Fingeredmouse
Full Member
Oh, what the actual feck? That's actually astonishing. "Old Earth" Scientists?Welcome to the world of the American evangelical community. Try growing up in it!
Also check out this: https://answersingenesis.org/
Oh, what the actual feck? That's actually astonishing. "Old Earth" Scientists?Welcome to the world of the American evangelical community. Try growing up in it!
Also check out this: https://answersingenesis.org/
Isn't this the guy that comes out of the painting in Ghostbusters II?
yeah man. That's how it is. I'd say at least 9 out of every 10 people I've ever known have been evangelicals who believe this stuff completely.Oh, what the actual feck? That's actually astonishing. "Old Earth" Scientists?
Seriously. Move somewhere else.yeah man. That's how it is. I'd say at least 9 out of every 10 people I've ever known have been evangelicals who believe this stuff completely.
Easier said than done, bud.Seriously. Move somewhere else.
Haha, I was the other one who told him (you) to leave (for Canada initially). But it was in jest, kind of. As long as you and your family are relatively safe and sane and beyond the brainwashing then you're ok.Easier said than done, bud.
I get the impression from this forum that the ability to just up stakes and migrate must be a lot easier elsewhere.
Probably also not the worst thing if there are people (especially teachers) around who can impart a different perspective on things.Easier said than done, bud.
I get the impression from this forum that the ability to just up stakes and migrate must be a lot easier elsewhere.
My wife cuts my hair. Buzz cuts are easy peazy.Haha, I was the other one who told him (you) to leave (for Canada initially). But it was in jest, kind of. As long as you and your family are relatively safe and sane and beyond the brainwashing then you're ok.
And get your hair cut, seeing as you can where you are. :P
Steal that ridiculous big boat those lunatics have built. That'd get you somewhere at least.Easier said than done, bud.
I get the impression from this forum that the ability to just up stakes and migrate must be a lot easier elsewhere.
Very true.Probably also not the worst thing if there are people (especially teachers) around who can impart a different perspective on things.
Well, I'm glad I can give some insight into just what it's like to live hereSteal that ridiculous big boat those lunatics have built. That'd get you somewhere at least.
Seriously though, I can't believe that's the mainstream mindset in your locale. You won't remember but years ago I was asking why you owned guns. I think I'm beginning to understand. Who could feel safe surrounded by those mad bastards?
That you do and it is appreciated. I've read many of your posts about your extraordinary conversations at your school and I suppose I'd never really considered how prevalent the evangelical mindset was in your state. I hope you get through to some of them, especially the kids.Well, I'm glad I can give some insight into just what it's like to live here
This forum has taught me a great deal about mindsets abroad, and I just hope that I can do the same for others.
Well, thank you.That you do and it is appreciated. I've read many of your posts about your extraordinary conversations at your school and I suppose I'd never really considered how prevalent the evangelical mindset was in your state. I hope you get through to some of them, especially the kids.
My IQ just dropped to single digits, and I have an important deadline for next week. Thanks!Welcome to the world of the American evangelical community. Try growing up in it!
Also check out this: https://answersingenesis.org/
Depends on the religion, but on Christianity and Islam, unquestionably yes. It doesn't matter if you're the nicest person of all time, if you don't believe in God, you burn.One thing I am always curious about with religion: is believing in God - or whichever other deity you follow - a prerequisite to getting your eternal paradise in the afterlife?
I always think that if I try to live my life by a good moral code, and to be a good person - why should I be denied entry to heaven just because I didnt engage in worship or prayer? To put it another way, is God really so narcissistic that they are that interested in whether you believe in them or not, rather than how you have lived your life?
interesting. Conversely, is it also the case that your worldly actions don’t really matter as long as you are pious enough? That would certainly explain a lot.Depends on the religion, but on Christianity and Islam, unquestionably yes. It doesn't matter if you're the nicest person of all time, if you don't believe in God, you burn.
Unless you're Pope Francis, who apparently throws the whole last 1900 years of Christian theology out with the bath water.Depends on the religion, but on Christianity and Islam, unquestionably yes. It doesn't matter if you're the nicest person of all time, if you don't believe in God, you burn.
Not sure about Christianity, but when it comes to Islam, if your last words are 'I believe in God, and in his prophet' (or some similar version of it), and you truly mean it, the heaven is guaranteed regardless of what you did in your life. So technically speaking, if someone like Genghis Khan did it, he'll be on heaven. More complicated for Hitler cause he made suicide and that is hell guaranteed. Dunno, if Hitler did that, Allah will be very confused.interesting. Conversely, is it also the case that your worldly actions don’t really matter as long as you are pious enough? That would certainly explain a lot.
