Alternative to Intelligent Design

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]Professor X wrote:
There is no hidden meaning. Nowhere in the Bible does it say “be poor and don’t hold onto any material possessions”. [/quote]

See previous post.

But that’s what the vast majority of believers (you included, to be clear) do. They pick and choose whatever is not too inconvenient for them and forget about the rest. Why should we have to follow different rules if we wish to comment on it?

I get pissed off when they come barging in on some random thread riding their high horses and reproving us for “lack of respect” of other people’s beliefs.

I find the way they act to be profoundly more disrespectful, as they claim (that’s the easy part) to truly and faithfully believe and follow the teachings of the Bible, but actually do (the hard part) very little of what it requires.

Do you really wonder why we feel no qualms at all at parodying or satirizing your beliefs all day long when we see how truly honest the vast majority of believers are in those beliefs?

You want us to take your beliefs seriously and show respect? Ok, but you first.

102

pookie

your post reminded me of this:

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/joke/laura.htm

Oh so funny.

103

[quote]IagoMB wrote:
graphicsMan wrote:

Evolution is NOT fact, it is a theory. A damned fine one if you ask me, but a theory nonetheless.

A scientific theory carries a great deal of weight. Here’s something from the sceptic’s deictionary:

A scientific theory is a unified set of principles, knowledge, and methods for explaining the behavior of some specified range of empirical phenomena. Scientific theories attempt to understand the world of observation and sense experience. They attempt to explain how the natural world works.

A scientific theory must have some logical consequences we can test against empirical facts by making predictions based on the theory. The exact nature of the relationship of a scientific theory making predictions and being tested is something about which philosophers widely disagree, however (Kourany 1997).

It is true that some scientific theories, when they are first developed and proposed, are often little more than guesses based on limited information. On the other hand, mature and well-developed scientific theories systematically organize knowledge and allow us to explain and predict wide ranges of empirical events. In either case, however, one characteristic must be present for the theory to be scientific. The distinguishing feature of scientific theories is that they are “capable of being tested by experience”[/quote]

You’ll find no arguments from me on this issue… Someone simply stated that evolution was a FACT, when, in fact, it is a theory.

104

[quote]pookie wrote:
I’d like you to explain that one to me. No matter how I read it (and this time I checked a few other versions) I can’t fathom how you get a Jesus who’s ok with an abundance of material possessions; but then again, I don’t go around calling myself “Professor” either, so what do I know.[/quote]

There is no doubt to me that a man who puts his material possessions above God wouldn’t be considered “true”. That is what I get from that verse, not that any man on earth who has any possesssions at all needs to get rid of them. What makes a “rich” man? To me the term implies someone who hordes material items or wealth far beyond what could ever be needed. Isn’t that what you get from that statement?

105

[quote]pookie wrote:
Do you really wonder why we feel no qualms at all at parodying or satirizing your beliefs all day long when we see how truly honest the vast majority of believers are in those beliefs?

You want us to take your beliefs seriously and show respect? Ok, but you first.[/quote]

How have I disrespected you in this thread? Please, show me. You have made post after post attempting to tear down what I believe despite the fact that I have explained each question you asked, yet to you this isn’t disrespect on your part? No one here is trying to force you to believe in God. No one here has started a thread laughing at atheists, I really want you to show me where all of this disrespect that you feel is, especially coming from me. You asked if I sit around worrying about what you believe. No, I don’t. I also don’t make threads about atheists or make up some random parody to mimic atheists just for the sake of doing it.

Disrespect? You seem to be the master of it in this circumstance.

106

[quote]Soco wrote:
pookie

your post reminded me of this:

http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~susan/joke/laura.htm

Oh so funny. [/quote]

ROFL! why cant i own canadians?

107

[quote]graphicsMan wrote:
You’ll find no arguments from me on this issue… Someone simply stated that evolution was a FACT, when, in fact, it is a theory.[/quote]

Oh none here either, I’ve just seen people dismiss evolution completely with “it’s only a theory” when they don’t know what that word really means.

108

[quote]Professor X wrote:
How have I disrespected you in this thread? Please, show me.[/quote]

I didn’t say you disrespected me or any other atheist. I said you demand or expect respect from us for beliefs we don’t share. More, you seem to expect a level of respect for those belief that I don’t even see in those claiming to hold them.

