Kansas City Star columnist Mike Hendricks did a riff on the Flying Spaghetti Monster incident at Wichita’s Stucky Middle School. That’s when, as first reported in The Eagle, conservative State Board of Education member Connie Morris tried to demand that the logo of the anti-evolution parody FSM be removed from a science classroom door. Hendricks acknowledged that it might have been impolite or improper for the parody to be in a school. But, he said, “there’s another case to be made, too. That Morris and fellow members of the board’s wing nut coalition deserve to be mocked for what they’ve done to the state’s reputation.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JWink on Too many exemptions
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Chas on Open thread 11/22
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
342 Comments
Maybe Connie should write another book.
Ben, Nah, she’d probably ban it.
Support TIM CRUZ!!!!!!
Does anyone else find it strange that the BoE members do not have a state government email address? They are different types, with a few using Yahoo.com as their email.
Of course, the idiots like Morris never bother reading/responding to any email, anyway. At one point, she had an auto respond feature claiming she was not trying to bring religion into the classroom, no matter what the message to her was.
Shouldn’t elected types be a little more accountable than be able to hide behind an auto responding email?
Thankfully Carole Rupe from Wichita does respond to emails…more than I can say about any other BoE member.
Raptor, when you have a direct pipeline to and from god, like connie does, you “dont need no stinkin’ emails!”
“Born again” people think they have a pipeline to God. They think they have been singled out by God to make up for their sins by forcing their particular brand of religious beliefs on the rest of the world. In fact, they are religious psychos. Most of them get over it in a few months, but whackos like Connie Morris will never get over it. Her sins were so many and so bad in her mind, that she is bound and determined to make the children of Kansas pay for them. She has a Messiah complex that completely overshadows common sense. She belongs in a loony bin, not on the KBOE. But the average Kansan thinks she’s wonderful. In other words, you got what you deserve.
Support TIM CRUZ!!!!!!Seconded!!!!!!!!!
I hate to sound ignoarnt but … WHO IS TIM CRUZ?
Ben, Tim Cruz is the former mayor of Garden City and is running against connie. She once falsely accused him a wetback (no kidding) and falsely accused him of being an illegal.
She has since apologized and admitted she was wrong. I think that is the ONLY time she admitted she was wrong.
She was elected out here because she wanted to stop educating the children of illegals. When Cruz called her on it, she called him a wetback. Nothing like some good christian lying and name calling to win an election in kansas.
Especially western ks.
That same immigration that got connie elected in 2002 will be hot again in this election. I wonder if it will get her re-elected. I wonder if it will trump all the other stupid things she says and does and pushes off on the rest of us. (See walker’s post above)
I wonder if her position on immigration will be louder than her cheating the taxpayers on false travel vouchers. I wonder if it will be louder than her support of the kansas taliban on the board of evangelism.
Maybe immigration will not only divide republicans, but also people who support public education.
For the sake of our children and the future of our state, I hope not. But then I have learned that you can never go wrong underestimating voters in kansas. Especially western kansas.
Thanks KFG. Now I remember the stories. Did she even acknowledge the reasons for her lies? And did she claim to be exempt from “Thou shalt not bear false witness”?
I still remember the lies spread when I ran for Legislature by “Godarchy” in support of Les Donovan. I guess they were exempted from that Commandment as well.
In San Diego, the schools are focused on science education. They’ve been using a 9th grade physics, 10th grade chemistry, 11th grade biology regimen, because University of California San Diego biologists, and biotech leaders told the schools that you cannot properly teach modern biology without a chemistry foundation, and you cannot teach chemistry without a physics foundation. The sledding has been tough because not enough kids have the requisite math skills to do 9th grade physics.
But they’re figuring out things. They have to, because San Diego is a world-leading technology center. It has to raise scientifically-educated talent.
Here in Kansas, we’re stuck redoing the 1925 Tennessee Scopes trial. It’s okay, because Kansas kids don’t need to learn science. Everybody knows that outside JoCo, Kansas median household income is above the national average, so we don’t have to teach kids science to have a fine economy. Oh, the median income is BELOW the national average and falling? Well then, everybody knows that it is great to be ignorant and poor. It builds character.
JM Walker,
Have you heard of the term hasty generalization?
Any group that thinks that they have the exclusive answers, religiousw or otherwise, is what KSF was referring to, Nathan. The fact that the taliban executed women, infidels, lawbreakers is completely explainable by the fact that they held power in Afghanistan..thankfully, we have not had such a group take charge in the US and hopefully we never will.
I cannot imagine that you would sit down with any member of another faith and compromise on any position you might hold. In short, you have the religious answers and other traditions are just wrong. If you don’t see that, first of all, as truly un-Christ-like, and secondly, as unbelievably self-absorbed, then I completely understand why you miss KFG’s point.
One might not have much good to say about the history and positions of the Roman Catholic Church, but they have over the past 200 years, after losing temporal power, come to the correct conclusions on several things: 1) that there is no fundamental problem with science/religion coexisting and even reinforcing one another, even on subjects like common descent, 2) that Christianity is not a pre-requisite for salvation…that good people of any religious persuasion, or no religious persuasion at all, can be saved. They believe that the Church is God’s gift to the world and that Christianity is the surest path to eternal life, but they have had the wisdom to see that God and spirituality are common to many cultures and these traditions represent a fully acceptable, if “incomplete” understanding of God (this is their position, not mine), 3) they have striven for religious and ecumenical unity rathher than denominational exclusivity, 4) they have concentrated on what’s really important, like bringing relief to the poor and needy. Go out and do the same and you might actually find yourself on the brink of a spiritual awakening..one that focuses on what’s really important (how we treat our neighbors) rather than on denominational squabbles over trivialities like common descent…which, by the way, is undeniable, and which could easily be seen as God’s mechanism for change.
