Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Bible, Creationism, and Prophecy (part 1)

Options
1172173175177178822

Comments

  • Posts: 0 CMod ✭✭✭✭ Keanu Gifted Chipmunk


    JimiTime wrote:
    What an insulting way to talk! It was a disrepectful tone that was used and I reminded bluewolf where he was. I.E. in a Christianity forum. he later ackknowledged his 'rudeness' to Jackass. So get off your high horse mod man. Ban me if you want. Personally i think you are bang out of order! and an apology wouldn't go a miss. Whats this place coming to!!
    Firstly, bluewolf is female,
    secondly, I've already apologised 3 times(so my rudeness should not be an issue anymore). And despite this, all I've been met with was accusations of ignorance and narrowmindedness.
    how on earth is he out of order when he's the mod, and being perfectly polite too! ?
    argh!

    as for your last post to me, I am looking for some quotes atm to back up my reply and I've to go in half an hour anyway so my response will be delayed


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    bluewolf wrote:
    Firstly, bluewolf is female,
    secondly, I've already apologised 3 times(so my rudeness should not be an issue anymore).
    Apology accepted :), I may have been a bit out of order but my religion is very personal to me. You are my neighbour after all, bluewolf regardless of whether you believe or not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    JimiTime wrote:
    have I rocked the boat then?

    No, you're just sitting in it being rude.

    regards,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    bluewolf wrote:
    Firstly, bluewolf is female

    :o
    secondly, I've already apologised 3 times(so my rudeness should not be an issue anymore).
    It isn't. I merely stated that you had accepted that you were rash in your tone. This has nothing really to do with what you have said. Its about the manner of post my talliesen.

    how on earth is he out of order when he's the mod, and being perfectly polite too! ?
    argh!

    I don't think it was polite thats why. It implied that I overstepped a mark or spoke with authority in a place where I obviously know I have none. That wasn't the context in my original point but that is how he presented it. Charter point number 3. Thats all I'm referring to.
    as for your last post to me, I am looking for some quotes atm to back up my reply and I've to go in half an hour anyway so my response will be delayed
    No bother.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Scofflaw wrote:
    No, you're just sitting in it being rude.

    regards,
    Scofflaw

    Could you refer me to where i was rude?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    JimiTime wrote:
    Could you refer me to where i was rude?

    In the post I quoted. Do you only think you're being rude if you use insults or swearwords?

    regards,
    Scofflaw


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    ...ignoring the slagging match...

    > As for Christians thinking they are worthless that is clearly not true.

    I beg to disagree -- there are plenty of posts around in which religious people belittle themselves (and include everybody else too). One from JimiTime earlier today: "you believe you are entitled to life. You are not. Nobody is.", but there are plenty more.

    For the evolutionists here: I was thinking about this earlier on today while driving around town. Over evolutionary time, what happens when a religion regulates reproduction within a society, when the religion also claims that only people who belittle themselves are good religionists, and that members of other religions should either be killed or rejected as partners?

    Is it reasonable to suppose that a predisposition for personal belittlement, manifested as a tendency towards uncritical authoritarianism, will propagate throughout that society?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    robindch wrote:
    Is it reasonable to suppose that a predisposition for personal belittlement, manifested as a tendency towards uncritical authoritarianism, will propagate throughout that society?

    Only if the basis for it is genetic, surely?


    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I don't see how being one of God's people makes us feel worthless. I think that it makes me unique knowing that God Himself has crafted me, and that I have been given the strengths and abilities that I have been given thanks to Him. Infact I would consider myself to be valuable even just for knowing that God has created me.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    I don't see how being one of God's people makes us feel worthless. I think that it makes me unique knowing that God Himself has crafted me, and that I have been given the strengths and abilities that I have been given thanks to Him. Infact I would consider myself to be valuable even just for knowing that God has created me.

    So, when you say "we are all worthless, and we're so lucky God loves us", you're just kidding? Or is it that we're worthless except insofar as God loves us?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,196 ✭✭✭BrianCalgary


    robindch wrote:

    For the evolutionists here: I was thinking about this earlier on today while driving around town. Over evolutionary time, what happens when a religion regulates reproduction within a society, when the religion also claims that only people who belittle themselves are good religionists, and that members of other religions should either be killed or rejected as partners??


    Like the Chinese who regulated reproduction?
    robindch wrote:
    Is it reasonable to suppose that a predisposition for personal belittlement, manifested as a tendency towards uncritical authoritarianism, will propagate throughout that society?

    In English? :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I didn't say we were all worthless. I'm saying that it is a privilege to be given life by God, but by no means does this make us worthless.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    I didn't say we were all worthless. I'm saying that it is a privilege to be given life by God, but by no means does this make us worthless.

