cbs poll on evolution vs. creationism

[WITHTEETH]

Mothman, things aren't always what they seem.

 

I'm simply stating that, and leaving it at that. I may not be a christian but we can still be friends though. right? :D

 

Besides, a good person, is a good person.

[Baley]

And you'd take death and punishment as well for knowledge?  I see. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes you bewildered puppet.

 

Knowledge is the single greatest asset humanity possesses.

[Dark Moth]

Have you even read about Satanic cults, anyway?  Very sick and twisted, I tell you, what some of them had done and still do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stop being such a hypocrite.Christian cults have performed "vile deeds" over the years as well.Or do we forget about them?

 

Christianity has more crimes under it's golden robe than Satanism ever will.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

*sigh*

 

AGAIN, that is not because of Christianity, but humanity's own failings. Christianity does not permit that, Satanism does. I don't condone any of the things Christians (not Christianity) have done in the past, but that is not the religion's fault.

[WITHTEETH]

BTW, WITHTEETH, the Bible makes it clear Satan/Lucifer is a real being, not an idea.  Remember the snake in Genesis?  That would be him. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was raised Lutheran so i had a reformed view on what is Christianity. I thought that much of it could be taken fugeratively. Thus the snake was actaully just a flaw we had.

 

Later in my contemplating this as an atheist i realized that we are not fundementally flawed. We are what we are. What you may call imperfect I may call beauty, what i may call imperfect you may call blasphme. Its all just a matter of opinion to me.

[thepixiesrock]

@pixies: it's a bit of both, I think.    Sometimes a parent knows a child won't understand why he or she is not allowed to do something, but must obey anyway for their own good.  For instance, not to touch fire.  A parent can tell the child that he/she will be burned, but the child won't really know why, and won't know for sure if the parent is telling the truth or not unless the child touches fire for him/herself.  But if they did, they would still be burned. 

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So God thinks we are too stupid to understand why?

 

You are saying God is trying to protect us? From what? If the child does get burned, they will have learned a lesson and they will remember not to do it again, and they will have more knowlege because of the experience. And who is to say God know's what is better for us than we do? It is only better because God says it is better.

[thepixiesrock]

Later in my contemplating this as an atheist i realized that we are not fundementally flawed. We are what we are. What you may call imperfect I may call beauty, what i may call imperfect you may call blasphme. Its all just a matter of opinion to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

It's all relative, "a man is only headless when compared to a man with a head."

Edited November 6, 2005 by thepixiesrock

[Dark Moth]

*SIGH* Well, I guess you'll just have to take it up with him then, pixies. I'd love to stay and chat, but I have to finish homework. Adios.

 

On one final note, I wouldn't put too much faith in humanity's intelligence. Humanity has shown time and again we don't always know what's best for us.

[WITHTEETH]

AGAIN, that is not because of Christianity, but humanity's own failings.  Christianity does not permit that, Satanism does.  I don't condone any of the things Christians (not Christianity) have done in the past, but that is not the religion's fault. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This gets tricky. maybe we cannot, or maybe should not stereotype people with their religion. Was Mothman part of the Inqusition? no. Would we have been able to tell? no. Christians come in all different beliefs. Each one has a unique personal view on God, just like other theistic religions

 

Many people cause terrible acts all over the planet everyday. we cannot blame religion for the majority of them. I believe we have to blame the individual, for their choice, not the religion.

[Baley]

Have you even read about Satanic cults, anyway?  Very sick and twisted, I tell you, what some of them had done and still do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stop being such a hypocrite.Christian cults have performed "vile deeds" over the years as well.Or do we forget about them?

 

Christianity has more crimes under it's golden robe than Satanism ever will.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

*sigh*

 

AGAIN, that is not because of Christianity, but humanity's own failings. Christianity does not permit that, Satanism does. I don't condone any of the things Christians (not Christianity) have done in the past, but that is not the religion's fault.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you're saying that say the Inquisition was not a Christian product of its time?