Oy Vay, more Vatican II nonsense and sophistry!http://www.truecatholic.org/heresiesjp2.htm
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
Ian,
take it up with the Curia..
here is a portion of the pertinent sections of the Catechism of the catholic Church…you know..the profession of YOUR faith..the thing you’re supposed to have read and accepted:
841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”[330]
842 The Church’s bond with non-Christian religions is in the first place the common origin and end of the human race:All nations form but one community. This is so because all stem from the one stock which God created to people the entire earth, and also because all share a common destiny, namely God. His providence, evident goodness, and saving designs extend to all against the day when the elect are gathered together in the holy city. . .[331]
843 The Catholic Church recognizes in other religions that search, among shadows and images, for the God who is unknown yet near since he gives life and breath and all things and wants all men to be saved. Thus, the Church considers all goodness and truth found in these religions as “a preparation for the Gospel and given by him who enlightens all men that they may at length have life.”[332]
“Outside the Church there is no salvation”
846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?[335] Re-formulated positively, it means that
847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience – those too may achieve eternal salvation.[337]
Brain,
KFG has no other point than to bash Christians.
She has wasted little chance to misrepresent Christians, make fun of them, belittle them, and attack Christianity with anything she can true or not in many threads.
I did not miss her point at all. It was just her trying to compare the Taliban with Christians. A far stretch from the truth at best.
I do not belong to the Catholic church.
“Christianity” is not required for salvation. Faith in Christ is what is required. Which is what a Christian is, someone who believes in Christ.
Nathan…that was, um, not very enlightening…please explain how one can be a non-Christian yet have faith in Christ, which you define as what a Christian is…a person with faith in Christ.
I’m sorry, but that just seems like a complete load of logical drivel. If you believe in Jesus as the incarnation of God, you’re a Christian, if you don’t, you’re not. There’s no person who believes in Christ and is nor Christian, just like there is no who does not believe in Christ who is Christian.
The point with the RC Church also seems to have flown over you.
Heartlander, what kind of math is needed to do 9th grade physics? I don’t remember it being that complex (but this was many years ago)…we needed to memorize some linear algebraic equations, and the rest was basically plugging in the numbers. Certainly 9th graders know how to do that?
Brian,
There are many who claim to be Christian who I would argue are not.
So that is why I am not saying being a Christian is what is required for salvation.
It is only a term used to describe those who do have faith in Christ which is not always true.
Not logical drivel.
Nathan?
I guess you forgot to lump me in with KFG this time.
KFG has expressed on many occasions her respect for many Christians on this thread. As have I.
I don’t presume to speak for her. For myself? My respect to any particular posters Christianity is directly proportional to my perception of their respect for others beliefs.See my thinking here is that folks who think they are close to an authority on God probably at least think they are speaking for god. Their words being “divinely inspired. I seek for them to prove it in their posts.
Unfortunately, the general quality of their posts so far tells me otherwise.
Ian,”Since Christ died for all, and since all men are in fact called to one and the same destiny, which is divine, we must hold that the Holy Spirit offers to all the possibility of being made partakers, in a way known to God, of the Paschal mystery.” 63 Every man who is ignorant of the Gospel of Christ and of his Church, but seeks the truth and does the will of God in accordance with his understanding of it, can be saved. It may be supposed that such persons would have desired Baptism explicitly if they had known its necessity.
Oh yeah, Happy Easter to those who are celebrating!For any Orthodox Christians out there: Have a blessed and great Holy Week!
Nathan,
So you are now the arbiter of Christian faith and behavior. What’s that passage about removing the log from your own eye before pointing out the splinter in another’s?
Din’t jesus also point out that “those who are not against us are with us” when one of the apostles pointed to someone preaching “Christianity” but not in the way Jesus would have?
Preach it, Brother Brian!!!
Or should it be Father Brian? :-)
P.S. – a word of advice, chasing Nathan’s red herrings aren’t real productive, usually. But, on the other hand, you sound inspired tonight. So, who knows?
“There are many people who claim to be Christian who
I
would argue are not.”
Spacing here intentional.
Nathan?
“Judge not………wanna finish that for me?
DD,
Mother Orthodox, father Catholic, an uncle who was coptic, another classic Protestant West Virginian who “converted” (I use the word advisedly) to Catholicism to marry…12 years of Catholic school. I believe I know something of Christianity.
That was me, BTW
Brian,I was impressed with your posts. I had no doubts that you had credentials. Thanks.
Back to Connie Morris, member of the KS BOE — does anyone know if she attended college and, if so, where? Just curious.
Brian,
I never claimed to be the “arbiter of Christian faith and behavior.”
Do you think that every person who calls himself a Christian is a Christian?
I am not talking about preaching Christianity a certain way.
JR,
As usual you try to quote the Bible and have no clue what you are talking about…
Nathan?
Of COURSE not! Only YOU know the truth about the bible.
JR,
If that is what you want to think…
I don’t claim that or agree with it though.
Tara,
What is generally agreed is that kids need to know how to plug in numerical values for simple linear equations of the form y =mx +b (slope-intercept), basic second degree equations of the form y =ax^2 + bx +C, and derive numerical solutions. These are generally covered in algebra I. Some simple trigonometry and vectors are also used, which are taught in the physics course.
The problem they are having in San Diego is an inability to achieve algebra I proficiency in 8th grade (which they are trying to make the new standard in math education there.)
So the problem’s solution will have to be better mathematics education, working from middle school down.
Some of us believe that we should have mathematics specialists moving from elementary classroom to classroom teaching math to 4th-5th graders, rather than relying on regular elementary school generalists. Achieving this nationally, is going to take 20 years, most likely. If schools are to meet NCLB standards, they are going to have to do this. It won’t be enough to provide after-school tutoring to struggling students, such as minority students, you need a systematic skills-building regimen, and people who know math well to deliver it during the regular school day. Then you provide class-synchronized tutoring to kids who need it.
In my opinion, schools are also going to have to cough up differential salary money for math (and science) teachers. If union leaders fail to support this, then they are arguably putting teachers’ interests ahead of their students’ and the nation’s interests. But in so doing, they are arguably undermining the interests of their successors, tomorrow’s teachers, as well.
How many young teachers quit the profession today? How many non-mathematically proficient teachers would, if they think about it, be quite happy to give up the stress of trying to teach a subject that is out of their field of expertise, and be allowed to concentrate on the subjects they are good at and love to teach?
Nathan,I certainly claim to be no biblical expert (I actually tried to read the King James cover-to-cover once; I gave up when I reached the extended discussion of leprosy in Leviticus).