    So if we are not worthless, why should we humble and abase ourselves?


    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    In order to create a just and loving society. Even the Messiah humbled himself and washed the disciples feet before they sat down for the Last Supper. That however didn't mean He was worthless now did it?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,417 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    > Only if the basis for it is genetic, surely?

    It's the nature-nurture debate -- personally, I'd expect that a lot of low-level human behavior is genetically determined as recent research has indicated. So, running a religiously-controlled society like the one I described above would certainly, over time, produce a greater number of religious believers than non-believers.

    But with that tentative conclusion, I wonder then why religion in general is slowly dying out? Is it that low-level behavior is not genetically determined and that humans really are the 'clean slates' that the post-WWII socialists claimed in contradistinction to the pre-WWII genetic-determinists? Or is it that the tendency for religious belief is easily diffused and disappears within a few generations when it's not specifically selected-for?

    Thoughts still in progress on this one...


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    In order to create a just and loving society. Even the Messiah humbled himself and washed the disciples feet before they sat down for the Last Supper. That however didn't mean He was worthless now did it?

    Ah, you are talking about humility towards one's fellow man - something I would agree with.

    However, I am asking about being humble and abasing oneself before God.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    robindch wrote:
    > Only if the basis for it is genetic, surely?

    It's the nature-nurture debate -- personally, I'd expect that a lot of low-level human behavior is genetically determined as recent research has indicated. So, running a religiously-controlled society like the one I described above would certainly, over time, produce a greater number of religious believers than non-believers.

    There's a book online I kept pointing Schuhart towards - I'll dig up the reference. The author's conclusion is that people like that are about 20-25% of the (US) population, and I would consider it one 'strategy' for the use of intelligence. It would be unusual for a single strategy to dominate the entire population, though, since that will always leave unexploited a number of niches.
    robindch wrote:
    But with that tentative conclusion, I wonder then why religion in general is slowly dying out? Is it that low-level behavior is not genetically determined and that humans really are the 'clean slates' that the post-WWII socialists claimed in contradistinction to the pre-WWII genetic-determinists? Or is it that the tendency for religious belief is easily diffused and disappears within a few generations when it's not specifically selected-for?

    There are various possible explanations - is it polite to go into them here, though?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Scofflaw wrote:
    Ah, you are talking about humility towards one's fellow man - something I would agree with.

    However, I am asking about being humble and abasing oneself before God.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw
    You mean prayer? How does praying to the most powerful being in existence make you worthless? I fail to see how talking to Him makes us worthless...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,314 ✭✭✭Talliesin


    JimiTime can come back if he indicates a desire to discuss things with some degree of courtesy.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Talliesin wrote:
    JimiTime can come back if he indicates a desire to discuss things with some degree of courtesy.

    ...without which, after all, many of us would not bother to haunt these boards.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Scofflaw wrote:
    In the post I quoted. Do you only think you're being rude if you use insults or swearwords?

    regards,
    Scofflaw

    What an insulting way to talk! It was a disrepectful tone that was used and I reminded bluewolf where he was. I.E. in a Christianity forum. he later ackknowledged his 'rudeness' to Jackass. So get off your high horse mod man. Ban me if you want. Personally i think you are bang out of order! and an apology wouldn't go a miss. Whats this place coming to!!

    Rude:confused: Insulted by an insinuation, I react honestly. Why is that rude? Not only that but there was a threat that I would be put in my place. As I said, it wasn't a nice comment to make, and I made it clear that I was not happy with it. Rude? Not in my book, but there you go.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    You mean prayer? How does praying to the most powerful being in existence make you worthless? I fail to see how talking to Him makes us worthless...

    Slippery. Do you pray in the expectation of your prayers being granted/rewarded? Do you pray humbly, or proudly?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Talliesin wrote:
    JimiTime can come back if he indicates a desire to discuss things with some degree of courtesy.

    So thats a ban then? I take it your apology is not forthcoming then?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Scofflaw wrote:
    Slippery. Do you pray in the expectation of your prayers being granted/rewarded? Do you pray humbly, or proudly?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw
    Hmm, what do you mean in terms of praying humbly or proudly?


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    JimiTime wrote:
    What an insulting way to talk! It was a disrepectful tone that was used and I reminded bluewolf where he was. I.E. in a Christianity forum. he later ackknowledged his 'rudeness' to Jackass. So get off your high horse mod man. Ban me if you want. Personally i think you are bang out of order! and an apology wouldn't go a miss. Whats this place coming to!!

    Rude:confused: Insulted by an insinuation, I react honestly. Why is that rude? Not only that but there was a threat that I would be put in my place. As I said, it wasn't a nice comment to make, and I made it clear that I was not happy with it. Rude? Not in my book, but there you go.