Or the recent murder of nun believed to be possessed?

 

 

Also,do some study on Satanism,your knowledge is lacking.

Edited November 6, 2005 by Baley

[thepixiesrock]

On one final note, I wouldn't put too much faith in humanity's intelligence.  Humanity has shown time and again we don't always know what's best for us.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You mean like religion?

 

Thats not actually fair what I said, because religion has done good things as well as bad, but you fail to realize that the human race is the most intellegent on the face of the earth. Until Aliens come (if they aren't already here). And you say that as though you know of something more intellegent than humanity. Currently, the most intellegent beings I know of are humans. Relative concept.

[Baley]

1. Satan represents indulgence instead of abstinence!

 

2. Satan represents vital existence instead of spiritual pipe dreams!

 

3. Satan represents undefiled wisdom instead of hypocritical self-deceit!

 

4. Satan represents kindness to those who deserve it instead of love wasted on ingrates!

 

5. Satan represents vengeance instead of turning the other cheek!

 

6. Satan represents responsibility to the responsible instead of concern for psychic vampires!

 

7. Satan represents man as just another animal, sometimes better, more often worse than those that walk on all-fours, who, because of his divine spiritual and intellectual development,has become the most vicious animal of all!

 

8. Satan represents all of the so-called sins, as they all lead to physical, mental, or emotional gratification!

 

9. Satan has been the best friend the Church has ever had, as He has kept it in business all these years!

Edited November 6, 2005 by Baley

[WITHTEETH]

On one final note, I wouldn't put too much faith in humanity's intelligence.  Humanity has shown time and again we don't always know what's best for us.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You mean like religion?

 

Thats not actually fair what I said, because religion has done good things as well as bad, but you fail to realize that the human race is the most intellegent on the face of the earth. Until Aliens come (if they aren't already here). And you say that as though you know of something more intellegent than humanity. Currently, the most intellegent beings I know of are humans. Relative concept.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Fear and laziness is humanities biggest hurdles. Once we find ways to jump them... :cool:

Then again, maybe its too late, more proof to live for the now.

[thepixiesrock]

The problem with Mothman is that a lot of his replies started with a "sigh", as if he knew all of the answers for a fact, and that we just dont understand. I don't try to pass my beliefs off as fact, I just give my opinion.

Edited November 6, 2005 by thepixiesrock

[WITHTEETH]

Well with relativism, your opinion is right. With relativism Mothman is right. But the guy next to you doesn't have to agree to be right though.

[Dark Moth]

The problem with Mothman is that a lot of his replies started with a "sigh", as if he knew all of the answers for a fact, and that we just dont understand.  I don't assume to be right, I just give my opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Just to clear something up before I leave, the *sigh*'s were actually more from me starting to get tired of arguing while still having this homework to put up with. Sorry if you took it the wrong way, I wasn't trying to make it look like I believed everything I stated was fact. Okay, now I'll get back to my homework. (friggin AP courses) <_<

Edited November 6, 2005 by Mothman

[Lucius]

On one final note, I wouldn't put too much faith in humanity's intelligence.  Humanity has shown time and again we don't always know what's best for us.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

You mean like religion?

Was just about to say that. ::points to sig:: :D

[Commissar]

On one final note, I wouldn't put too much faith in humanity's intelligence.  Humanity has shown time and again we don't always know what's best for us. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You'll put your faith, on the other hand, in the judgment of a council of bishops, convening hundreds of years after the death of Jesus, as to what ought to consist of his gospel, though?

 

You'll put your faith, on the other hand, in a book that might be just a bit off on a few things - such as the age of the earth, for example. If it's literal, then it's just plain wrong; if it's a metaphor, then can you tell me what else is? What isn't? That's interpretation, interpretation by human intelligence, and we all know the problems with human intelligence, yeah?