However, I recall some mouthy fat guy who had a relevant point. Speaking of a Baptist sect he called the “Dunkers,” the mouthy fat guy said:
“This Modesty in a Sect is perhaps a singular Instance in the History of Mankind, every other Sect supposing itself in Possession of all Truth, and that those who differ are so far in the Wrong: Like a Man travelling in foggy Weather: Those at some Distance before him on the Road he sees wrapt up in the Fog, as well as those behind him, and also the People in the Fields on each side; but neer him all appears clear.- Tho’ in truth he is as much in the Fog as any of them.”
http://www.4literature.net/Benjamin_Franklin/Autobiography/32.html
heartlander,
I think you’re pretty much on target (particularly on the importance of basic math skills), but getting decent pay for ALL teachers is, alas, hard enough to do!
Well Nathan it was you who brought up who is and who is not a Christian.
Now clearly as an atheist, I am not a Christian. You are free to judge me. Kfg is also an easy willing target.
I am curious as to our Christian posters just who and who does not meet YOUR standards Nathan. I mean if you are going to judge people, shouldn’t you at least give them the courtesy of naming them?—–
JR,
Allow me to clear up some misunderstandings you seem to have:
“Well Nathan it was you who brought up who is and who is not a Christian.”
I have not brought up who is or who is not Christian.
I made the statement that there are those that claim to be that are not.
“I am not a Christian. You are free to judge me.”
So which is it: Are you taking the stance that it is ok to judge or it is not?
“I am curious as to our Christian posters just who and who does not meet YOUR standards Nathan.”
How coy you think you are JR. The only standard I have is that to call yourself a Christian you must be a believer in Christ.
If there are fellow Christian here who disagree with MY(since you want to try to isolate this as just me) definition then please do so.
“I mean if you are going to judge people, shouldn’t you at least give them the courtesy of naming them?”
I was making a general statement in my posts not actually pointing out anyone in particular.
Rage, I agree with you, because I think teachers are our most valuable resource.
This being said, two married mid-career teachers can make over $80,000, and the fact is most middle-class American families today have dual-spouse incomes (at least I think), so that’s a pretty decent family income. Then when you add the protection from layoffs, good healthcare benefits that are rapidly being eviscerated in much of the American economy, pensions, and low interest credit union consumer loans, it looks even better, doesn’t it.
Should teachers earn more than this? Quite possibly. What I am saying with respect to getting math teachers is that you have to pay a premium at the outset, because people with strong math skills are in high demand in our general economy. Ultimately if this enables elementary teachers to focus on what they do best, and reading and social studies scores rise substantially, then you can certainly make an argument for then paying them substantially more as well.
An important consideration is that to major in math and earn a B+ or better average, takes a lot more time than to do so in the humanities and social sciences. This has to do with the fact that math is esoteric, with a “foreign” symbology and language. You can’t read 100 pages of math in a week. More like 20 pages. It’s dense. It’s impossible to cruise early in the semester, then cram for mid-terms, cruise again for a bit then cram for finals. If you do this, you flunk out.
You’ve got to do 2 to 3 problem sets per week that can each take 3-4 hours. On a strictly-equal teaching salary scale this extra, really hard work, is ignored, and not credited. I think equal pay is actually inequitable compensation policy, and so do a lot of math people. So they decline to become math teachers. That’s a loss for our kids, our community and our nation.
Rage,
There is a difference in debating differing doctrinal stances on many different things and my having to constantly wade through the attempts of many here to do little more than throw whatever verse out of context at me they can.
Forgive me for being blunt with people like KFG and JR who have proven to do little more than just that time and time again.
Nathan?
Well you did say that there are those who YOU would argue that are NOT Christian. Even if they say they are.
By self admittance I’m out of that group.
So just who are you talking about Nathan?
Nevermind. I’ll help you out here.
Are there posters of the Christian faith here who find Nathan somewhat on the self righteous judgemental side? Are there Christian posters here who feel that Nathan is marginallizing not just them but their faith into something that only Nathan and folks like him get to define?
I guess the page I was working from is gone and we’ve gone away from science. If someone wants to go back to scientific problem with evolution that favor creation let me know.
On the post right now, where to begin. I was also raised catholic, but left for some of the reason metioned above. When Scripture and teachings of a denomination disagree, what becomes the final authority. For example, above you have the catholic Churh and many others saying belief in Jesus is not required for a person to enter the Kingdom of God. They have chosen another authority. Jesus gives no wiggle room in John 14:6 where he says ..”no man comes unto the Father, but by me.” Again speaking of Jesus in Acts 4:12 ” niether is there salvation in any other: for there is no other name under heaven given amoung men, whereby we must be saved” (Brian, this is a problem with point number 2 you mentioned earlier, ecumenical yes, Biblical no) What is Jesus saving them from? Sin. Where did sin come from? Adam. What was the result of sin? Death. Adam was either the cause of sin and death Genesis chapters 1-3, or he was a result of millions of years of death? Adam can not be both. It is not possible to be both the result of and the cause of the same thing. If he is not the cause of death in the world, then the death and resurrection of Jesus has no purpose. Brian, I know the Catholic Church has said otherwise as you pointed out in point #1, but they are not being consistant theologically- the reasons I am no longer Catholic. Explain how Adam can be both the cause and the result of death. I agree with your point number 4 though you may find even extreme conservatives teach going out and helping the poor and needy. Common descent is deniable, and I will throw scientific problems out tomorrow.
Has anyone other than Tara decided they want to even try and explain how one tree can be fossilzed in three different strata of earth where the top and bottom layers are dated to be millins of years apart. How does one part of a tree become fossilized while another part remains in tact to become fossilized millions of years later. I have seen no biological explanation. Since I am throwing out geology, how about a couple more for you. Why are 3 of the 10 geological columns missing over 85% of the world’s suface area. This may seem like a dumb question, but how does any part of the world miss out geologically on 100 million years of earth history? Geological studies shows evidence of Oxygen in all the columns back to the Archain (oldest rock formations), so why do we insist on a reducing atmoshphere model (presupposition of what was needed for our origin of life chemestry despite the evidence- Miller and Orgel ” the synthesis of compounds(amino Acids)of biological interest take place ONLY UNDER REDUCING CONDITIONS”(emphasis mine), or something else).Just as an addition to that, does any one find it interesting that oil companies do not drill in the oldest rocks? If they were produced in a reducing atmosphere, shouldn’t they be full of methane for oil? yes!!! If you buy in at all to the follow the money idea, then oil companies are not drilling, because the methane is not there. Also, limestone and sandstone are found at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, meaning it was formed in oxodizing not reducing conditions.
