Evolution and the Public School System (single, Genesis, Religious, member)

SATCHMO · 03-23-2009, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toretorden

Why would atheism require more faith?

Atheism requires faith that there is no god. Faith that the scientific theories that substantiate the belief that there is no God won't be contradicted sooner or later. And the faith that none of your actions as a result of your beliefs have eternal consequences.

sleepy jack · 03-23-2009, 04:00 AM

That's not true though. Atheism requires no faith whatsoever. It is natural, simple and instinctive and you need no intellectual justification to say "I believe in nothing." The intellectual justification falls purely on people who believe in magical deities, holy books and claim to know what happens in unknowable situations.

I also don't really understand how I make the assumption in my post that every person is a religious nut. You can't, without bastardizing and picking and choosing what you want to believe from whatever religious text you choose, reconcile faith with science. There is a conflict there; every religion makes claims about the way the world is and science explains it in terms that are contradictory to what is taught by religion. You can't say "I believe in Science but I also believe in birth without contraception, the ability of mammals to survive death, and other sorts of magic taught in the bible." Jesus and what faith says he did and Christians believe he did isn't something you can reconcile with the way the world works, according to science.

SATCHMO · 03-23-2009, 04:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

you cant without bastardizing and picking and choosing what you want to believe from whatever religious text you choose, reconcile faith with science. There is a conflict there; every religion makes claims about the way the world is and science explains it in terms that are contradictory to what is taught by religion. You can't say "I believe in Science but I also believe in birth without contraception, the ability of mammals to survive death, and other sorts of magic taught in the bible." Jesus and what faith says he did and Christians believe he did isn't something you can reconcile with the way the world works, according to science.

Your talking about two different forms of knowledge empirical and mythological. Something can truthful without being factual. There are plenty of Christians with strong faith who have enough intelligence to know that the book of Genesis is not a science textbook and shouldn't be treated as such, and yes many of them do believe in evolution. To clarify what I was trying to say in one of my earlier post you're making the assumption that every religious follower believes in a strict literal interpretation of their respective sacred text, i.e. a fundamentalist.and yes fundamentalism and fanaticism do represent everything that's evil about religion. But what's worse hardcore fundamentalist or a hardcore reductionism? Both are equally unyielding, and equally erroneous viewpoints.

sleepy jack · 03-23-2009, 04:35 AM

You're still ignoring the fact that Genesis is no less scientifically plausible than a mammal surviving his own death, a torturous and brutal death I will add. The belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and his own magical powers is something that is fundamental to Christianity. This fundamental belief is directly in conflict with what science has observed in regards to what happens when a human being dies.

SATCHMO · 03-23-2009, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepy jack

You're still ignoring the fact that Genesis is no less scientifically plausible than a mammal surviving his own death, a torturous and brutal death, and coming back three days later. The belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and his own magical powers is something that is fundamental to Christianity. This fundamental belief is directly in conflict with what science has observed in regards to what happens when a human being dies.

I hope your not expecting me to play apologetics here. My aim was not to get you to believe in christianity or even to defend it, but simply for you to not make the assumption that all of it's followers are gullible bible-thumping morons.
I am one of those rare people who picks and chooses what he believes from a wide varieties of faith because I do believe that all faiths have a certain degree of truth to them. And I find in most cases where the "facts" are disputable the metaphorical value that can be obtained from ignoring the literal and seeing through to the figurative is where wisdom is obtained. This is what is basically wrong with western religion. So much of peoples faith is exhausted on trying to believe in something literally, that no wisdom is able to penetrate into their lives.
Not to be offensive, but the same thing happens invertedly with atheists and reductionists.The "i'll believe it when I see it" mentality They become so obsessed with what can be proven scientifically that they ignore everything supernatural or metaphysical. Science has come a long way since Isaac newton died almost 300 years ago. Wev'e grown past reductionist based physical science and are well into the realm of quantum physics. Science and religion aren't really as at odds with each other as we used to think, and a lot of what we would have filed under supernatural 20 years ago is becoming widely accepted scientific theory. It takes a while for the general public to follow suit and internalize a new paradigm.
Creationism is still ridiculously stupid we can agree on that for now.

~~The Unfan~~ · 03-23-2009, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SATCHMO

I hope your not expecting me to play apologetics here. My aim was not to get you to believe in christianity or even to defend it, but simply for you to not make the assumption that all of it's followers are gullible bible-thumping morons.

I will actually refute this to some degree. They might not all be bible thumpers but they still believe that a man who happens to be his own father and the creator of the universe sent himself/his son who he happens to be to get nailed to some planks because he felt his own symbolic death was needed for him to forgive us because someone ate a fruit because a talking serpent instructed her to many generations ago...AND ALL OF THAT HAPPENED ACCORDING TO HIS OWN PLANS. And why do they believe this? Some book said so. If that isn't a gullible moron than I don't know what is.

SATCHMO · 03-23-2009, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Unfan

I will actually refute this to some degree. They might not all be bible thumpers but they still believe that a man who happens to be his own father and the creator of the universe sent himself/his son who he happens to be to get nailed to some planks because he felt his own symbolic death was needed for him to forgive us because someone ate a fruit because a talking serpent instructed her to many generations ago...AND ALL OF THAT HAPPENED ACCORDING TO HIS OWN PLANS. And why do they believe this? Some book said so. If that isn't a gullible moron than I don't know what is.

please see the part of my response that deals with figurative and literal interpretations. As I Said, I don't have rhe energy to defend a set beliefs I don't subscribe to. What you just spouted off to me is a bunch of fundamentalist crap that I wouldn't try defending with a gun to my head.
OMG try being more intelligent than the people your bitching about! FIGURATIVE ****ING LANGUAGE. I would say most Christians have the intelligence to know that a talking snake offering forbidden fruit to eve in the garden of Eden is allegorical, and the ones who don't are the ones who are polluting the gene pool. My god it even says IN THE BIBLE that its The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Sound like anything you have growing in your backyard? Ugh, I need a cigarette.

khfreek · 03-23-2009, 07:57 AM

Seeing as how this stuff was written 3000 or more years ago by guys living in the middle of the desert, I think it's safe to say that they might let their imaginations run wild with what is and isn't real. Christians might say TODAY that it's allegorical, but I find it hard to believe that was the original intent.

SATCHMO · 03-23-2009, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by khfreek

Seeing as how this stuff was written 3000 or more years ago by guys living in the middle of the desert, I think it's safe to say that they might let their imaginations run wild with what is and isn't real. Christians might say TODAY that it's allegorical, but I find it hard to believe that was the original intent.

Actually, I personally believe that it was more or less the early Roman Catholic church. The council of Nicea (wiki that) in the 3rd century. was responsible for thee doctrine that basically said that being a christian meant believing in christs divinity, death and resurrection as a means of salvation. Then there's the great scourge of charlemagne, the crusades, the spanish inquisition yada, yaa, yada. I don't believe Christ's original followers had such huge sticks up their a$$es.

Yukon Cornelius · 03-23-2009, 08:24 AM

The big bang was when space and time collided before that there was nothing...

03-23-2009, 07:57 AM	#108 (permalink)
khfreek What a guy Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Brentwood, TN Posts: 2,123	Seeing as how this stuff was written 3000 or more years ago by guys living in the middle of the desert, I think it's safe to say that they might let their imaginations run wild with what is and isn't real. Christians might say TODAY that it's allegorical, but I find it hard to believe that was the original intent. __________________ last.fm

03-23-2009, 08:24 AM	#110 (permalink)
Yukon Cornelius Music Addict Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 625	The big bang was when space and time collided before that there was nothing... __________________ Attempting to find a cure for Stupid...