in based on their specious, ignorant speculation about how the universe works.
Don't believe everything you think!!
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by Scriabini know the last feeling.
in Robbie I find a keen intellect and a highly developed sense of humor.
Thus, if he wants to jerk my chain, I'll probably enjoy it.
If he wants to thrash me at chess -- well, I could surprise him -- but even if not, I'll probably enjoy it.
So far, he does NOT annoy me, make me feel like putting the keyboard thru the monitor, or simply abandoning t ...[text shortened]... illy waste of time.
I only do this to avoid doing the real world tasks I am putting off ...
the robbie represents a concept. the concept of the brain-washed zombie who cannot change his programming. he has already figured out what is to figure out. furthermore he will not and quite possibly is unable intellectually to defend his position or refute someone else's.
i find that very annoying. if you are stupid or ignorant, simply admit it. or have the decency to admit no amount or arguments will ever change your mind.
i do not know now if the robbie is actually a real person or it is simply a front put up by someone with a "speshul" sense of humor. and i don't really care since i cannot verify. what i do know is that the robbie is wasting the time of mostly anyone he debates with. unless you happen to agree with him of course.
01 Apr 09
Originally posted by Zahlanzithere is no debate here and precious little discussion. Just a lot of chest beating, as is the usual thing in this medium.
i know the last feeling.
the robbie represents a concept. the concept of the brain-washed zombie who cannot change his programming. he has already figured out what is to figure out. furthermore he will not and quite possibly is unable intellectually to defend his position or refute someone else's.
i find that very annoying. if you are stupid or igno ...[text shortened]... ng the time of mostly anyone he debates with. unless you happen to agree with him of course.