Any body want to tackle any of these for me?
I really enjoyed my social science and humanities distribution courses, overall. I found psych and anthro to be fascinating. I had lunches with my TA’s, and visited the profs a few times. Even volunteered to be a subject for a psych research project. History as taught at the university level was awesome.
But here is what I noticed: most of the students in these classes were majoring in ss and hum. On the other hand, these students were given special math and science courses that math and science majors couldn’t take, as they were not credited.
You can today look at any university online course catalog and see this: Physics for nonscientists, The Wonders of the Universe, algebra, chemistry that doesn’t require a prior hs chem course, biology for non-bio majors, et al.
The math, science and engineering students are required to take regular university ss and hum courses, but the ss and hum students are given sub-university (for the discipline) math and science courses.
Why? Because first and second-year regular university math and science courses are much, much harder than regular first and second-year ss and hum courses.
I think that our public schools should honestly acknowledge this, and compensate math and science-expert teachers accordingly.
Clearly this blog is getting attention.
“chuck” comes to us as a “new poster”. But he is CLEARLY immersed in ID and wants to shower us with his “knowledge”. This guy is an idealougue and has come here to get his message out. I find it flatttering for this forum that he is here.
Let’s cut to the chase “chuck” How old do you say the Earth is?
JR,
“So just who are you talking about Nathan?”
It was a general statement. I was not pointing out anyone in particular with it.
I do not think Nathan is wrong that there are peole who say they are Christians who clearly are not. Matthew 7 21-23 should be proof enough.
Was not even thinking about that verse chuck. Thank you.
I know what you mean, heartlander. I wonder if WSU still offers “business calculus” (giggle!). I can remember one math professor bitching about how his linear algebra course had been “watered down” to accomodate the nonmajors (I happened to be one of them, but I didn’t WANT anything watered down, thank you; I felt cheated!).
On the other hand, I took a required philosophy course “Ethics & Computers,” which, contrary to someone else’s idea of what was supposed to happen (or so I later heard), turned out to be a full-fledged ethics course. It was quite fascinating, actually. So it’s not just the “hard” science courses that are being soft-pedalled for someone else’s convenience.
The issue you raise about relative time and effort vs. pay scale is a fascinating one and, as you well know, a political minefield. I certainly have my own biases, but I’d prefer to look into it further before saying more.
“It was a general statement. I was not pointing out anyone in particular with it”Oh yes you were Nathan. You were pointing at anyone who does not meet YOUR standard. If not you would not have made that statement in the first place. Or is your last a half hearted attempt to take it back?
Oh I think some of your fellow Christians are gonna feel pointed at by you Nathan.I think we will hear from them.
“chuck”? I don’t know chapter and verse. Why are you evading my last question to you Re the age of the Earth? Don’t hide behind Nathan.
JR,
Answer me this:
Do you think that everyone and anyone that simply says they are a Christian is a Christian?
JR,
“You were pointing at anyone who does not meet YOUR standard.”
That is why it is a GENERAL statement.
“Or is your last a half hearted attempt to take it back?”
No, it is my struggling attempt to have a discussion with you…
“Oh I think some of your fellow Christians are gonna feel pointed at by you Nathan.”
If any of my fellow “Christians” don’t believe in Christ then they are not Christians.
“I think we will hear from them.”
If any of them admit they don’t believe in Christ and call themselves Christians I will gladly tell them that I don’t think they are Christians.
I actually was on a page they dropped, so I new to this page, though not all of you. J.R. you were on that page, maybe you never read my posts.
I am an unapologetic young earth creationist for many scientific reasons. I suspect you think I am trying to get around something, but I am not. I was an evolutionist in beliefs and changed. Some of the above are a scratch of the surface about reasons I believe what I do.I suspect you will want to ridicule this, and try to ask a bunch of questions, and unfortunately as most seem to do, not deal with the things I bring up.
If you really want to deal with only the age of the earth issues other than as mentioned above, I recommend you see the current Radioisotope and Age of The Earth project.
Nathan,
As an outsider looking in, my expereience is that those who most loudly trumpet Christianity are the least Christian. Those who speak that they understand the faith best are the worst judges of that faith BECAUSE they pretend to define it. That would include you.
Now that is from an atheist. An impartial judge.
J.R. I was not avoiding your quetion, I am not very fast that is all. Are you in the process of dealing with any of mine?
J.R. I was not avoiding your quetion, I am not very fast that is all. Are you in the process of dealing with any of mine?
We shall see how Christians weigh in with you Nathan. You are quite the eqivocator. Let us see if you can equivocate yourself out of the corner you have painted yourself into.
JR,
Christianity is about spreading God’s word.
Matthew 28:19-20
19 “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
What do you think Jesus was doing with his 12 disciples? He was teaching them and grooming them to spread Christianity and God’s word.
Sorry that this seems to be a problem for you, but I am proud to claim I am a Christian and your trying to denigrate me for it doesn’t bother me at all.
Besides, most of the time I talk about my faith is only after KFG and someone like you distort verses or try to attack Christianity.
J.R. I will not try to define anything. My attitude is my opinion does not really matter. God’s does. I will only deal with Christian matters from what God’s word says. speaking of that, anyone trying to explain how Adam can be both the cause of death and a result of death? Brian that should cause a problem for you as a Catholic. J.R. you apprently missed last night when I quote American Atheist Magazine in an article called the Meaning of Evolution. As an atheist you can find some non-Christians amoung the people who claim to be Christians. You can ask any person claiming to be a Christian Why will God let them into heaven? You will be amzed at how many people will not even include anything about Jesus in the answer. Those people are really not christians
“chuck”
Your first challenge is to discredit and deny carbon dating. DO that. Then you get my attention.
