PoorMans180SX

The bible talks about dinosaurs in the book of Job. I'll find it tomorrow.

Some good links:

Creation Worldview Ministries: The Nine Great 'Proofs' for Evolution: and Why They Are All False!

Creation Science Evangelism - Creation, Evolution, Dinosaurs, and the Bible.

__________________
Build: http://zilvia.net/f/showthread.php?t=643065

Friends don't let friends buy knock-offs.

hitman

i dont see how anyone could take religion seriously after nietzsche. i will however say the only worthwhile and tenable religious perspective imo is that of liberation theology. i dont see what in anyones experience has given them the impression of some sort of god existing, and more specifically the belief in any sort of "true eternal" god is some sort of metaphysical view of history that denies historiocity.
furthermore anyone who places any more belief in science that religion also has issues. science itself is just one interpretation of the world. scientists have a concrete theoretical framework from which they are working from before they even do "science". you cant look at all the "facts" (which are shaped by theory), thus to decide which facts are more "valuable" than other, how to look at these facts (methodology) etc, all presuppose some sort of theoretical stance prior to investigation, thus destroying notions of "objectivity" and "unnatachment". these values and assumptions which guide "science" differ from culture to culture and epoch to epoch. it really is your personal world view, whatever it may be, that creates the world you live in. even "love" is a notion created by people in a certain historical epoch. so when people say they love god they are just using one ideological construct to describe their relation to another. you get the point.

__________________
driftparty.com

Matej

No I'm pretty sure many won't get your point haha, as almost no one on here can truly relate to those terms unless they're studying philosophy.
I have to disagree with what you said about science and facts. You can look at "facts," they don't even necessarily have to be "scientific" facts, fact is a fact because it's something that can be observed and/or proven to be true. That is the widely accepted real world definition of fact. Are you a Philosophy major by any chance? Most advanced philosophy students talk like they're living in the Matrix, as nothing is real or given. In my opinion that is a rather extreme viewpoint in itself, because if each individual truly decided to live by his or her personal world view, there would be chaos. I understand a philosopher may define fact differently, and it will definitely make sense, but chances are it won't work in the "real" world, as entire societies are built and live on presuppositions.
Yeah I'm pretty sure you can rip what I just said completely apart, but if my assumption is correct that's basically what you're studying to do.

g6civcx

I don't understand the "treat others as you want to be treated" rule.

We each are different and want different things. My friend loves peanuts and I am allergic to peanuts.

She would love someone to feed her peanuts. If she fed me peanuts, I would die.


Is the rule wrong?

I believe in treating others the way they want to be treated, not how you want to be treated. What gives?