But if you insist, “I would have expected this much attention for that idea in junior high school” might be seen as disparaging our intelligence?

Honestly, I find it a bit sad that it takes something like the FSM phenomenon to get the point across that ID is not science in any way or form; when actual scientist have been saying the same thing for months before, but where being by and large ignored by the mainstream press. The FSM got articles in the New York Times, the Washington post and many other “mainstream media.” In that way, it was very useful.

No one is forcing you to discuss your beliefs. But you can’t simply express your views, says “that’s the simple truth” and expect me to simply accept it without question.

Again, I’m talking about respect towards beliefs. You and a few others posted at the beginning of this thread saying that our comments about the FSM where simply digs at religion. My point is that from the way most believers live their faith, they don’t have any more respects for their own belief than I do. I’d get madder at false Christians than I would at atheists.

The FSM was initially a dig at ID; unfortunately, you can’t really discuss ID without religion getting involved, since ID is just repackaged Creationism.

If I post newbie pics for you to make fun of, can we still be friends?

109

[quote]graphicsMan wrote:
You’ll find no arguments from me on this issue… Someone simply stated that evolution was a FACT, when, in fact, it is a theory.[/quote]

This has been discussed to death in the recent evolution thread, I ranted on about it myself. In short:

The Theory of Evolution is the theory that explains the processes by which unicelular life became all the different creatures that live (and ever lived) in this world; while evolution is simply a fact.

Note the use of capital letters where appropriate.

110

[quote]Miserere wrote:
graphicsMan wrote:
You’ll find no arguments from me on this issue… Someone simply stated that evolution was a FACT, when, in fact, it is a theory.

This has been discussed to death in the recent evolution thread, I ranted on about it myself. In short:

The Theory of Evolution is the theory that explains the processes by which unicelular life became all the different creatures that live (and ever lived) in this world; while evolution is simply a fact.

Note the use of capital letters where appropriate.[/quote]

Sorry, I missed the memo :slight_smile: That thread got SOOOOO long, I just gave up one day.

111

[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
How have I disrespected you in this thread? Please, show me.

I didn’t say you disrespected me or any other atheist. I said you demand or expect respect from us for beliefs we don’t share. More, you seem to expect a level of respect for those belief that I don’t even see in those claiming to hold them.[/quote]

Why lie? You wrote, “You want us to take your beliefs seriously and show respect? Ok, but you first.” This implies that you have not been respected. Please explain how no one is respecting you.

[quote]
But if you insist, “I would have expected this much attention for that idea in junior high school” might be seen as disparaging our intelligence?

Honestly, I find it a bit sad that it takes something like the FSM phenomenon to get the point across that ID is not science in any way or form; [/quote]

Who here claims that Creationism replaces science? Especially on this board, who here has made a claim like this?

[quote]
No one is forcing you to discuss your beliefs. But you can’t simply express your views, says “that’s the simple truth” and expect me to simply accept it without question.[/quote]

What? No one is saying " accept this" at all. You asked questions with the very apparent goal of degrading an entire religion. I answered those questions simply because of how you were degrading it. Have you asked any questions with the true purpose of understanding? Can you even be truthful about that?

[quote]
No one here is trying to force you to believe in God. No one here has started a thread laughing at atheists, I really want you to show me where all of this disrespect that you feel is, especially coming from me.

Again, I’m talking about respect towards beliefs. You and a few others posted at the beginning of this thread saying that our comments about the FSM where simply digs at religion. My point is that from the way most believers live their faith, they don’t have any more respects for their own belief than I do. I’d get madder at false Christians than I would at atheists.[/quote]

What does that have to do with the religion? I am sure there are people who work at banks who steal some of the money. Are you making posts about them because it pisses you off so? No, you aren’t.

Then quit acting like you have shown any respect at all for Christianity. You haven’t…yet it surprises you that some got pissed off? How dense does someone have to be to not see how that could offend some people? I didn’t take this personally. However, I will never pretend like I don’t understand those who did.

112

[quote]Professor X wrote:
pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
How have I disrespected you in this thread? Please, show me.