    Hmm. I'm not keen on continuing this particular vein, but I would consider telling anyone to "mind their place" quite startlingly arrogant and rude. Following that up with "fighting talk" on reproof wasn't an improvement. I don't think you were 'insulted by an insinuation', I think you resent being challenged, personally.

    Still, if you are someone who only thinks they're being rude when they use "rude words", then that's how you are, I suppose. You're certainly not alone, but you're certainly not God's gift to a discussion forum. After all, we had managed 250 pages of being extremely rough with each other on this thread without descending to this kind of wrangling before you chose to involve yourself.

    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,418 ✭✭✭JimiTime


    Scofflaw wrote:
    Hmm. I'm not keen on continuing this particular vein, but I would consider telling anyone to "mind their place" quite startlingly arrogant and rude. Following that up with "fighting talk" on reproof wasn't an improvement. I don't think you were 'insulted by an insinuation', I think you resent being challenged, personally.

    Still, if you are someone who only thinks they're being rude when they use "rude words", then that's how you are, I suppose. You're certainly not alone, but you're certainly not God's gift to a discussion forum.

    Scofflaw

    I explained why I said place. It was to say tone it down as this is a christianity forum. this was Ackknowledged by the intended target. I am certainly not Gods gift to anything. I am certainly not rude. But then again, you can choose to interpret as you will. Nothing I can do about posters presumptions.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    JimiTime wrote:
    I explained why I said place. It was to say tone it down as this is a christianity forum. this was Ackknowledged by the intended target. I am certainly not Gods gift to anything. I am certainly not rude. But then again, you can choose to interpret as you will. Nothing I can do about posters presumptions.

    We've had that discussion elsewhere. I don't recall it being resolved in favour of you personally deciding what is acceptable or not.

    As I said, we've already had 250 pages of this thread, without your input. It has its own standards - if you don't like them, don't join in. If you do join in, don't assume that you can tell the other posters how to behave.

    Scofflaw


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    Jakkass wrote:
    the former. I pray in the hope that He will grant me my prayer. However I recognise should it be selfish, it won't be granted. An example of this would be when Solomon prayed that he would be wise so he could govern the people of Israel in the best way possible. God was pleased with Him as He didn't pray for something out of selfishness.

    Would you not describe that as "humble before your God"?

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Well I suppose but that isn't the same as saying you are worthless. I feel that it would be arrogant for one to say that they were as good as the being who created this world and it's people.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9 pipraider


    There a couple of things which science attempts to explain, which I have long considered absurd, and since nothing important has happened of late, other than the usual political nonsense, that I might as well harass you with these two. The first is the "Big Bang" theory of how the universe 'happened,' but of course was not created by a supreme being. The Big Bang defies explanation, and to me is sort of like the Santa Claus 'happening,' when no other explanation is available to the kiddies when on Christmas morning, there are all those toys. Where did the "Big Bang" come from? Who supplied the explosives? Was there oxygen there so that an explosion could happen? Isn't a big bang a rather destructive, rather than creative force? Since when did a big bang create anything? When did this happen? Trillions of years ago? How could anyone know anything about the origin of the universe in the first place, other than to ascribe it to a creator? We are but a speck on the earth, compared to the size of the earth in the universe! Stop with this 'Big Bang' crud if you please! Could there be any other explanation other than a supreme being or creator? I am not trying to make this religious...just logical.

    Then we come to the evolution theory, which makes about as much sense as does the big bang nonsense. Did we evolve from apes, chimpanzees, or ancient fish who happened to find it more convenient to live on land, shed their gills, and breathe air? Do giraffes have long necks because they had eaten all the vegetation at lower levels, and so rather starve, they grew long necks to access higher food stuffs? I have been told both stories by evolutionists. Then there are ancient humans who have been dug up, and whose bone structures are about the same as is current. No one has ever dug up a combination ape-man, which would demonstrate an evolving. The fruit fly has a life span of about a month, and for thousands of years, fruit flies, and every other insect, animal and creature have reproduced trillions of times, and guess what? They're still fruit flies, pigs, apes, and earthworms. No one has ever seen an air breathing fish, nor catfish and whales who indeed do breathe air, sprout legs to avoid the nuisance of having to dive to the surface to breathe air. How did the giraffes last so long while their evolving necks grew? Survival of the fittest? How about arrival of the fittest?

    In no way am I depreciating scientific discovery, knowledge, and research. It's just that there are times when scientists are so damned stubborn, that they will invent any fairy tale, and the educators then make it compulsory in education, (except home schooling!), so that we all toe the line and believe their absurd theories and pronouncements. Not me, nor any logical, clear thinking person...I hope.

    -d-


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement