RE: Evolution vs. Religion

RE: Evolution vs. Religion (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DomKen -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 4:51:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle the Sceptic's Annotated Bible, which is a really cool site (IMHO) and can be checked out here Hell's bells. I've just been reading what, according to the Bible, God thinks about violence. The more hideous brutality, the better he likes it, apparently. Wow. I hadn't realised just how much vicious, insane drivel there was in the Bible. There is also much good in there. Why only take the bad from it? Look for the good. Kinda like life. I have trouble ignoring the passage where a prophet got god to send two bears to slaughter 40 children because they made fun of his baldness.

PeonForHer -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 5:15:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub There is also much good in there. Why only take the bad from it? Look for the good. Kinda like life. I shouldn't have to - it's called The Good Book. It shouldn't contain 'bad' - least of all descriptions, in multiple places, of a God who is bad given almost any sane moral interpretation today.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 5:32:53 PM)
quote: I shouldn't have to - it's called The Good Book. It shouldn't contain 'bad' - least of all descriptions, in multiple places, of a God who is bad given almost any sane moral interpretation today. So then we ban every book that doesnt follow our "sane moral interpretation today"? Ever thought many books followed the sane moral interpretations of the times they were written?

PeonForHer -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 5:37:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl So then we ban every book that doesnt follow our "sane moral interpretation today"? No, we pick and choose what's good from it, like any other book. That's not a problem for me, because I'm not religious and the Bible doesn't have any special place above all other books for me. How Christians do it, though, is for them to answer.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 5:56:28 PM)
quote: No, we pick and choose what's good from it, like any other book. That's not a problem for me, because I'm not religious and the Bible doesn't have any special place above all other books for me. How Christians do it, though, is for them to answer. As I have said before, its a beautifully written story. That book holds no more of a special place for me than Mauvreen. What amazes me is that you state you can pick and choose what's good from books like Tom Sawyer, but christians cant from the bible?

PeonForHer -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 7:29:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl What amazes me is that you state you can pick and choose what's good from books like Tom Sawyer, but christians cant from the bible? I can't agree that it's a beautifully written story. There's too much that's ugly for me in it. Still, I haven't said anything about what policy Christians should take towards the Bible. Since I'm not religious, still less a Christian, I couldn't begin to work that out for them.

eihwaz -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 8:46:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz IMHO, the origins of life and the universe are susceptible to scientific explanations albeit understanding of the latter may be limited by an epistemological horizon beyond which science can discern nothing. By establishing the limit you are establishing a knowledge gap, unless i am especially dense to your pov. It is like telling Galileo he will have to wait on the invention of the telesope before he can see the moons of Jupitur. Sooner or later the telesope will be invented. You will have to elaborate a bit on "epistemolical horizon" before i can give you a better response. Speak s l o w l y please. [:D] I was using the term in the general sense of a boundary between the knowable and unknowable. You and DomKen have alluded to the contours of one such in your exchanges about singularities. AFAIK, epistemological horizons can exist because (a) the required technology doesn't exist (your example above); (b) there are no frames of reference or intellectual constructs or metaphors by which to even perceive the phenomena -- I think this is closest to typical usage; or (c) the domain is intrinsically unknowable. As an example of this last, it is now commonly accepted that it is impossible to predict the weather (as opposed to climate) more than a few days into the future. (Because weather is a chaotic system, i.e., an emergent behavior of a highly complex system sensitive to initial conditions.) quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: eihwaz quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML (a) there is a creator god, or (b) the universe is eternal A creator god and an eternal universe are mutually exclusive only if the former is constrained by time. However, one can posit -- metaphysically -- that the universe is eternally generated or emanating from the creator god. Or that the universe is eternally generated by eternal mass/energy. Why invent a god? We already have mass/energy I see your point, but then why posit a God if the universe has an origin?