J.R. I forgot to give you the verse I said should show there are people claiming to go to God’s Kingdom will not
Matthew 7:21-23
Not everyone who says to me Lord Lord shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.Many will say to me in that day, Lord Lord have we not profisied in your name? and in your name cast out devils? and in your name done many wonderful works?And then I will profess unto them, I never knew you; depart from me, you that work iniquity.
It was that passage that made me realize I could never be good enough on my own to get to heaven if these guys were not.
You denigrate your own faith Nathan. I’m just here to point it out.
I do not know to what degree I need to do it. Call one thing into question or show an inconsitancy of dates, show one example of something we know was wrong. What would suffice?
There are many posters here of the Christian faith. Let us see how they regard you Nathan and “chuck”.
JR,
Do you practice being this obtuse?
I have no problem with how I am being regarded, as long as I am being true to what God’s word says, I have no ther concern accept with God. That does not mean I should be hateful towards people, but I can speak the truth in love. I will always be straight and honest.
Four years ago the Department of Education and KU jointly announced a plan: Kansas was doing to develop a science curriculum that would be a “model for the nation”. What nation were they refering to? Albania?
“It was a general statement. I was not pointing out anyone in particular with it.”
Nathan, is this an example of a hasty generalization?
connie morris lies, files false travel vouchers, slings false accusations at anyone who disagrees with her or her theology, mandates as an individual what teachers should have displayed in their classrooms, and imposes her personal religous zealotry on the entire population of ks.
And nathan defends her as a true christian? Or is he saying she is not a true christian? Only nathan knows for sure.
I have never seen such a whiney and overly sensitive display of mindless devotion since, well, Richard Nixon resigned or the current preznit was outed as the liar in chief. Damn the truth hurts, doesnt it?
I always find it usefull to give nathan full room to expound on the gospel according to nathan, the bible according to nathan, and the judgement as to real christians vs. fake christians, all according to nathan.
It is useful because he is the best advertisement of toxic christianity. We can clearly see in nathan’s posts what the christian agenda is.
In nathan, I think many of us also see EXACTLY why state sponsored religion is so dangerous.Just like the taliban is dangerous state sponsored religion.
Your questions with brief answers (not at the right office to get references)
Has anyone other than Tara decided they want to even try and explain how one tree can be fossilzed in three different strata of earth where the top and bottom layers are dated to be millins of years apart. How does one part of a tree become fossilized while another part remains in tact to become fossilized millions of years later. I have seen no biological explanation.
I have seen no evidence to support the claim of one tree with its pieces millions of years apart.
Since I am throwing out geology, how about a couple more for you. Why are 3 of the 10 geological columns missing over 85% of the world’s suface area. This may seem like a dumb question, but how does any part of the world miss out geologically on 100 million years of earth history?
What 3 of what 10 columns? Most columns have discontinuities for very well explained reasons. Also, most of the earth’s surface area (ocean floors) is young due to the effects of plate tectonics.
Geological studies shows evidence of Oxygen in all the columns back to the Archain (oldest rock formations), so why do we insist on a reducing atmoshphere model (presupposition of what was needed for our origin of life chemestry despite the evidence- Miller and Orgel ” the synthesis of compounds(amino Acids)of biological interest take place ONLY UNDER REDUCING CONDITIONS”(emphasis mine), or something else).
Geological evidence, particularly banded iron formations, support early reducing conditions.
Just as an addition to that, does any one find it interesting that oil companies do not drill in the oldest rocks? If they were produced in a reducing atmosphere, shouldn’t they be full of methane for oil? yes!!! If you buy in at all to the follow the money idea, then oil companies are not drilling, because the methane is not there..Methane – being a gas – migrates.
Also, limestone and sandstone are found at the bottom of the Grand Canyon, meaning it was formed in oxodizing not reducing conditions.
The sedimentary layres at the bottom of the Grand Canyon are not that old.
Good job, Ben, but next time, please add some quote marks. ;) You had me scratching my head there for a second.
sorry rage – done in a hurry without any research or proof-reading
The problem I see with Chuck and nathan here is the same problem one sees in society in general now on many issues…that being individuals without the requisite knowledge, background, and whatever other requirements are necessary, making judgement of the work of others…the continuity of that work extending over decades, centuries, or even millenia.
Somehow, they know better than some of the greatest minds that God has crated…even though they admit freely or through their ignorance, that they have neither studied or understood what has been written or recorded.
With regard to Biblical authority, there is a tradition (in addition to the Bible) extending back 1,500 years. One only has to LOOK at the Bible to see what Jesus was teaching. In the Good samaritan, the two Jews of the priestly class, concerned with breaking the law and with ritual purity, ignore the injured man. It is the Samaritan, an infidel, one of the unsaved (as an ancient Jew would see it), who puts aside the tabos against helping an enemy, touching, blood, and all the rest, to HELP the injured Jew. Nathan and Chuck would have us believe he is damned because he hasn’t heard the WORD. Of course he has, the belief isn’t in the PERSON of JESUS but in his role as the WORD..and in short, the WORD is to love your enemies and those who hurt you as you would love a family member or yourself. If you know this, then you know the WORD, and you know the true meaning of man’s search for truth.
Chuck, I’d suggest that if you’re so concerned with the science, then go out and get a Ph.D. Spend 5 to 7 years in intense research on the subject. Talk to the world’s experts, give presentation tothem on your findings (finding include the thought process behind your interpretations), explain to them the shortcomings of the theories as you see them. Work on correcting them.
Somehow, many people seem to think scientific theories are born fully formed. they aren’t. EVERY branch of science has had its false starts and wrong roads. The theories of phlogiston, caloric, cold fusion, violations of the second law of thermodynamics…which by the way appears SO simple and violatable that I’ll bet Chuck would think he could think up a way to violate it..
“It is impossible to construct an engine which, operating in a cycle, will produce no other effect than the extraction of heat from a reservoir and performance of an equivalent amount of work.”
or
“It is impossible to construct a heat pump which will transfer heat from a low temperature reservoir to a high temperature reservoir without using external work.”