 

You'll put your faith, on the other hand, in a religion that can't answer any of the big questions, such as, "Why?" Why would God create us as imperfect? To see who can make it into heaven? What's the point of that? Why not just create Heaven and put everyone there? Because we wouldn't be tested then, sure. But what's the point of the test? It's a bit like me tossing some mice in a maze, and killing the ones who don't make it to the cheese. We have to prove our faith, yada yada yada. If God's omnipotent, though, then he could just create us all with perfect faith. But that gets in the way of free will, doesn't it? But if God can't create us without violating our free will, then he's really not omnipotent. If he can, and chose not to, then we're back to the mice scenario, and it all sounds more like a sick game than anything we ought to respect.

 

Stop arguing about this. It's not the point of the thread.

[Guest Cantousent]

It seems the point of the thread is to attack Mothman for having the temerity to admit he is Christian. You seem well educated in the events of early Christianity, Commissar. For the most part, I admire your grasp of the facts, having some small experience in these things myself. As I understand your overarching arguments, I believe we are not so wildly different. On the other hand, Mothman has only committed one grievous mistake, he is unwilling to stand in silence while people make charges against Christians in general for offenses made by certain Christians in specific.

 

The point of this thread? I truly believe, and I apologize to my random friend for saying, that it was always to castigate Christianity. Furthermore, any Christian who had the audacity to make a strong statement regarding his personal faith was inevitably destined to face a flood of harsh and ugly responses from a whole slew of people. baley, whom I've always rather liked, is now touting the moral superiority of Satanism? Has it gone so far that atheists only hate Christians? Where are the harsh voices speaking out against other religions in this thread? Still, while I disagree with a Satanist perspective, I will say that less persecution is better, even if it leaves us Christians in a select group with a rather dubious distinction.

 

You know, it just seems, when folks feel compelled to add the disclaimer to their posts, "...not that I'm a Christian" or "...And I'm not even a Christian," then it is Christianity that bears the brunt of a lot of intolerance. Mothman might not have articulated his thoughts as well as he wished, but it seems to me that his overarching theme is, "I am a Christian. I lead my life as best I can. I need apologize to no-one for my beliefs."

 

In that regard, I agree with Mothman as much as I do you, Commissar. If you didn't know his religion, you wouldn't comment on it? Perhaps it would be best if you knew his religion without passing judgments upon it anyhow. Should creationism be taught in the classroom? I don't believe so. If Mothman believes it should, then you have an argument. Attack his Christianity? Heavens no. That would be as bad as attacking you for your atheism.

 

Finally, I've noticed a lot of folks claim that they put their faith in science. That you believe science is the basis for how man understands the world sounds perfectly reasonable. It fails, however, to provide even a rudimentary basis for ethical or moral behavior. Science is, to paraphrase an old television show, all about the facts and nothing but the facts. Science doesn't tell us that killing is evil. It doesn't tell us that pollution is bad. Indeed, science tells us that some organisms must kill other organisms to live. Evolution tells us that some creatures will adapt to pollutants and will thrive in a "polluted" environment.

 

Folks need not get their moral or ethical foundation from religion, but, if you'll pardon the expression, they sure as hell can't build a moral or ethical framework on a foundation of science.

[Hurlshort]

Very good post Cantousent. The thing that drives me nuts about every religious argument here is that people who believe in God are treated like they are against science. I posted an earlier statement by a Cardinal that said how important it is for religion and science to co-exist.

 

I am proud of my faith. It has not faltered.

[LoneWolf16]

Folks need not get their moral or ethical foundation from religion, but, if you'll pardon the expression, they sure as hell can't build a moral or ethical framework on a foundation of science.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No we don't.

 

I wasn't raised in a religious environment and I've got a stronger framework of morals and ethics than damn near every person I know.

 

For the most part, I agree with the post in its entirety, and I also believe it to be hypocritical to attack Christianity and not the other religions.

 

There's a problem there though. I only argue with people like Mothy when they sit there and tell me things like "I'm too stupid to understand why god does certain things, or the reasoning behind why he wants me to do other things."

