Who Here is a Christian? bLinD fAiTh rEbeLs :)

[indra]

um, i'm going to assume that you were talking to me, and i'm going to say that we've been through the ID debate here on FYM a million times and i'm very certain in both my facts and my convictions.

real intellectuals not only search, but they understand the rules of the discipline in which they are studying -- science deals with exactly that which you can feel with your fingers, that which you can test, quantify, verify, or falsify.

you cannot do such things with the supernatural. hence, it is not fit for a science class. take it to a theology or philosophy class, but do not destroy science standards with such things.

EXACTLY!!!

 

[got2k9s]

A_Wanderer, how is it so easy for you to believe in 'the fates,' then, if they are so very intangible?

 

[Irvine511]

Irvine, read the book.

Written by a guy who was an athiest, who learned how to be one in BIOLOGY CLASS.

You know, with all those facts and things you can touch.

Read the book and see how it addresses your beliefs.
It's a very interesting read . . . you know, for an intellectual.

i think you're missing the point entirely.

no one i saying that you're a fool to believe in intelligent design. i think livluv makes a great post. but you are a fool if you believe intelligent design is science or deserves to be even mentioned in the same sentence as evolution. it is pseudoscience, or junk science.

also, the book's understanding of ID is (at least according to the amazon editors .. and remember, those reviews are designed to maek the book appealing to it's intended audience so you will buy it) much different than that of the stripe that has been brought in front of schoolboards and is propagated by the Religious Right.

 

[A_Wanderer]

A_Wanderer, how is it so easy for you to believe in 'the fates,' then, if they are so very intangible?

I don't believe in fates and furies in a literalist sense or any form of karmic retributon. If I ever speak of them it would be metaphorically.

 

[got2k9s]

Creationism, you mean?

Well, let's see . . . ID was ruled to be unacceptable in the public school system on the idea that it was just creationism with a different name, so what is the difference? The judge didn't see one.

AND, I know, that SCARY, SCARY "Religious Right" - - those people who haven't said, "Take evolution out of the schools," but instead want an alternative theory taught as well, *shudder* - - what might the world come to if those aspiring to learn aren't just taught one idea? What if they were forced to look into it themselves and form their own idea

What might the world come to?

 

[got2k9s]

I don't believe in fates and furies in a literalist sense or any form of karmic retributon. If I ever speak of them it would be metaphorically.

Symbolic of what, though?

 

[A_Wanderer]

I think it would come to a point where it becomes untenable to place origins and evolution in the biology curriculum because equal time rules and parent group pressures mean it's just not worth the effort.

 

[got2k9s]

I think it would come to a point where it becomes untenable to place origins and evolution in the biology curriculum because equal time rules and parent group pressures mean it's just not worth the effort.

Now, that beats all.

So, 'too much trouble' shoud dictate education?
Not the lofty ideal of TRUE education - - the elitist rantings from earlier - - are you the same person?

Besides, origins and evolution is ALREADY in the biology curriculum - - what do you mean?

 

[A_Wanderer]

Symbolic of what, though?

A means of emphasising important events maybe?

All that exists is energy and energy condensate spread across various dimensions interacting within the constraints of physical constants. Nothing supernatural about it.

 

[got2k9s]

A means of emphasising important events maybe?

All that exists is energy and energy condensate spread across various dimensions interacting within the constraints of physical constants. Nothing supernatural about it.

All this talk of 'constraints' makes me think of 'limitations,' which seems to fly in the face of what one might mean when trying to metaphorically, even, describe something attributable to something like "the fates," even as a figure-of-speech.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Now, that beats all.

So, 'too much trouble' shoud dictate education?
Not the lofty ideal of TRUE education - - the elitist rantings from earlier - - are you the same person?

Besides, origins and evolution is ALREADY in the biology curriculum - - what do you mean?

That is merely the end that the proponents wish to achieve, the elimination of naturalistic evolutionary biology from the curriculum to make it more compatiable with literalist beliefs. ID is literally the wedge tactic of the Discovery Institute. The ID movement is an effective stepping stone because you cannot bring creationism into the classroom, they know this through the failures of the 1980's, but ID is more honed, it lacks overt theist overtones and can be dressed up in scientific language. Science classes have to cover a lot of material, it reaches the point when the trouble of teaching evolution becomes too great and curriculums have to be modified to fit community standards, it extends across to the way that geology is taught (the proponents of flood geology) and cosmology (the origins of the universe). It isn't about letting people make up their own minds, it is about causing enough trouble to force schools to stop teaching material that offends a belief system.

Again ID is not real science, it is not a recognised and accepted theory within the scientific community, it fails to explain all of the evidence as well as naturalistic evolutionary biology, given that a science class is about teaching children the accepted paradigm it makes little sense to introduce an unfounded hypothesis and grant it equal time.

