Alternative to Intelligent Design

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
121

[quote]Vyapada wrote:
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!
[/quote]

Well, the theory is sound, no? The mechanisms of how the different specie of christianity came about is the difference though, just as you noted. One just has to look at the emergence of the Protestant family. Luther’s list nailed to the church door would definitely land on the side of “self-directed mutation”, and not arbitrary.

Another interesting parallel with the protestant movement and evolution is how it was ONE organism which did the mutation, was superior in a specific adaptation, and transmitted its mutation to its progeny, who in turn changed in their own way to fit their respective niches. There’s all kinds of protestants now, and many of them are progressive enough to allow women to be ministers, etc… much different from their ancestral Catholicism.

Can you think of a religious adaptation that was arbitrary? Maybe the televangelism movement? That just kind of happened and filled a new environment didn’t it? You can’t rightly say that the TV was invented to spread christianity, can you? Hmm…

122

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

By being human and acting as humans act. How can you be a police officer, act as an instrument of the law, yet take bribes? That never happens, right? I don’t understand your confusion. Being Christian makes you inhuman and lacking in faults? I do believe it is quite the opposite.

[quote]
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]

No. I have had a couple of teachers who couldn’t teach worth shit. They were still teachers and got paid as such. Perhaps your view of the world is a little limited? Since when do humans always do exactly what they are supposed to do?

If you really want to know, instead of continuing the line of thought you are on, it is repeated over and over that we are sinners…all of us. Everyone on the planet is and no one is perfect. If that doesn’t answer your question…then your question doesn’t have an answer.

123

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
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? :)[/quote]

Changing thought and belief systems equal scientific proof that biological evolution that has us all coming from the same organism is FACT?

I was going to wear the dark blue tank top to the gym earlier…until I realized I hadn’t washed that bitch. I therefore wore the red one. UHP, there you go…I changed my mind…more proof that evolution exists?

124

If you REALLY believe Jesus is the son of God, that he was crucified for your sins (that’s a horrible way to go out), and that you are going to burn in eternal hell-fire if you don’t live according to the bible, how could you not live a sin-free life?

I mean what in this world outweighs the thought of an ETERNITY of being burned?

125

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Changing thought and belief systems equal scientific proof that biological evolution that has us all coming from the same organism is FACT?

I was going to wear the dark blue tank top to the gym earlier…until I realized I hadn’t washed that bitch. I therefore wore the red one. UHP, there you go…I changed my mind…more proof that evolution exists?
[/quote]
Please wipe a little better next time, Prof. We’re just being a little silly here. All I’m saying is that it’s interesting that the mechanisms of mutation, adaptation, natural selection, and whatnot which we see in the evolutionary model of biology exist in a sociological context as well.

I don’t need to start in with the whole biological evolution thingy with you, do I? I mean, you have a doctorate degree. I would imagine that you took a few biology classes… :slight_smile:

In keeping with the “ID vs. Evolution” spirit of the thread here, is it plausible to think that the complexity and diversity we see in the christian faith is more explainable as the purposeful design of some creator? Is there one grand puppeteer behind all the different faces? Is it God’s will that we have so many different interpretations and incarnations of his supposedly literal, immutable, and everlasting gospel?

126

[quote]doogie wrote:
I mean what in this world outweighs the thought of an ETERNITY of being burned?[/quote]
Try being married to my ex-wife. Hell sounds like a nice reprieve after that shit.

“Oh! I just have to burn in horrible agony for all time? Where do I sign up? Do we get t-shirts or something?”

127

[quote]doogie wrote:
If you REALLY believe Jesus is the son of God, that he was crucified for your sins (that’s a horrible way to go out), and that you are going to burn in eternal hell-fire if you don’t live according to the bible, how could you not live a sin-free life?

I mean what in this world outweighs the thought of an ETERNITY of being burned?[/quote]

Talk about missing the point. The concept is he died for our sins…BECAUSE WE ARE SINNERS AND COULD NOT RIGHTFULLY STAND BEFORE GOD UNLESS THIS HAPPENED. In fact, none of this is hard to understand…aside from the fact that you are simply looking for every possible angle to avoid understanding it.

We are not expected to be perfect. What man on this planet could be? We have made “gray areas” for every right or wrong concept because not one concept or law we have takes all possibilities into consideration. Your argument is that since Christians aren’t perfect, than Christianity loses its validity? Does this mean that every “Evolutionist” actually has a complete grasp of science?

As was said before, if you have a question, ask. Stop acting like you have stumbled across some concept that no one has considered before…you haven’t.

128

Psst, ProfX, that was a good answer.

129

[quote]Professor X wrote:
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]

(Resisting tempation to quote Jules from Pulp Fiction…)

It implies nothing. It says that we’ll show your beliefs the same respect as the vast majority of christians do; which is nearly none at all.