Honestly, I haven’t found anything on in situ tree fossils. I may have to lurk around in the Geo building and look for a friendly face to harrass. I feel like a cop-out for just posting a link to talk origins, but I’m just a lowly undergrad :)http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate/trees.html
Brian – I remember with “cold fusion” personally telling some of those involved I thought they were wrong. They had put their findings out for peer review and criticism and we definitely did review and criticize. These fellow scientists subsequently acknowledged that they had spoken far too soon.
KFG,
“Nathan, is this an example of a hasty generalization?”
No. I was not making a statement about all or most of any particular group.
“And nathan defends her as a true christian?”
KFG, where have I defended her as a true Christian? I have only said that I think the FSM should not be in a classroom if Jesus can’t.
Do you even read my posts or is it easier for you to go ahead and make up whatever you want to?
“Or is he saying she is not a true christian? Only nathan knows for sure.”
I have not said anything about her at all.
“I always find it usefull to give nathan full room to expound on the gospel according to nathan, the bible according to nathan, and the judgement as to real christians vs. fake christians, all according to nathan.”
KFG, you don’t believe anything the Bible says let alone what I say. So don’t waste your time acting like this is about me.
Tara – watch out for those geology types – they are invariable Dirty Old Men.
Brian,
So what is your definition of a Christian and what is required for salvation?
It seems like you are trying to say that just being a good samaritan is enough and not faith in Christ.
Nathan,
I’m not a dogmatist, nor do I necessarily believe in the concept of salvation, damnation, and allthe rest.
However, if I follow what Jesus DID, then a Christian is one who does the same within the limits of his time, place, circumstances, and ability.
Jesus asked that the one among the crowd with no sin be the one to cast the first stone at the adultress. He pointed out the futility of dogmatic positions in the face of human suffering in the Good Samaritan, he uplifted the woman at the well who asked for his help (which he initially refused to give), he spoke of love, respect, kindness.
As with the old line about pornography, I may not be able to define what a Christian is, but I’d recognize one when and if I saw one. As the line from the song goes..”And they’ll know we are Christians by our love”
You consider doctrine and dogma important, obviously. But Jesus asked us to put aside what is important to us for what’s really important. Other people are what’s really important…more important than our pride, our paycheck, our clothing, our possessions. The only thing that is truly mine is the rest of humanity. Jesus said what you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me.
I hope that I can do a bit to make the world better, in spite of my arrogance, pride, selfishness, and the rest. I don’t know about the afterlife and frankly I don’t care. I’ll find out soon enough, and I believe, if anything, death will be a rebirth into a new environment wherein my shortcomings in this world are again mine to work on…that my spiritual self continues to seek oneness with the all.
I am an atheist.
But if I did believe in God, I’d want to think that all of his followers thought like Brian.
Now HE sounds like a REAL Christian.
Thanks, JR,
I won’t hold that against you ;-)
One thing about it JR, you are never afraid to voice an uninformed opinion.
You are an atheist who judges whether a person is a good Christian by how much they agree with you on the issues. You are entitled to your opinon, but in this situation, your opinion has no credibility.
I don’t mean you being an atheist, but you calling me a Christian.
I would consider myself a bit more objective on the matter than you Out. I got no dog in the fight.
Brian? YOu are not a Christian?
Outlander,
I dare say JR has more to say about it than you have to say anything about atheism. Most atheists in this country came to it through a conscious decision to reject the Christianity they were brought up with since childhood. That means they agonized, studied, read, and experimented. Can you say the same, or is your faith an enculturated one where you have never looked any farther than the limits that were set for you.
One thing about walking towards the light…it blinds you and it casts a long shadow behind you. Looking away a bit allows you to see and gives you a perspective on both the light in front of you and the darkness cast by other things as well as yourself just behind you.
JR,
No I don’t call myself Christian. I’m an atheist. But if someone mistakes my actions for those of a good Christian, Muslim, Jew, Bahai, Buddhist, Hindu, oa ny of the others, I wouldn’t be insulted.
Out?
Did you just see that?
It does not speak well for your take on faith when I consider someone who I did not know was an atheist(Brian) as a better Christian than someone who regularly instructs us all on just what a Christian is. (Nathan)
Does being a Christian mean “Christlike” or “Paulist”? If it is the former then I would consider it a supreme compliment. If the latter then I would not feel so complimented.
JR,
You mistook an atheist for a Christian, and your mistake proves a point about Nathan?
I don’t want to impune Brian in any way. I’m sure he is a good person. I think though that this proves the folly of trying to judge a person over a few paragraphs they write in a blog.
Well if you have done your reading Out, you would see that it is not I who started the “judging”. Nathan did that. I just called him on it.
To me faith in anything is best demonstrated by manner and acts. Unfortunately it ususually ends up in the faithful engaging in a continual squabble over who has a corner on the truth.
Well this saves me the posting of all the Bible verses where Jesus claims to be the way to eternal life and how you must have faith in Him…
It makes sense to me now how Brian can believe what he does about Christ. He is not a Christian.
JR,
You don’t like Christianity and you surely don’t agree with any of it.
Of course you are going to agree with Brian when he says something that you agree with which is that having faith in Christ is not the way…
Nathan,
Did you ever even suppose that your reading of the Bible, or that of the Church you belong to, is not the only way it can be read.
I posted for Ian, as I’m sure you saw, portions of the Catechism of the catholic Church which showed that the Roman Church does not consider being a Christian an absolute necessity to salvation. This comes from one of the oldest, most conservative, and most educated group of Biblical scholars/interpreters in the world.
I demonstrated for you that Jesus himself was less concerned about dogma than he was about action.
Somehow you dismiss the fact that I have a more diverse Christrian background and quite a few years of Christian religious education as a non-sequitor.
I guess we just see things differently. I believe in being inclusive and open to different points of view. You seem to believe in your exclusivity as a Christian and that others had better come around to your point of view and your reading of scripture or else.
I’ve used this example before. Koine Greek and ancient Hebrew had no punctuation and ancient Hebrew no vowels. So, in a poor example from English, how would you read JESUSISNOWHERE? Can you see how there might be some discussion? Can you see that the tradition associated with the text is justr as important as the text?
Brian,
If you knew me and my posting here you would know that I am always the one talking about looking at things in their context and their orginal Greek and Hebrew.
There is a difference in debating some doctrinal things here and there.