tweakabelle -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/25/2011 11:12:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: No, we pick and choose what's good from it, like any other book. That's not a problem for me, because I'm not religious and the Bible doesn't have any special place above all other books for me. How Christians do it, though, is for them to answer. As I have said before, its a beautifully written story. That book holds no more of a special place for me than Mauvreen. What amazes me is that you state you can pick and choose what's good from books like Tom Sawyer, but christians cant from the bible? Christians tell me that the Bible is the Word of God. While there is a valid choice to be made between literal and metaphorical interpretations, that seems to me to be the limit of available choices. Many 'Christians' do pick and choose - so the question is: Is picking and choosing a valid option for believers within the parameters of their belief system? How can mere mortals choose which words of their omnipotent God to believe? How can they choose which 'words of God' to ignore? Wouldn't making choices like that be a bit presumptuous? Doesn't it imply that one knows better than God? And if their God is all-knowing (as is claimed) why would any one reject any of the dictates of an all-knowing omnipotent God? Isn't that evidence they don't trust the 'word of God' fully? Isn't it, in fact, a kind of blasphemy? So, viewing the issue from the outside, I'm going to take some convincing that picking and choosing is a legitimate option for believers. It seems to compromise their belief system, quite possibly fatally. This is of course a separate issue to the latitude it offers non-believers. If believers are allowed to pick and choose, why can't non-believers perfectly legitimately do likewise (eg rejecting 99.99% of the Bible)? This is an eternal (pardon the pun) problem with absolute belief systems. They come in a package. To ignore/reject part of that package compromises the entire package - in effect it is to reject all of the package.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 12:33:51 AM)
quote: How can mere mortals choose which words of their omnipotent God to believe? How can they choose which 'words of God' to ignore? Wouldn't making choices like that be a bit presumptuous? Doesn't it imply that one knows better than God? And if their God is all-knowing (as is claimed) why would any one reject any of the dictates of an all-knowing omnipotent God? Isn't that evidence they don't trust the 'word of God' fully? Isn't it, in fact, a kind of blasphemy? I know many who have no issues with picking and choosing. Consider slavery. The bible talks about it alot. Yet I dont know anyone who is very religious who holds the belief that slavery is something they would ever entertain. Times change. We become enlightened, even the religious. When was the last time you went to a sacrifice? Its sometimes amazing that we, as a nation, can look at the Constitution as the framework for our country, and admit its not perfect, that it needs reinterpreting and changes... yet the same isnt allowed for a book and a faith that was founded thousands of years ago. Many of people of "faith" get that point. quote: So, viewing the issue from the outside, I'm going to take some convincing that picking and choosing is a legitimate option for believers. It seems to compromise their belief system, quite possibly fatally. This is of course a separate issue to the latitude it offers non-believers. If believers are allowed to pick and choose, why can't non-believers perfectly legitimately do likewise (eg rejecting 99.99% of the Bible)? You can, and regularly do, reject almost everything about the Bible. Why cant those who believe keep those parts they hold dear and which make sense to them without being told that they are blasphemous? Does looking from the outside of a relationship give you the right to dictate the inner workings of that relationship? quote: This is an eternal (pardon the pun) problem with absolute belief systems. They come in a package. To ignore/reject part of that package compromises the entire package - in effect it is to reject all of the package. Not everyone believes the absolute faith slant. Jesus, within the Bible, reversed a few laws. For example. Ex:21:23-25 , an eye for an eye.... But Matthew 38 states... 38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[a] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. Its within texts such as the above that many find room to "pick and choose". If the son of god disagrees, why cant "christians" who are also his children?

vincentML -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 8:14:43 AM)
quote: I see your point, but then why posit a God if the universe has an origin? Exactly. If mass/energy is eternal there is no origin and hence no need for a god.

PeonForHer -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 11:41:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why cant those who believe keep those parts they hold dear and which make sense to them without being told that they are blasphemous? Because in order to reject the parts you don't like, you have to put something else above God. You're not supposed to put 'what makes sense' to you above that which 'makes sense to God'. Faith is meant to eclipse one's sense of mere human reasoning; ours not to question God . . . and all that.