 

Were he Muslim and saying stuff like that, I'd be ripping into him in an instant.

 

* I don't think Baley is advocating Satanism, he's just making the distinction between the two "faiths".

 

 

Not to change tracks or anything......but here's the real question. If I'm wrong, and there is a heaven, and a hell, will I go to the latter simply because I did not believe in either...even if I was a good person, who did what he could in life to help others, and live honestly?

[Dark Moth]

I have nothing against science, either. I do agree with Cantousent that my inability to keep my mouth shut gets me in a tight spot a lot of times. I tend to get defensive of my faith. But just because I am proud of my faith doesn't mean I want a theocracy or want to ban teaching evolution in schools. What does get me though is that I'm constantly forced to defend my faith from others. I never attacked anyone on this board for being an atheist. But I have repeatedly had to answer for my faith to a lot of people on this board.

 

And to answer Comissar's question: yes, I do. I'm well aware that not everything in the Bible is perfect or infallible. It's teachings are quite clear, however. And frankly, while humans may be the most intelligent species on this planet, we have a plethora of flaws. I wouldn't be surprised if a higher intelligence did exist in the universe.

 

And for the record Baley, I have looked a lot into Satanism. I have read books and articles on it and its history, I've looked at theological and secular sources, watched documentaries, and even attended lectures on it. So yes, I do think I know what I'm talking about.

 

And Lonewolf, while I'm not the brightest of creatures, I never said I was too stupid to understand God's reasoning, I've mostly just offered my opinions on it. Disagree with them if you wish. As WITHTEETH said, some of it is interpretation. In my humble opinion though, I don't think we even could understand all of God's motivations if it existed. But to quote the Mothman Prophecies: "You're more advanced than a roach. Have you ever tried explaining yourself to one of them?"

Edited November 6, 2005 by Mothman

[LoneWolf16]

Slight amendment...I meant that people generally say "You're too stupid" not that they themselves are stupid, but the people they're talking to.

[Dark Moth]

Slight amendment...I meant that people generally say "You're too stupid" not that they themselves are stupid, but the people they're talking to.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Oh. Well, apologies if it seemed that way.

[Commissar]

It seems the point of the thread is  to attack Mothman for having the temerity to admit he is Christian.  You seem well educated in the events of early Christianity, Commissar. For the most part, I admire your grasp of the facts, having some small experience in these things myself.  As I understand your overarching arguments, I believe we are not so wildly different.  On the other hand, Mothman has only committed one grievous mistake, he is unwilling to stand in silence while people make charges against Christians in general for offenses made by certain Christians in specific.

Actually, no. I have no problem - and I don't think anyone else in the thread would, either - with someone stating that they believe in Christian theology and leaving it at that. Try and argue the point, however, try and prove why you're right and I'm wrong, and of course I'm going to jump all over that. Has anyone ever seen me back off from a tasty argument around here before?

 

The point of this thread? I truly believe, and I apologize to my random friend for saying, that it was always to castigate Christianity.  Furthermore, any Christian who had the audacity to make a strong statement regarding his personal faith was inevitably destined to face a flood of harsh and ugly responses from a whole slew of people.  baley, whom I've always rather liked, is now touting the moral superiority of Satanism?  Has it gone so far that atheists only hate Christians?  Where are the harsh voices speaking out against other religions in this thread?  Still, while I disagree with a Satanist perspective, I will say that less persecution is better, even if it leaves us Christians in a select group with a rather dubious distinction.

I would argue it was made to castigate people who take creationism over evolution. That's a very, very bad thing...see my comments in response to Walsingham's attempt to get the thread back on topic.

 

Atheists don't only hate Christians. Atheists, as a whole, can't be said to have any opinion on anything other than the shared disbelief in a divine deity. As always, you're treating atheism like a religion, a cohesive unit with set beliefs or goals. An atheist is not the opposite of a Christian.