 

[A_Wanderer]

All this talk of 'constraints' makes me think of 'limitations,' which seems to fly in the face of what one might mean when trying to metaphorically, even, describe something attributable to something like "the fates," even as a figure-of-speech.

Can matter be accelerated to the speed of light - no, for that is a physical impossiblity imposed by constraints.

Can we create stable elements with really high atomic numbers - no we cannot because the physcial constraints.

Can we instantaneously transmit information from one place to another - no we cannot because there is a limit to the speed of information.

These are universal constraints that exist and act upon the energy and matter within the universe.

 

[Irvine511]

Can matter be accelerated to the speed of light - no, for that is a physical impossiblity imposed by constraints.

Can we create stable elements with really high atomic numbers - no we cannot because the physcial constraints.

Can we instantaneously transmit information from one place to another - no we cannot because there is a limit to the speed of information.

These are universal constraints that exist and act upon the energy and matter within the universe.

but i thought that with god anything is possible.

 

[indra]

Creationism, you mean?

Well, let's see . . . ID was ruled to be unacceptable in the public school system on the idea that it was just creationism with a different name, so what is the difference? The judge didn't see one.

AND, I know, that SCARY, SCARY "Religious Right" - - those people who haven't said, "Take evolution out of the schools," but instead want an alternative theory taught as well, *shudder* - - what might the world come to if those aspiring to learn aren't just taught one idea? What if they were forced to look into it themselves and form their own idea

What might the world come to?

What part of intelligent design isn't science didn't you understand?

 

[For Honor]

I've search all over this world
and that rebel from Nazareth shines truth!

That is what I believe.

*simple faith*

Since I have never really responded to the original post.......

I'm glad you have found something that you believe in in such a way, the iron horse.


=====
=====

As for everyone else....
Interesting discussions, mostly.

 

[got2k9s]

What part of intelligent design isn't science didn't you understand?

Apparently the same part of 'manners class' you didn' t understand. Oh, wait, 'manners' is apparently like ID - - not allowed in schools because it's so SCCCCAAAARRRRYYYY.

You are just belligerent - - get back to me when you learn to interact on a more intelligent level. I'll be holding my breath.

 

[BVS]

Apparently the same part of 'manners class' you didn' t understand. Oh, wait, 'manners' is apparently like ID - - not allowed in schools because it's so SCCCCAAAARRRRYYYY.

You are just belligerent - - get back to me when you learn to interact on a more intelligent level. I'll be holding my breath.

That was flat out rude AND avoiding the question.

 

[nbcrusader]

What part of intelligent design isn't science didn't you understand?

Science only excludes ID by definition in that it won't be considered, not that it is inferior.

 

[got2k9s]

That is merely the end that the proponents wish to achieve, the elimination of naturalistic evolutionary biology from the curriculum to make it more compatiable with literalist beliefs.

This is just simply not true.
Saying this is the equivalent of "gun control advocates just want to take away all of our guns!" It's fatalistic propaganda.

And like LivLuv alluded to, why is it so unimaginable that God *created* the facts of science? Why are they viewed to be completely mutually exclusive?

ID is literally the wedge tactic of the Discovery Institute. The ID movement is an effective stepping stone because you cannot bring creationism into the classroom, they know this through the failures of the 1980's, but ID is more honed, it lacks overt theist overtones and can be dressed up in scientific language. Science classes have to cover a lot of material, it reaches the point when the trouble of teaching evolution becomes too great and curriculums have to be modified to fit community standards, it extends across to the way that geology is taught (the proponents of flood geology) and cosmology (the origins of the universe). It isn't about letting people make up their own minds, it is about causing enough trouble to force schools to stop teaching material that offends a belief system.

Again, I assert that this theory of "it's too time consuming" flies in the face of REAL EDUCATION, which you definitely seem to be a proponent of. What gives?

"It would take too long" is not acceptable, but I'm glad you're honest.

And, IF ID was already taught in schools, wouldn't those who don't believe it want the "schools to stop teaching material that offends (their) belief system?" Absolutely.

And it IS about people being allowed to make a decision. Could you imagine sitting in history class and the teacher saying, "All right, now, class, we're studying the American Civil War today, but since there are time constraints and it's difficult to explain all of the details of opposing sides, we're just going to focus on "The North" - - we will not be talking at all about "The South."
I realize you are Australian, so it's just an example, but would YOU consider that an education or a joke?

[QUOTE} Again ID is not real science, it is not a recognised and accepted theory within the scientific community, it fails to explain all of the evidence as well as naturalistic evolutionary biology, given that a science class is about teaching children the accepted paradigm it makes little sense to introduce an unfounded hypothesis and grant it equal time. [/QUOTE]

First of all, "not a recognized and accepted theory within the scientific community" is just not true!
Are you saying that anyone who believes ID is not a scientist? Because there ARE people who are scientists and believe in ID and/or are continually fascinated enough with it to continue looking into it. YOU just don't believe it. Many others don't as well, that's true. But for you guys to say "We speak for everyone" is a lot of things, including not only arrogant, but just plain false.

 

[Kieran McConville]

I used to be a christian but then I found FYM.

 

[got2k9s]

That was flat out rude AND avoiding the question.

Um, hi.

The question was rhetorical on her part, obviously.
So, no answer was required or requested.

AND, "rude?"
Yes, her answer was THAT too. Just because you agree with her doesn't mean you should avoid that fact.

 

[got2k9s]

I used to be a christian but then I found FYM.

How do you define Christian? Just wondering . . .

 

[got2k9s]

Can matter be accelerated to the speed of light - no, for that is a physical impossiblity imposed by constraints.

Can we create stable elements with really high atomic numbers - no we cannot because the physcial constraints.

Can we instantaneously transmit information from one place to another - no we cannot because there is a limit to the speed of information.

These are universal constraints that exist and act upon the energy and matter within the universe.

So, do you attribute the 'metaphorical' abilities of "the fates" with those of "matter" and "stable elements" and "the speed of information?"

I ask, because, the point I was trying to make is: utilizing the words "the fates" indicates something superior to all else . . . something bigger than us, bigger than that which is limited, therefore it can impact or affect the whole. Us, the world, etc.

But you just made the point that the things you mentioned ARE limited. Which to me, seems to support that they, too, are 'inferior to' "the fates."

 

[Irvine511]

Science only excludes ID by definition in that it won't be considered, not that it is inferior.

science excludes ID because ID isn't science. it has no scientific credibility, thus it is inferior.

 

[got2k9s]

but i thought that with god anything is possible.

With GOD, it is.

Just because something hasn't happened, does that mean it couldn't? No. Not necessarily.

 

[Irvine511]

I used to be a christian but then I found FYM.

i hear that.

 

[got2k9s]

i hear that.

Irvine, I ask the same question of you. What do you mean by Christian? How do you define it?

Honest question, here . . .

 

[Irvine511]

Irvine, I ask the same question of you. What do you mean by Christian? How do you define it?

Honest question, here . . .

i really don't know anymore.

i used to think i had an idea, but in here, it's a definition of convenience.

 

[carrieluvv]

I can't accept that science can explain the people I love. I can't boil them down to simple chemicals. I believe that is one place where I can find God.

i was raised by catholics.( my parents- anyone who had parents who were sorta "old school" knows about what happens when your not quiet in church.when ya get home-

the nuns when they were in school or the priests if they went to catholic school would mess em up big time! I have an aunt who was thrown down some stairs by a nun!)

.the last sacrament i made was my 1st holy communion.
I consider myself a christian but not a born again one...or anything charismatic

catholic churches welcome christians into thier churches wholeheartedly now

its an AWESOME expirience when you have good and glorious expiriences with your family at church and feel good about it and feel that holy feeling

but sometimes christians can really suck -
the christian bros. society or whatever it was where they enslaved kids - they took them from ireland and UK and sent them to australia- because thier parents couldnt afford food or they were WWII orphans or summat
or the magdeline laundries-
stuff like that
so much abuse
they did it in the name of god.

 

[got2k9s]

i was raised by catholics.( my parents- anyone who had parents who were sorta "old school" knows about what happens when your not quiet in church.when ya get home-

the nuns when they were in school or the priests if they went to catholic school would mess em up big time! I have an aunt who was thrown down some stairs by a nun!)

.the last sacrament i made was my 1st holy communion.
I consider myself a christian but not a born again one...or anything charismatic

catholic churches welcome christians into thier churches wholeheartedly now

its an AWESOME expirience when you have good and glorious expiriences with your family at church and feel good about it and feel that holy feeling

but sometimes christians can really suck -
the christian bros. society or whatever it was where they enslaved kids - they took them from ireland and UK and sent them to australia-
or the magedeline laundries-
stuff like that
they did it in the name of god.

Carrie, SO MUCH BAD STUFF is "done in the name of God."
That doesn't mean God would want it, though.

It can be a VERY BAD THING to allow other people's actions to dictate for you YOUR beliefs. The most recent scandal with many priests (not all!) in the Catholic church is just ONE example.

It's not "other people" that = God. It's God. And the Christ of Christianity.

YES, many "Christians," I wish would stop claiming to be one! ha ha!

But that doesn't change GOD or CHRIST or what they mean to the faith.

Does that make sense?