You’re the only one on this board who can’t understand what I write without requiring 2 or 3 posts of explanations.

Stop reading what I write the way you read the Bible.

I have no respect for your beliefs. Is this clear enough for you to understand?

Again, my point is: People who claim to hold those beliefs don’t live their lives in accordance with them. Hence, they show, through their actions, that they also have no respect for those beliefs.

Now which type of disrespect is worse? The one from atheists who are basically disrespecting, from their point of view, fairy tales; or the one from believers who are disrespecting the Word of God?

That’s what I find hypocritical about believers jumping on a thread and whining about atheists being disrespectful towards their beliefs. They’re your beliefs, not mine. You respect them; and maybe I’ll consider it.

When there’s a thread with some babe being slobbered over, I don’t see any believers chiming in with “Lust is a sin” and “hitting it breaks a commandment” and so on… That might be a lot more appropriate, since fornication and infidelity actually happen in the real world. But no, you all jump on a thread about the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Par for the course for christians. Whine about piffles and trivialities, and shut up and do nothing when it counts.

130

[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]

In all those example you gave, the bad seeds are the minority. In the case of Christianity, it’s the vast majority. It’s not “some” Christians, it’s “most” Christians.

131

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Talk about missing the point. The concept is he died for our sins…BECAUSE WE ARE SINNERS AND COULD NOT RIGHTFULLY STAND BEFORE GOD UNLESS THIS HAPPENED. In fact, none of this is hard to understand…aside from the fact that you are simply looking for every possible angle to avoid understanding it. [/quote]

That we are born sinners is an article of faith. That Jesus died for our sins is another one. All of what your wrote is dogma to be accepted on faith.

The problem is not understanding how the story goes; the problem is that I accept none of those articles of faith. Understanding it (which I do) is not the problem. Accepting it as truth (which I don’t) is.

132

[quote]Professor X wrote:
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?[/quote]

There you go. You have to define rich to be something you’re not. You don’t live your life according to what Jesus said; you distort what he said to fit the life you want.

“Hordes material items or wealth far beyond what could ever be needed” gives a lot of leeway to define “rich”.

No one needs a TV. I don’t have a PS2 and I’m not dying from it. Hence, a PS2 is not a need. Basically, once you’ve got a roof, some clothes and a couple of meals a day, you could spend the rest of your money and time helping others. That seems to me to be a lot closer to what Jesus said.

133

[quote]pookie wrote:
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?

In all those example you gave, the bad seeds are the minority. In the case of Christianity, it’s the vast majority. It’s not “some” Christians, it’s “most” Christians. [/quote]

This is false…it is EVERY Christian. Not one on the planet is perfect or without fault. I am not sure why this causes a problem for you as far as the concept is concerned…but then, you don’t seem to have the desire to understand any of it…which begs the question of why this enters your mind so much to the point that even feel the need to make parodies of it. That sure is a lot of contemplation for something you claim to have zero respect for.

The opposite of love is indifference, not hate.

134

[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
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?

There you go. You have to define rich to be something you’re not. You don’t live your life according to what Jesus said; you distort what he said to fit the life you want.

“Hordes material items or wealth far beyond what could ever be needed” gives a lot of leeway to define “rich”.

No one needs a TV. I don’t have a PS2 and I’m not dying from it. Hence, a PS2 is not a need. Basically, once you’ve got a roof, some clothes and a couple of meals a day, you could spend the rest of your money and time helping others. That seems to me to be a lot closer to what Jesus said.
[/quote]

Did I ever claim to be perfect? I know what my faults are and don’t make apologies for them. What does that have to do with the religion? I also have one really cool motorcycle that isn’t a need. Girls like to hop on the back of it. None of that has a thing to do with the concept of Christianity. Getting into heaven isn’t even based on perfection.

Along with that, I know where my heart is and my mind is not geared towards gaining money at all costs. If that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t be in the military right now.

Why are you so worried about how others perform in Christianity? What does any of that have to do with you?

A rich man puts material items above God. In essence, it is making money your focus. That passage didn’t read, “it is harder for a man with any possessions at all to enter into heaven”, it specifically mentioned being rich. Why do you think that is?

135

[quote]Professor X wrote:
This is false…it is EVERY Christian. Not one on the planet is perfect or without fault.[/quote]

I’m not requiring perfection. But you’re at the other end of the scale, where simple lip service is enough and you can live your life any way you want.

I didn’t “make” the FSM parody. I find it amusing, yes, but in its original context of opposition to ID. At it’s basis, FSM is not to slam religion, it’s meant to keep science scientific. Religion gets pulled in because ID is a religious idea, not a scientific one.

I can be interested in the questions of God’s existence, the origin of the universe and the beginning of life without having to contemplate the validity of the Bible.

The opposite of indifference would be simple interest. You can be interested in something without loving it.