 

You know, it just seems, when folks feel compelled to add the disclaimer to their posts, "...not that I'm a Christian" or "...And I'm not even a Christian," then it is Christianity that bears the brunt of a lot of intolerance.  Mothman might not have articulated his thoughts as well as he wished, but it seems to me that his overarching theme is, "I am a Christian.  I lead my life as best I can.  I need apologize to no-one for my beliefs."

And I'd have been fine with that overarching theme. Trouble is, he tacked on the rider: "And here's why I'm right." I don't believe I've ever articulated precisely why I don't believe in the Christian God, simply because it's rarely relevant, and it could easily be taken as an invitation to a debate. If you want to tell us all why creationism is the cat's ass, be prepared for people to disagree, with evidence, or personal opinion arguments, or anything else that comes to mind.

 

In that regard, I agree with Mothman as much as I do you, Commissar.  If you didn't know his religion, you wouldn't comment on it?  Perhaps it would be best if you knew his religion without passing judgments upon it anyhow.  Should creationism be taught in the classroom?  I don't believe so.  If Mothman believes it should, then you have an argument.  Attack his Christianity?  Heavens no.  That would be as bad as attacking you for your atheism.

You're welcome to it; I've seen folks of the religious persuasion arguing against atheism before, and it never fails to be amusing.

 

But my point was that if you want to put forth some sort of idea in the public space, it's best not to include religious sentiments if you want it to be considered objectively. I'm down here in the South, and it's in vogue for the folks with the hick accents and a literal litter of kids to preface every opinion they make with, "Well, I'm a Christian, so..." You have no idea what eye-rolling is all about until you've heard that prefix used with everything from film discussions to automobile choices.

 

There's this culture of persecution developing primarily amongst evangelicals these days, and I just don't get it. They're as protected as anyone else in this country - they currently run it, in fact - but apparently you've never known oppression until you've been a white heterosexual Christian male.

 

So yeah, keep that stuff to yourself. Know why? Because Hindus never get up and say, "Well, I'm Hindu, and I don't feel that Hindu values are being represented in the media these days. Let's ban Desperate Housewives." Muslims don't ask that sections of the Koran be etched into the walls of the Supreme Court. Jews never suggest that legislation be enacted to ensure the country remains kosher. I dare you to suggest that Christians never attempt to force their values on the American public.

 

Finally, I've noticed a lot of folks claim that they put their faith in science.  That you believe science is the basis for how man understands the world sounds perfectly reasonable.  It fails, however, to provide even a rudimentary basis for ethical or moral behavior.  Science is, to paraphrase an old television show, all about the facts and nothing but the facts.  Science doesn't tell us that killing is evil.  It doesn't tell us that pollution is bad.  Indeed, science tells us that some organisms must kill other organisms to live.  Evolution tells us that some creatures will adapt to pollutants and will thrive in a "polluted" environment.

 

Folks need not get their moral or ethical foundation from religion, but, if you'll pardon the expression, they sure as hell can't build a moral or ethical framework on a foundation of science.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No one suggested that personal ethics ought to be derived from science. On the other hand, why should general scientific thought be derived from personal religion?

 

Ethics and morals can come from all sorts of places. I'd posit that I'm a prime example. And, of course, ethics and morals are wholly subjective. I personally feel the Yellow Elephants are ethically corrupt, and yet a great many of them are Christians. And let's not rehash the Catholic child molestation scandals and the absolutely abhorrent handling thereof, shall we?

[Colrom]

I don't know about building a moral or ethical foundation on "science" but I know that there are people who have very good moral and ethical foundations that they believe are built on something other than religion.

 

Some folks believe that the "truth' is so imbedded in reality that it is evident to anyone who chooses to accept what they see.

 

Sometimes folks talk about certain people who are uninformed about Chritianity or are unbelievers of Christianity but who have Christian moral and ethical values as being "accidental Christians".