21 Nov 06
Originally posted by amannionYou may not be ready to done your Sunday best. No sweat off my back.
Don't worry.
Even if the existence of God were proved definitively tomorrow morning at 8.39am, I wouldn't be ironing my Sunday best.
You're very wrong about science by the way.
Science doesn't work by disputing existing theories without alternatives.
Scientists always have an alternative. If they don't then they shut up about it until they do.
I've ...[text shortened]... evangelist. Demonstrate a viable alternative and I'm yours.
...
I'm waiting ...
And I'm not brainwashed to leap to the absurdities of your evolution magic explaining how the diversty of life functions fell out of the mix of a random "selection" of some kind.
21 Nov 06
Originally posted by jaywillJust by calling it a theory you are disassociating it with mainstream science.
Intelligent Design Theory does not require any particular theological foundation as far as the science of it goes.
Opponents of Intelligent Design Theory are eager to link it to Christianity. But as far as the science of it goes, no particular faith or religion is indorced by it. And that is what ID is - a science theory.
Most scientists would call it a baseless hypothesis. That is, a suggestion made without any supporting evidence. Although it cannot be ruled out that some biological developments did not come about solely via natural processes, no evidence to that effect has yet been given by its proponents that can be verified and all the evidence presented so far has been shown to be inadequate.
The fact that most if not all proponents of the hypothesis are members of a particular religion implies that although ID does not endorse a particular faith, only one particular faith endorses ID.
What is also very interesting is that even though is it only a hypothesis without any available evidence, its proponents feel that it should be taught as fact in schools.
Maybe we should also teach my own hypothesis that gravity is actually billions of little devils all trying to drag us down to hell.
21 Nov 06
Originally posted by jaywillUh uh, wrong.
You may not be ready to done your Sunday best. No sweat off my back.
And I'm not brainwashed to leap to the absurdities of your evolution magic explaining how the diversty of life functions fell out of the mix of a random "selection" of some kind.
Selection is far from random.
The randomness in evolution is in the mutations that lead to differences from one individual to another - that is what makes you different from me.
Selection is very precise and non-random.
Those things that make an individual better able to survive and reproduce are selected over those that don't - which is pretty obvious if you think about it.
That's not random.
21 Nov 06
Originally posted by KnightWulfeBecause we know that not all literature is meant to be read literally.
How you can pick the parts of the Bible that you like and discard others?
Example - Creationism. The OT clearly explains the origins of the world and its age, yet you discard this (well, many of you do) and embrace this "Intelligent Design" theory. How can you do that? I dont get it.
21 Nov 06
No one is answering the question. The main thing I am asking is not Creationism to ID theory...it is how can you pick and choose what to follow and what not to? The Creationism was just used to point out the fact that is it done by millions of Chirstians around the world.
The question remains....
How can you pick and choose what to follow?
21 Nov 06
Originally posted by KnightWulfeBecause that is what religion - and for that matter, most human endeavours - is all about. People take what they want from their experiences and the things they see and hear and read.
No one is answering the question. The main thing I am asking is not Creationism to ID theory...it is how can you pick and choose what to follow and what not to? The Creationism was just used to point out the fact that is it done by millions of Chirstians around the world.
The question remains....
How can you pick and choose what to follow?
Theologians interpret the biblical texts.
They determine, within the bounds of their faith, what things are really important, and what things can be just left to one side.
The faithful of that religion accept this, or they don't and move on.
Pretty much the story of humans really.
But of course, none of this is new to you, nor is it the point of your question, is it?
What I think your asking is, how can you be so bloody stupid?
You'll get no responses to that.
The world is full of stupid people - I've been prone to bouts of stupidity myself, as have we all I would guess.
22 Nov 06
How you can pick the parts of the Bible that you like and discard others?
It's called having a faith where you are allowed to think for yourself. Some things in the Bible can be rightly interpreted as mythology based on creation stories and some things are more historical. Anyway , if we took it all literally you'd be bashing us for being fundies with no brains. We can't win.