hitman

ya im a philosophy major but i take a lot of other classes as well in soc/lit/poli sci/womens studies.
its not that "nothing is real" while that is what they say, its that everything is now real. when they say nothing is real they are usually reffering to what derrida calls the transcendental signified, basically any metaphysical being (or concept-ie "humanity" or "rationality" (science also)), basically what nietzsche means when he says "god is dead". this isnt some statement saying god was once alive and satan killed him or something, its that in and for mankind god no longer carries much weight. for example in the old ages if a cup fell it was because god wanted it to, or if something needs to get done and someone asks why, its because of god. if people used this logic now days to reply to questions such as those they would get laughed at. basically what they mean is there is nothing to "center" (base life/theories/values (the positivistic notion replacing metaphysics) etc). in other words, while these notions where historically created, they no longer hold weight, and now we (individuals or humanity) must create new values. for example, the notion of completely isolated atomistic humans is entirely created. people view themselves as completely distinct from one another, this is just an assumption that many people over time havent neccesarily agreed with. another is that "human nature" is based on greed, or competition, or selfishness. a marxist might look at this and say these are human characteristics that may come up under certain socioeconomic conditions (such as capitalism), but under other types of societies and relations of production they might become latent (ex socialism, also the ancient greeks were very skeptical of selfish people, while today it is the norm and accepted), while some people might just say there is no human nature, if there is we might not be able to know it, or some sort of sartrean (existentialist) existence precedes essence. most of these theories just assume there is no god though, which i think is a safe interpretation of reality. so basically, since there is no "Center" (god, "reason", etc) there is no SINGLE ie THE interpretation of reality, there can be many. also, when you have some sort of transcendental signified, this can be used as a weapon for domination (think Christianity and colonialism/imperialism). there are facts but only within a context, ie according to certain other standards (something is 1 pd, but the notion of a pound is created) , or its the year 2008, but its people and not some sort of metaphysical thing that decide what year it is. if people wanted next year to become 3005 that could become a fact.
and it is kinda extreme, and really i dont know what you can philosophize about anymore lol since, while im not very learned about this stuff yet, it just seems like well what the fuck can i talk about now, besides critiquing other things. but i think if you buy into the whole "god is dead" and really follow its logic to the end, then you end up in this wierd and extreme position.
its hard to because nietzsche was a total dick in some respects, but he was "right". for example he thinks the ideal society is where the dullest man does the most hard work, and the most sensitive men would just paint and produce culture type stuff like art etc. then you say this isnt democratic etc, then it follows that democracy and equality are also just assumptions, which i think they really are. he says the notion that people are equal might be the worst proved assumption ever, but its just so hard to let things like this go, and i want to say things like people need to treat eachother fairly, but how can i say and justify something like that? thats where it comes down to individuals, i can say i want people to treat each other as equals although it may not be a reflection of reality... i dont know. im struggling through all this stuff, its hard to get classes or professors who are into all this since most of them arent intellectuals but academics and have to impress their coworkers and stuff.
sorry about the grammar... but grammar itself was a historically created thing, meaning people just made it up. so theres that to all you grammar natzis. its just an assumption!
also, its really hard to talk about this stuff, because when viewed and judged from the perspective of sceince, which is pressumed to be rational, anything that goes against it (for example its objectivity) is immediately deemed irrational. but rationality (ie the "inherent ability to determine good from evil" is also just an assumption, just as "good" has meant different things at different times.
i dont know just a rant lol

__________________
driftparty.com

hitman

heres a metaphor for the treat others as you want to be treated rules...
would a lion tell a zebra to treat others as you want to be treated? or would the zebra tell the lion? by now we've all internalized these moral categories, but the creators of these ideologies were weak, in fact slaves (due to their unfortunate social circumstances-not saying slaves are weak im just saying their power in society and to have control over their lives is weak, which was of course no fault of their own) (according to some books ive read.)

in other words, the golden rule was created by the weak (the herd/crowd/the they) in order for them to gain strength and in order to make life more livable for them.

__________________
driftparty.com

luisgonz

We evolve From me getting drunk and sticking my Penis into a girl and BOOOOOOOOOOOOm And some more boom boom boom and some skin slapping for another 3hrs, Then its the wait for 9months. Slap that bitch in the ass and clean up and go home to your wifey.

shishcabobers

So I haven't read anything but to the people who think the Thomas Aquinas 5 ways of God's existence. Well if you believe God is a spirit, and spirits are not material things then it would make sense otherwise no. There is a gradation of levels of life for example an ant vs us like intellectually. If you noticed we are the only species that has done things blah blah advancements, while others have been the same, act on instinct. too lazy right now....

hitman

i think st anselms proof is pretty strong until you realize existence is not a property.
exist=is=being, existence is what ties the property to the object. god IS all powerful etc.
but if you need a proof, then its knowledge, not a "belief"

if youre interested look up "the problem of evil" on wikipedia. its an argument against the existence of god, at least in the judeo christian sense.
it seems if god exists, in the omniscient (all knowing) omnipotent (all powerful) and benevolent, then its hard to explain evil in the world. so, they state there is evil, so, god could fix this, but doesnt, so he isnt all powerful
or, he doesnt know about it, then he isnt all knowing
or he just doesnt care, they he isnt all good

but people say"its for free will"! but these presumes gods existence and isnt an argument really.
i find it hard to keep god and free will together, which christianity gives you both. morality presupposes free will. if the people are part of the casual chain of effects, then what you "should" do doesnt matter since you dont have a choice in the matter.
but if god knows (since he is all knowing) what you will do in the future, is that free will? since he knows everything, you could not have done otherwise (than you did) since he knew what you were going to do before you did it.
so, you couldnt have done otherwise, so you didnt act freely (no free will)