The one thing not open to debate is the belief in Christ.
I don’t know where you are getting your information from but this is the Catholic stance on Christ:
Jesus Christ: True or False
True. Para. 454:
The title “Son of God” signifies the unique and eternal relationship of Jesus Christ to God his Father: he is the only Son of the Father (cf. Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18); he is God himself (cf. Jn 1:1). To be a Christian, one must believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (cf. Acts 8:37; 1 Jn 2:23).
I can quote you numerous verses which all indicate that faith in Christ is required for salvation.
It is not a mere difference in opinion on the text but your gross distortion of it.
Nathan, the Biblical scholar . . . do you read medieval Latin, classical Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic?
Question: why does the spagetti monster offend you so much?
It doesn’t offend me, and I’m a Christian.
“Most atheists in this country came to it through a conscious decision to reject the Christianity they were brought up with since childhood. That means they agonized, studied, read, and experimented. Can you say the same, or is your faith an enculturated one where you have never looked any farther than the limits that were set for you.”
Brian: I have been through something not quite as drastic when, after a lot of introspection and study I decided that I would leave the Catholic church over the faith vs works salvation issue. I would argue that you, as one who has completely rejected faith, have forfeited your ability to credibly criticize what another believes about salvation issues. Apparently nothing have met your standard.
You sound like a very intelligent person. Sometimes that can get in the way. I hope that at some point you reconsider.
When did I ever say I was offended Trumad?
I said that if we are going to allow the diety of the FSM in the classroom then we should allow Jesus in there too.
Are you offended as a Christian at teachers being allowed to display posters of Christ?
Nathan,
Back atcha. If Jesus is of one substance with the Father, how is it that he knows less that the Father does(Mk 13:32; Mt 24:36)?
Jesus shows periods of omniscience, predicting the cock crowing incident with Peter, for example. He also shows period of omnipotence, by raising Lazarus from the dead.
Based on these incidents, you would think that He might question his abilities if He were unsure of their extent and find that He was indeed omniscient and omnipotent.
If you believe he was both of these a priori, then how come He doesn’t know the day or the hour?
The NT claims Jesus was TEMPTED by Satan, not that Satan TRIED to tempt Him. Temptation implies conscious consideration of actually committing the act. If you’re TEMPTED by the smell of a pizza, then you consciously consider eating some. If you’ve just eaten and are full, someone might TRY to tempt you with a slice, but you don’t seriously consider it.
If you want to take the words as literally as you do, outside the context of place, time, language, etc., then for every quote you throw at me, I’ll throw one back at you.
Where does that get anyone? The Lord’s Diner is still full every night and in need of volunteers and money. I’d prefer to spend my efforts helping than arguing textual trivialities with you.
When Gandhi was asked whether he was a Hindu, he responded
Later in his life when he was asked whether he was a Hindu, he replied:
“Yes I am. I am also a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist and a Jew”.
Enough said.
There are fundamental differences between humans and all other species that evolutionary theory cannot explain. So to say that humans evolved from common ancestors to modern-day great apes, has no scientific foundation.
For example, Voyager-1 was launched 28 years ago. It’s passed Neptune. Within a decade it will be beyond the newly-discovered 10th planet, and will be outside our solar system. We are communicating with it. At the speed of light, it takes 12 hours for one-way communication.
No other species past or present has dug hundreds and thousands of feet into our earth’s crust to find resources that have enabled cities to be built, our species to travel to any point in the globe in less than three days, to regulate our habited climate to “comfortable levels”.
No other species has developed communication systems that enable it to communicate across continents to any point in the world, in aural, visual and written communication.
No other species has developed educational systems in which parents send their offspring thousands of miles away to be educated.
No other species has developed ideas and systems to invade other territories thousands of miles away.
No other species sends representatives to posts thousands of miles from home to negotiate trade deals.
No other species has developed systems to decimate other continents natural and species ecocystems, and impose its will.
No other terrestrial species that evolutionists has discovered, has ever explored and exploited oceans thousands of miles from its homeland. No marine species that evolutionists have discovered has said, “We want to got deep inland, and conquer terrritories.”
No other species has said, “Let’s live in a warm climate, with 80 F summer temperatures, but go to high mountains in Alaska, the Himalayas, and the Antartic” to experience -20 to -100 F temperatures.”
No other species has sent itself high into the air in hot air balloons, then a mere century later devised aircraft that could fly accordig to aerodymanic principles, with wings like birds, except powered by completely different principles, against the wind, then 40 years later, devise aircraft that could fly 1500 miles against the wind in 8 hours, then twenty years later send its members into space, then twelve years later send its members to the moon, then a half-decade later send probes to other planets.
Humans are fundamentally different from all other species.
BTW, Chuck,
You throw out all these complicated sounding “refutations” to evolutionary theory, as if just not having an answer proves no answer is possible.
I don’t know what the answers to your questions are, but I know that researchers grounded in biology, geology, and could chew those “concerns” up and spit them out.
Ben H. already in the format of this blog demolished most of them.
It’s not that hard to come up with seemingly impossible-to-answer questions for any theory. “Shakespeare didn’t write his plays for he couldn’t have known the speech of kings, knights, courtiers, and soldiers.” “We never walked on the moon, because the radiation would have killed the astronauts.”
But when you talk to the people that know, who don’t spend much time thinking about this crap because it is, after all, crap, they’ll set you straight.
Outlander,
That is an incredibly bad standard. I guess by that standard, those who reject common descent have no business commenting on it and vice versa.
I guess those who believe republican government should shut up when other leaders bring up their position as divine right leaders.
If your standard is “you have to accept something of what I accept to have any basis or authority to talk about it”…I would say you’re mistaken.
Heart–
You’re confusing cause and effect.
We are different than animals because we were subjected to climate and environmental changes that forced us to become sapient instead of instinctive.
We developed language concurrent with abstract reasoning.
This is why we can make tools like clothing that allows to survive in the arctic or airplanes that fly.
Still, consider the lilies of the field. Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed as one of these.
Brain,
I do many things to help in the Church and contribute my time and money to help those less furtunate.
I am not doubting that we are commanded to do these things. I am in full agreement.