136

[quote]pookie wrote:
The opposite of love is indifference, not hate.

The opposite of indifference would be simple interest. You can be interested in something without loving it.[/quote]

Don’t mean to hijack, but have you ever been in a long term relationship or married? Love and hate are definitely on the same side of the coin. ;-p Okay, I’ll stay out now.

137

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Did I ever claim to be perfect? I know what my faults are and don’t make apologies for them. What does that have to do with the religion? I also have one really cool motorcycle that isn’t a need. Girls like to hop on the back of it. None of that has a thing to do with the concept of Christianity. Getting into heaven isn’t even based on perfection. [/quote]

I’m not asking perfection of anyone. I’m simply pointing out that what Jesus taught requires to go above and beyond living a decent life. I’m sure you’re a good and decent human being; you’re a doctor, so you spend a large part of your time helping others. I’ve never said that’s bad, and it’s not.

What I’m saying is that while the teachings of Jesus ask for more than simple decency and civility, nearly no one is ready to really give it that much effort. And some actively go against those teachings, by cheating on their taxes, sleeping around, lying, etc. But when you ask them, they still consider themselves “good Christians.”

[quote]Along with that, I know where my heart is and my mind is not geared towards gaining money at all costs. If that wasn’t the case, I wouldn’t be in the military right now.

Why are you so worried about how others perform in Christianity? What does any of that have to do with you?[/quote]

I’d like a little honesty. If someone doesn’t care for Christianity’s teachings, well just don’t follow them. But don’t call yourself “a Christian” either. It’s the “keeping up the appearances” part that annoys me.

But no matter how rich you are, you always define rich as having more than you’ve got. By third-world nation standards, we’re both filthy rich. And Matthew 19:21 still has Jesus saying “go sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,” he doesn’t list any exceptions or say you can keep what you deem necessary for your entertainment.

138

[quote]IagoMB wrote:
Don’t mean to hijack, but have you ever been in a long term relationship or married? Love and hate are definitely on the same side of the coin. ;-p Okay, I’ll stay out now. [/quote]

I think you’re confusing love and lust. Or your relationships are built on something other than love.

I’ve been with my wife for 16 years now and the love is deeper, if anything, than it was when we first met. I hope I never put “hate” and any member of my family in the same tought.

139

[quote]pookie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
This is false…it is EVERY Christian. Not one on the planet is perfect or without fault.

I’m not requiring perfection. But you’re at the other end of the scale, where simple lip service is enough and you can live your life any way you want.[/quote]

No one has written that. I wrote that I know what drives me. I know what’s in my heart. It isn’t your place to judge anyone else except yourself so why worry at all about what anyone else is doing? the actions of someone else have nothing to do with me or the credit given to my life.

[quote]

I can be interested in the questions of God’s existence, the origin of the universe and the beginning of life without having to contemplate the validity of the Bible.[/quote]

Then do that. Why are you posting in this thread?

[quote]
The opposite of love is indifference, not hate.

The opposite of indifference would be simple interest. You can be interested in something without loving it.[/quote]

Love requires caring for someone deeply. the opposite of deep emotions for something would be lack of emotion at all.

140

[quote]pookie wrote:
What I’m saying is that while the teachings of Jesus ask for more than simple decency and civility, nearly no one is ready to really give it that much effort. And some actively go against those teachings, by cheating on their taxes, sleeping around, lying, etc. But when you ask them, they still consider themselves “good Christians.”[/quote]

And? What does that have to do with you? You aren’t judged by anyone else’s actions but your own. Why are you all up in everyone else’s business?

[quote]

I’d like a little honesty. If someone doesn’t care for Christianity’s teachings, well just don’t follow them. But don’t call yourself “a Christian” either. It’s the “keeping up the appearances” part that annoys me.[/quote]

Do you realize how many church sermons have been devoted to this topic? The point is, none of it has thing to do with YOUR eternity. Let everyone else worry about themselves. Why would someone sleeping around or commiting whatever other sin you can think of bother you so much? Are you related to these people?

[quote]
But no matter how rich you are, you always define rich as having more than you’ve got. By third-world nation standards, we’re both filthy rich. And Matthew 19:21 still has Jesus saying “go sell that thou hast, and give to the poor,” he doesn’t list any exceptions or say you can keep what you deem necessary for your entertainment.[/quote]

I am rich compared to someone who is homeless, however, I doubt Donald Trump would find my apartment very “spectacular”. That is why that word means so much. He didn’t just say “man with possessions”, he said “RICH”. If God finds fault in me owning a big screen tv, that is between me and God. I expect my life to be judged by more than whether I own a Playstation2 or not. In the end, it matters to no one but me and God. Take care of yourself and do what you need to do. Quit worrying about judging an entire religion by the faults of men. Not one person on this planet is perfect. Deal with it.