22 Nov 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterYou cant win because of your choice. You say that God's word is Law, yet it is written in a Book that you pick and choose what to follow, therefore breaking the laws that are laid down by your deity. If you are allow to pick and choose what you want to follow, why do you pick something that is soley based in faith and has not a piece of concrete backing to it and allows for and almost invites to be picked apart by those who do not believe? Why not pick something that can be proven?
How you can pick the parts of the Bible that you like and discard others?
It's called having a faith where you are allowed to think for yourself. Some things in the Bible can be rightly interpreted as mythology based on creation stories and some things are more historical. Anyway , if we took it all literally you'd be bashing us for being fundies with no brains. We can't win.
22 Nov 06
Originally posted by KnightWulfeHow are you defining “Christian”? I know people who are not Jewish so they think that means they are “Christian.” Jesus told the Pharisees of his day that they made the laws of God to no effect by their traditions. Why single out just “Christians”? Why couldn’t you ask Jews the same question?
[b]How you can pick the parts of the Bible that you like and discard others?
b]
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
22 Nov 06
Originally posted by KnightWulfeWhat nonsense. You seem to be advocating here that the only way a religious Christian can authentically interpret the scripture is literally - which is rather disingenuous for a non-Christian (or so I assume you are) to do, when atheism (or other critics) tries to refute a literal interpretation of scripture.
How you can pick the parts of the Bible that you like and discard others?
Example - Creationism. The OT clearly explains the origins of the world and its age, yet you discard this (well, many of you do) and embrace this "Intelligent Design" theory. How can you do that? I dont get it.
If one wants to interpret scripture the main point to understand is that the books in the bible were written at different times, in different places, and to different audiences, and not intended for the 21st century where we would be discussing the compatibility of religion and science. Therefore, to understand the meaning of any passage of the bible the context, literary form, socio-historical circumstances and thematic context must be taken into consideration. An understanding of source, text, form and redaction criticism is also needed. This is a vague outline of the mainstream methodology used by the prominent Christian denomination.
As for creationism and Intelligent design, you seem to be confused (the two aren't actually incompatible). All Christian religious accept creationism and intelligent design since they believe that God ultimately created and designed the universe.
Perhaps you mean "young-earth creationists" and "Intelligent Design -to be taught in a science class near you"? However, most Christians reject young-earth creationism, and the push for ID to be taught in science class rooms is exerted by a small but vocal minority (who do not represent any religious authoirty). St.Augustine and St. Iraenius both observed that one cannot literally read the Genesis account since the concept of day and night did not come into existence until the fourth day (verse 14). Other objections to fundamentalist have been that the authors of Genesis did not have the language available to describe the time God used to create the universe, and so assigned each stage of creation to a day - but not specifically to 24 hours.
I don't see how any of this is based on "what you like", it actually seems to be a very logical way to approach any given text.
22 Nov 06
Originally posted by masscatSince you specifically name them, the people of the Judaism faith believe and support constant discussion and interpretation of the OT. It is part of the faith.
How are you defining “Christian”? I know people who are not Jewish so they think that means they are “Christian.” Jesus told the Pharisees of his day that they made the laws of God to no effect by their traditions. Why single out just “Christians”? Why couldn’t you ask Jews the same question?
Christians pick and chose that which the will hold dear and "The Word of God" because it is written in the Bible and yet throw away other things because it offends their modern sensibilities. Hence the mention of the Bible advocating slavery and women and secondary citizens and God murdering thousands of first born children. Hence the mention of the specific details of the Bible, the "Word of God" dictating the age of the Earth and how long we have been around.
I do not include all those who follow the Bible, NT or OT. I am specifically directing my question at Christians. They are the ones that do it. I am trying to understand how they pick and choose amongst the "Words of God" to what suits them.