Either way I find the whole concept somewhat anathema to any argument that religion is about teaching morals and common decency.
Bless him! Trying to find a way for the religion to co-exist in modern society, even if it means contradicting everything the religion stands for. At that stage, the question arises, why just not give up the religion in the first place?!Unless you're Pope Francis, who apparently throws the whole last 1900 years of Christian theology out with the bath water.
My thought exactly.Bless him! Trying to find a way for the religion to co-exist in modern society, even if it means contradicting everything the religion stands for. At that stage, the question arises, why just not give up the religion in the first place?!
The best book that combines science/evolution and philosophy is Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meaning if Life by Dan Dennett. A truly great book that everyone should read.I have not. In the last 5 years, for whatever reasons (probably cause I was reading a lot of scientific stuff for Ph.D.), I read exclusively fiction stuff (sci-fi and fantasy) in my reading time. However, recently went back to non-fiction books and they're much better. The book looks quite interesting though, so putting it in my to-read list.
I guess it just got memed. Some imperfect memnization (mutation) and the new meme had it easier to spread in the teenagers.
I'd say if there is an intelligent, all-powerful and all-loving God, surely He would assess the situation at the 'judgement day' and understand perfectly well that there have been people who, during their life time, did not find sufficient evidence to believe in His existence. At which point everything would be forgiven and atheists and agnostics would enter paradise together with all believers. You can't believe what you can't believe. And it makes no sense to punish someone for not believing in something that he or she simply cannot believe.One thing I am always curious about with religion: is believing in God - or whichever other deity you follow - a prerequisite to getting your eternal paradise in the afterlife?
I always think that if I try to live my life by a good moral code, and to be a good person - why should I be denied entry to heaven just because I didnt engage in worship or prayer? To put it another way, is God really so narcissistic that they are that interested in whether you believe in them or not, rather than how you have lived your life?
Hell is the grave, or death, nothing else. No torture, no eternal suffering. The reward is eternal life, the sentence is eternal death.I'd say if there is an intelligent, all-powerful and all-loving God, surely He would assess the situation at the 'judgement day' and understand perfectly well that there have been people who, during their life time, did not find sufficient evidence to believe in His existence. At which point everything would be forgiven and atheists and agnostics would enter paradise together with all believers. You can't believe what you can't believe. And it makes no sense to punish someone for not believing in something that he or she simply cannot believe.
For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. According to the word of God there will be no atheists or agnostics saved, because to be saved you must believe in Jesus Christ. He is the sacrifice which if you reject then you are doomed to eternal suffering. Not eternal burning just eternal non existence, to cut it short, you cease to exist. You will be like you were before you were born. Remember that time?I'd say if there is an intelligent, all-powerful and all-loving God, surely He would assess the situation at the 'judgement day' and understand perfectly well that there have been people who, during their life time, did not find sufficient evidence to believe in His existence. At which point everything would be forgiven and atheists and agnostics would enter paradise together with all believers. You can't believe what you can't believe. And it makes no sense to punish someone for not believing in something that he or she simply cannot believe.
What a book that is. Consciousness Explained too.The best book that combines science/evolution and philosophy is Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meaning if Life by Dan Dennett. A truly great book that everyone should read.
That one made lots of people angry. Which made it an even better book.What a book that is. Consciousness Explained too.
No book (on Abrahamic religions which are those that have the hell) say so.Hell is the grave, or death, nothing else. No torture, no eternal suffering. The reward is eternal life, the sentence is eternal death.
Well, God's really rather unpleasant in that case then.For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. According to the word of God there will be no atheists or agnostics saved, because to be saved you must believe in Jesus Christ. He is the sacrifice which if you reject then you are doomed to eternal suffering. Not eternal burning just eternal non existence, to cut it short, you cease to exist. You will be like you were before you were born. Remember that time?
In the words of the great @Mockney, God's a cnut.Well, God's really rather unpleasant in that case then.
That was interesting. To be honest, the format of this is less of a debate and more of a harsh interview, where all the power is in interviewer's hands (due to him being the one asking the question with personal preparation), but in this case Dawkins doesn't look great too great in it. But Dawkins is certainly quite dogmatic in his atheism; and there are certainly better answers to questions about Stalin or Mao points (Dawkins kinda tried to formulate it but failed to do it properly). While technically those were atheist regimes, they were not — atheism was a word that was used in the politics of replacing a more traditional religion with basically religious belief in the regime, communism & personal cults (Stalin, Mao, Lenin etc.).Quite entertaining discussion. I would critize Richard Dawkins inability in this debate to acknowledge the good deeds carried out by religous peole.
Agree.First time I've seen Dawkins speak. He makes some good points of course, and he can articulate them well. But his criticism of religion comes across as too narrow and dogmatic as soon as more ambivalent issues are brought up. Or when religious convictions might get any credit for something desirable. Hasan is quite good at pointing out inconsistencies (and sometimes absurdities) resulting from that, and on a few occasions Dawkins starts to wriggle.
I agree, there are also a lot of typical stupuid questions like "Can you prove Muhammed didn't fly to the moon on a winged horse?".That was interesting. To be honest, the format of this is less of a debate and more of a harsh interview, where all the power is in interviewer's hands (due to him being the one asking the question with personal preparation), but in this case Dawkins doesn't look great too great in it. But Dawkins is certainly quite dogmatic in his atheism; and there are certainly better answers to questions about Stalin or Mao points (Dawkins kinda tried to formulate it but failed to do it properly). While technically those were atheist regimes, they were not — atheism was a word that was used in the politics of replacing a more traditional religion with basically religious belief in the regime, communism & personal cults (Stalin, Mao, Lenin etc.).
Agree.
I thought that the journalist was actually quite good for the most part. Dawkins inability to put anything good to religion is as dogmatic as religion itself.I agree, there are also a lot of typical stupuid questions like "Can you prove Muhammed didn't fly to the moon on a winged horse?".
Fair enough. But anyone who's postiny here in readable english presumeably had that chance to know Him.I'd say if there is an intelligent, all-powerful and all-loving God, surely He would assess the situation at the 'judgement day' and understand perfectly well that there have been people who, during their life time, did not find sufficient evidence to believe in His existence. At which point everything would be forgiven and atheists and agnostics would enter paradise together with all believers. You can't believe what you can't believe. And it makes no sense to punish someone for not believing in something that he or she simply cannot believe.
I agree tbh. I still feel these discussions sometimes lack nuance. On of my favourite books is The monk and the philosopher where a highly prestrigious biologist becomes a monk in Vajyarana buddhism and debates his father who is a renowned atheist philosopher.I thought that the journalist was actually quite good for the most part. Dawkins inability to put anything good to religion is as dogmatic as religion itself.
I like much better scientist Dawkins than anti-theist Dawkins.
Had the 'chance to know Him'? What sort of ego does a creature that rewards or tortures other entities based on reasonable conclusions drawn? Such a tyrant should be overthrown.Fair enough. But anyone who's postiny here in readable english presumeably had that chance to know Him.
On the flip side if god suddenly parts the skies and descent himself it wouldn't be called faith if you believe him
We cannot. The sick feck is too powerful.Had the 'chance to know Him'? What sort of ego does a creature that rewards or tortures other entities based on reasonable conclusions drawn? Such a tyrant should be overthrown.
Interestingly I cannot detect that aspect of 'believing' being crucial in the Old Testament narrative. Apart from Abraham packing his stuff, 'having faith' and 'following God to the land that He will show him', God is presented as someone who is constantly revealing Himself, either through the miraculous cloud of fire, or through His glorious presence in the tent of the congregation, or through the clear, unmistakable voice of Israel's prophets, etc... In one way or another God always revealed Himself.Fair enough. But anyone who's postiny here in readable english presumeably had that chance to know Him.
On the flip side if god suddenly parts the skies and descent himself it wouldn't be called faith if you believe him
That's exactly the reason why Marcion wrote his 'Antithesis' in the second century AD. The nature of God in the Old Testament is fundamentally different from the nature of Jesus (and therefore the God that Jesus identifies with). Marcion came to the conclusion that those are two completely different gods and the the OT God is in no way compatible with the NT God.We cannot. The sick feck is too powerful.
God is essentially Emperor Palpatine but more evil and more powerful.
Have you lost your faith @Mihajlovic? Remember you being very religious a few years ago.That's exactly the reason why Marcion wrote his 'Antithesis' in the second century AD. The nature of God in the Old Testament is fundamentally different from the nature of Jesus (and therefore the God that Jesus identifies with). Marcion came to the conclusion that those are two completely different gods and the the OT God is in no way compatible with the NT God.