__________________
driftparty.com

shishcabobers

General Misconception of free will, you are thinking about the teaching of Martin Luther's teaching that was about predestination which was totally against what the church taught. He taught that there was only an elect few that would make it to heaven while others were sent to hell. While God is all knowing he knows what is going to basically happen to you but basically throughout your lifetime you are given chances, but the flaw with martin luther was that he taught that the elected few can basically do whatever they want without any punishment and others would go to straight to hell. Catholic Church teaches that there is predestination but we actually don't know whether or not we are going to heaven or hell. Sorry if I have some holes in this im being lazy to get into description. Oh yeah he does know what we are gonna choose its not actually him choosing for us to go to hell, gives us many chances blah blah blah

luisgonz

I will strike the With my penis, TO stand my existence.

hitman

im talking about free will in the sense of human beings not being in the chain of cause and effect. about people being able to choose among possibilities freely in an ontological (not political) sense. it has nothing to do with martin luther per se. free will antecedes martin luther by centuries.

__________________
driftparty.com

raen419

If that someone is God, then no I'm not going to question Him...or His Word. I never accept anything said by man unless there is some logical argument behind it. But yes, I know that to the non-believer my faith and view toward God isn't an easy thing to understand.

I must've missed the part where scientists have proved that this world is 65 million years old.....oh wait, they haven't. The Bible goes back around 6000 years, which is plenty of time for all kinds of things to happen when you consider that the entire theory about evolution and whatnot is nothing more than a hypothesis, as there is no way to 'go back 65 million years' and re-create 'the big bang.' I'm aware that the same can be said for the Biblical account of creation, but thats where faith comes in for me....Faith in God, not man....as man will ALWAYS fail you at some point. God won't.
Got proof? I'm not saying I doubt you, but I'd like a Biblical reference to look at for proof of this, b/c well, I'm fuzzy about such things.
It might be a bit condescending, but thats me. I'm far from a perfect "Christian" by any means. I didn't say I could 'reveal' anything to anyone, but if people have questions, they've always got the opportunity to ask me. I'll answer accordingly as well.
And Primitive Baptist aren't typical Southern Baptist. We've got some similarities, but plenty of differences too. No piano, no BS like that guy that "throws the Holy Spirit" at people on TV, no choir. Its simple, its (according to the KJV) just like church in Biblical times as far as how church goes, only difference is we're dressed casually, we're in a nice A/C'ed building, and we don't have an Apostle standing in the pulpit....lol. Oh, and our doctrine differs as well from Southern Baptist...but its backed by the KJV down to the word.

If you'd like to know more or dispute whatever, just PM me. Or we can keep it going here. My views on religion are far from anything new, but they are quite logical....once you get around the whole "God" factor (and yes, I know some people will never grasp it).

ESmorz

Religion is for people who don't want to accept the fact that we may be alone, and death may very well in fact just be the end.

Although my favorite book is in the Old Testament. The Book of Job. That shits hilarious.

__________________

heychris

OK...here's my take....

Somewhere out in the big wide open there is a divine spirit of some kind...It's called many names by many cultures and can take many forms...

Second...Breaking different religions down to thier roots; how many are there? Probably IDK, 13....

Ironic then that the 13 tribes of men left the cradle of life and dispersed accross our world...and interspersed themselves with ALL of the diverse life on the planet...including evolving life forms

Cheers;
CH

Mi Beardo es Loco

I just can't believe that people actually still believe in something that was created by man thousands of years ago. It's the biggest scam of all time. I understand that people want to defend their religion but using common sense the concept of a church is the biggest scam in the history of this world. It's also the most profitable. Just think about this. We understand that the stories in the bible are fake, so they get thrown out the window. There's no such thing as magic, or the easter bunny, or santy clause, or other mystical things, that's why the stories are being thrown out. People just believed in those things back then so there was not as much debate in the faith back then. So basically what people believe in is a book which makes about as much sense as any other religious book in the world, including the mormon bible and scientology, and "what they believe in in their hearts." If someone told you that the world was flat for your entire life you'd believe that the world was flat "in your heart" so that also throws that out the window. So basically what you believe in is a book with crazy stories that was written by man. And to say that god commanded the "profits" to write what was written is horse shit because there were thousands of profits who wrote many things and they had to narrow the "prophesies" down to fit in the bible.
Again, it's a good way to live but it's just as real as the easter bunny

__________________

racepar1

I will not question the word of god himself, but I WILL question the word of MEN claiming to be repeating the word of god. I DO actually believe in god, I DO believe in an afterlife (heaven), just NOT in the traditional sense.


Dinosaur fossils have been carbon dated as such. Carbon dating is a very accurate way of estimating the age of anything carbon based. 6000 years is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Lucifer was cast from heaven because he questioned god's word. I will ask a buddy of mine who is much more well versed in the bible where I can find the passages dealing with that.

There you go assuming your BELIEFS are FACTS again. I truly believe my beliefs, but I will not consider them fact untill they are proven to me (which cannot happen untill after my death). Untill then they are open for discussion and modification.

txrxs

Creation Science is a device created to bring religion into schools.

One of the strongest proponents of creation science in schools:
God is for Suckers! » Blog Archive » Oh, Sweet Justice: “Dr. Dino” Kent Hovind Arrested

He is also the author of those wonderful sites you posted.

Also, Kent Hovind is also not a real doctor.

Why people laugh at creationists:
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

__________________
DRIFTINDY

ESmorz

See but that is where Christianity and other religions get you. If you want to go to heaven you MUST accept it all as truth and obey.

Such bs.

__________________

raen419

I do. If you don't believe what I've to say, go read the KJV.

Carbon dating has been proven to be VERY inaccurate. In the early 90s scientist carbon dated a telephone. The report was that the telephone was over 3-4000 years old. Also, read this:
THE PROBLEMS WITH CARBON-14 DATING
Sounds interesting, but let me know when your buddy can provide you with the scriptures. I'd like to look it up for my own knowledge.
And I truly believe mine, and I base them as fact (to me) b/c no one has ever or will ever be able to prove ANYTHING in the Bible wrong. Scientists will claim they know this and they know that until the end of time, but they'll never actually prove anything. I also don't understand why it bothers you that I take the KJV as fact. I'm not here to debate my beliefs with anyone else's. I trust God, I don't need death to prove anything to me. If you do, thats your issue, and I have no input on it. K? I'm not here to push anything on anyone else. All I've done is provide you guys w/ what I believe....I never claimed that I wanted to 'save' anyone (which I don't, b/c I can't). Comprente?

Matej

Religion has always been slowing down the development of society in my opinion.
Many great minds were labeled heretics in the past, some were even executed just for questioning a religious presupposition.
More recently, stem cell research comes to mind.
Without religion, I believe humanity could be further along than where we are right now, building deathstars to fight apes in space or something.

shishcabobers

So I'm guessing you believe in Friedrich Nietzsche beliefs that God is dead, and that once we banish religion forever we all will become super humans.



btw not all stem cell research is bad, for example umbilical cords.

g6civcx

Preach on! I hear you, and I get "it".

racepar1

I disagree. The whole "treat others as you would want to be treated" thing is just a generalization of the moral standards that we as human beings should uphold. It cannot be applied literally to any and all situations, it can be applied generally to most situations. We, human beings, no longer have to fight to survive (generally speaking). We have advanced to a point where we can make the world what we want it to be, speaking generally not literally. Therefore we are held to a higher moral standard than any other species on the face of the earth. There is no need for our animal instincts at this point in time, or any point in time for about the last 500 years or so. We should be generally polite as we have no need not to be. It basically translates to "don't go out and intentionally hurt other people". And that will always be true in our society.

Matej

Uhh, no.

And I support stem cell research, I think you misunderstood my post.

shishcabobers

oops sorry but yeah what basically you said was what nietzche taught.

Matej

It is quite alright sir, absolutely my fault, I should have been more clear.

SexPanda

lol. This thread is like...

Its like a hippo trying to convince an elephant that tusks just... arent where its at. All about the horn lol.

In all seriousness though... I bet when some of you get into heaven, God's going to be like "dude... Seriously, you got it all wrong. But close enough for me. Here's some cake"

Heaven's going to be kick ass.

__________________
BRAND NEW GReddy PRofec E-01 EBC for sale, Cheap!

g6civcx

I don't understand.

"treat others as you would want to be treated" = "don't go out and intentionally hurt other people"?

Please explain the parallel.

SexPanda

What if your into BDSM?

__________________
BRAND NEW GReddy PRofec E-01 EBC for sale, Cheap!