I didn’t say you disrespected me or any other atheist. I said you demand or expect respect from us for beliefs we don’t share. More, you seem to expect a level of respect for those belief that I don’t even see in those claiming to hold them.

Why lie? You wrote, “You want us to take your beliefs seriously and show respect? Ok, but you first.” This implies that you have not been respected. Please explain how no one is respecting you.[/quote]

By “you first” he meant “believers” taking their own beliefs seriously. That was the whole point of that post.

113

[quote]larryb wrote:
Professor X wrote:
pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
How have I disrespected you in this thread? Please, show me.

I didn’t say you disrespected me or any other atheist. I said you demand or expect respect from us for beliefs we don’t share. More, you seem to expect a level of respect for those belief that I don’t even see in those claiming to hold them.

Why lie? You wrote, “You want us to take your beliefs seriously and show respect? Ok, but you first.” This implies that you have not been respected. Please explain how no one is respecting you.

By “you first” he meant “believers” taking their own beliefs seriously. That was the whole point of that post.[/quote]

That makes even less sense. Again, unless all of you are about to start making posts about social workers who really don’t care about people, Recording artists who can’t sing, and cops who speed on the interstate for no damn reason, what is the point of even pointing out that there are actually some Christians who don’t act the part? Who is this news to and why does anyone care?

114

[quote]Professor X wrote:
That makes even less sense. Again, unless all of you are about to start making posts about social workers who really don’t care about people, Recording artists who can’t sing, and cops who speed on the interstate for no damn reason, what is the point of even pointing out that there are actually some Christians who don’t act the part? Who is this news to and why does anyone care?[/quote]

I think this is a very important point.

I’ve met many people who only ‘believe’ in things ‘proven’ by science, yet have a shallow conception of what science is or does.

The fact that these people exist does not invalidate the scientific method in the same way that ‘bad’ Christians do not invalidate their belief system.

115

How can you be a Christian, believe in Christ, yet not act as a Christian must act?

Wouldn’t the proper actions define one as a Christian, more so than claiming to believe? What we see in the world is “I believe, but”.

116

[quote]Vyapada wrote:
The fact that these people exist does not invalidate the scientific method in the same way that ‘bad’ Christians do not invalidate their belief system.[/quote]

Okay, agreed. So are you guys gonna lighten up about the Flying Spaghetti Monster now, or what? Because he’s just as “real” as the holy trinity. Or Buddha’s golden palace. Or any other faith.

117

[quote]vroom wrote:
How can you be a Christian, believe in Christ, yet not act as a Christian must act?

Wouldn’t the proper actions define one as a Christian, more so than claiming to believe? What we see in the world is “I believe, but”.[/quote]

Actually, just believing that Jesus is Christ makes you a Christian. Your actions dictate your final judgement.

118

[quote]vroom wrote:
How can you be a Christian, believe in Christ, yet not act as a Christian must act?
[/quote]

I feel that calling yourself a ‘Nominal religion title’ is about your own perceptions of what ‘Nominal religion’ is about.
What others choose to call you is their own business.

119

[quote]vroom wrote:
How can you be a Christian, believe in Christ, yet not act as a Christian must act?

Wouldn’t the proper actions define one as a Christian, more so than claiming to believe? What we see in the world is “I believe, but”.[/quote]

Yes vroom, but remember they have failsafes built into their belief system. A great deal of basic christian thought is reliant upon the idea of man being imperfect.

But as an aside, is there anybody else smiling in the irony of the whole “christians vs. evolution” thing the way I am? They start with one simple christian church… which has evolved into different species, adapted to the differing environments and nations, and now we have this incredibly complex belief system left over. Look at all the dang versions of the bible we have now.

How can you NOT be a christian who believes in evolution? Your religious beliefs are the living embodiment of what it means to change, adapt, and diversify. Sects of christianity which were unfit have become extinct, just like the dinosaurs. How many Puritans have you seen lately? And just like the evolutionary model for biology, the different churches – or species – arose from each other, and are traceable back to one ancestor.

Cool, huh? :slight_smile:

120

I like your behavioural model lothario, but it isn’t based on arbitrary mutation!

Unless you argue that our beliefs arbitrarily assigned… In a plural dogma environment it’d make an interesting contention!