Arturas -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 11:57:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why cant those who believe keep those parts they hold dear and which make sense to them without being told that they are blasphemous? Because in order to reject the parts you don't like, you have to put something else above God. You're not supposed to put 'what makes sense' to you above that which 'makes sense to God'. Faith is meant to eclipse one's sense of mere human reasoning; ours not to question God . . . and all that. Faith is not meant to eclipse one's human reasoning. My Faith is in God and is easy to have because it is not based in the ideas about God by "mere" men presented here or elsewhere but in his words to me and they do not require leaving the reasoning mind he gave me behind in the conversation.

PeonForHer -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 12:16:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Faith is not meant to eclipse one's human reasoning. My Faith is in God and is easy to have because it is not based in the ideas about God by "mere" men presented here or elsewhere but in his words to me and they do not require leaving the reasoning mind he gave me behind in the conversation. OK. But what reasoning processes lead you to conclude that the words you mention really do come from God?

BitaTruble -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 12:40:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: Arturas Faith is not meant to eclipse one's human reasoning. My Faith is in God and is easy to have because it is not based in the ideas about God by "mere" men presented here or elsewhere but in his words to me and they do not require leaving the reasoning mind he gave me behind in the conversation. OK. But what reasoning processes lead you to conclude that the words you mention really do come from God? Good question. I was wondering that as well since faith is pretty much the antithesis of reasoning. But, I never got the whole 'the world is only 6000 years old' thing either. Peter 3:8 at the very least would seem to cast reasonable doubt on that issue. Then there's the Revelation that clearly says to neither add to or subtract from the words in the book so picking and choosing would seem to be frowned upon. I find the bible interesting with some words of wisdom that good people can adhere to on a comfortable level in a 'be kind and eat your veggies kind of way' but the 'don't eat those veggies, dude, and I will smite you' sort of blows it for me. Free will isn't really free if you have to pay for it with such a consequence like.. I don't know.. eternal damnation in the firey pits of hell.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 1:51:21 PM)
Archbishop James Ussher deduced the date of creation began at nightfall preceding Sunday, October 23, 4004 BC. Lightfoot deduced it began at nightfall near the autumnal equinox, but in the year 3929 BC. It is "believed" Adam was 980, Abraham was 175, Ishmael 137, Isaac 180 (born to Abraham when he was 100) How would anyone be able to determine the length of the "begets in years" in order to determine the beginning of man, let alone earth... since most of this was passed down by oral translation. People are nuts believing it. Other people are nuts to buy into it as even a potential theory that gets them all worked up.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 2:15:19 PM)
quote: Because in order to reject the parts you don't like, you have to put something else above God. You're not supposed to put 'what makes sense' to you above that which 'makes sense to God'. Faith is meant to eclipse one's sense of mere human reasoning; ours not to question God . . . and all that. 1 Thessalonians 5 - 21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. There are many passages in the Bible with people questioning... Psalms is a good example... Jeremiah is another....why should the current generation be any different?

Kirata -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 2:20:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer ours not to question God . . . and all that. Says who? And why not? He's questioned in the Bible! K.

tazzygirl -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 2:23:37 PM)
Many people buy into the concept of blind faith... usually those who either cannot or will not accept the fact that they do not have all the answers... or those who know they dont know what they are talking about. I have blind faith in only one thing... the love I feel for my son... beyond that, all bets are off.

JstAnotherSub -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 3:56:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: JstAnotherSub There is also much good in there. Why only take the bad from it? Look for the good. Kinda like life. I shouldn't have to - it's called The Good Book. It shouldn't contain 'bad' - least of all descriptions, in multiple places, of a God who is bad given almost any sane moral interpretation today. I hear ya kinda sorta, but really, without bad, what makes good good? If that makes sense, one of us is porched.

thishereboi -> RE: Evolution vs. Religion (4/26/2011 4:08:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer ours not to question God . . . and all that. Says who? And why not? He's questioned in the Bible! K. I don't question God as much as I question the endless parade of people who have translated it since it was written.

Page: << < prev 14 15 [16] 17 18 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875