You have gone from trying to show that salvation is not based on having faith in Christ, yet you are an admitted atheist who doesn’t believe in God anyhow…
Now you are debating the Trinity.
You apparantly only believe what ever the Bible says which coincides with your athesitic view and throw out the very essence of Christianity and what Christians believe.
If you want to debate the trinity I can do that too. All your questions have very easy answers.
It doesn’t matter though. You already reject the diety of Christ and claim to be an atheist.
So tell me Brian, are you honestly seeking answers to your questions?
Nathan
Not from you, since you have none.
Lord, forgive me fer that…..help the starvin Pygmies. Amen
Hmmm, he’s got a point, Brian.
Why do you care so much about what Jesus really said when you don’t even believe in him like a Christian does?
What’s it to you?
Do you argue with Muslims about the five pillars and Jews about the Torah too?
Who would have thought it?
An atheist who doesn’t agree with Christianity or what the Bible says!
Of course that is why you are an atheist… LOL.
TruMad,
I would, you got one handy? This is a blog about the CHRISTIAN right’s attempt to infiltrate nonscience into the science curriculum. By the nature of the argument the text of the Bible and its interpretation enter the discussion.
If there were some fundamentalist Jews and Muslims arguing the same nonsense, then I’d be happy to deal with their texts versus the science.
TruMad,
You’re talking about hyper-speed evolution. Where’s the evidence for this?
Charles Darwin, if transported backwards in time, could have looked at cities 150 years old, and said, “I recognize this.” 300 years old, and “I can see societal evolution.” 150 years later, I think he would have been completely discombubulated.
***Nod***
You got that right, my friend.
Non-science in the service of any religion is a disservice to our society.
I’ll back you on that.
Nathan?Are you incapabable of discourse without attack?
You accuse me of hating Chrisitanity. Based on what?That I question your take on it? Isn’t that back to your typical “I’m right because you can’t prove I’m wrong” meme?Please post for me the annual earnings of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. While you’re at it, post the taxes paid by your or any church. I already dismissed your call for equal treatment for Christ and the FSM in a classroom upthread. We don’t need to do it again.
Heart? Soaring words. I have others to add.Human beings also practice ritualized and even mandated brutalization of members of their own species.
Human beings are the only species that practices genocide.Human beings are the only species that is currently ready willing and able to lay waste to the entire planet and biosphere over a disagreement among its members.
Human beings are the only species consciously able to alter the global environment, and apparently to busy doing it to care.
Human beings are NOT the only species to practice slavery. They are however the only one to have ever made it legal.Human beings are the only species capable of making other species extinct but consciously able to decide not to or do it anyway.
JR,
Wow, that blew away my rather feeble attempt at a comeback…makes you kind of sad to be a human :-((
Well, I’m way out of my field on this, Heart, but I think hyper-speed evolution is how the researchers think it works these days, isn’t it?
For instance, bacteria are fed different diets, some sugery and some salty. Within just a few generations, they see bacteria emerging into different strains–with DIFFERENT strategies for coping with their different diets.
Genetic changes accompany these changes.
In other words, scientists can see evolution taking place.
As far as “society” evolving, that’s something completely different. For instance, linguists (which is getting into my area) now have pretty positively determined that language gets neither simpler nor more complex. Latin SEEMS more complex because of all the conjugations, but English would be difficult for a Latin speaker with all its prepositions, two word verbs, and articles.
Technology gets more complex, but there’s no evidence that we know more things today than the ancients did–we just know different things. They knew about how bison migrate, and we know about computers. They know how to make fire from sticks and tinder, and we know how to strike a match. The total amount of knowledge any one person “knows” cannot be said to really increase.
Norm Chomsky says that language is virtually designed. He should know, being the father of modern linguistics, and the top linguist linguistics researcher (MIT Institute Prof, non Christian) on the planet.
Yeah, I love that guy, NOAM Chomsky.
Experimental science is modern science. Observational science is pre-Christian Aristotelian. Evolutionary scientists are basically applying 2300 year old observation-without-experiment principles.
Perform an experiment that turns monista into protista, and you win a Nobel Prize, Perform an experiment that turns a single celled prostista, like a yeast into a multicelled protista like a sponge, and you win a Nobel Prize. Turn a sponge into a notochord and you win a Nobel Prize. Alas, no Nobels on the horizon.
The genomic capacity just isn’t there. If it were, that would be so cool. We could create all kinds of new life forms. Right now, the best medical genetic gene insertion hasn’t cured a disease lie immune deficiency disorder. The best ag genetic insertion has only created resistance to some insects, and to synthetic pesticides. This is a form of “intelligent design” evolution. But it isn’t even close to supporting new-species-appearance evolution.
Darwin’s proponents said that blacks and peasants who were imported to Kansas were less-evolved subspecies. Mexicans too, even though they developed a base-20 mathematics system. But we now have Mexican Americans in California and Texas, and African-Americans nationally outperforming Kansas Euro-American students on AP math and science subjects. I propose that Kansas students can hold their own, if given good math and science instruction. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think that modern science is about performing EXPERIMENTS.
Some of you need to read Stanford physics professor and 1993 Nobel Laureate Robert Laughlin’s book, “A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down”. I got it at Borders in farmtown Fresno, California. Not on the shelf here. Lauglin is not an ID proponent, but has shown that science has a lot of unprovable metaphysicics. Borders execs decided that Kansans aren’t smart enough to read it. Prove them wrong.
“That is an incredibly bad standard. I guess by that standard, those who reject common descent have no business commenting on it and vice versa.”
Brian: I disagree with your analogy. An atheist arguing that one salvation concept is superior to another, is more like an Iraq citizen arguing in support of an American presidential candidate and against another. They would have no standing or credibility.
BS!!! Who are these black and beaner kids who are outperforming Whites? Provide proof or stop the nonsense!
States help schools hide non-White students’ scores
(AP) STATES ARE helping public schools escape potential penalties by skirting the No Child Left Behind law’s requirement that students of all races must show annual academic progress. With the federal government’s permission, schools aren’t counting the test scores of nearly 2 million students when they report progress by racial groups, an Associated Press computer analysis found. Minorities — who historically haven’t fared as well as whites in testing — make up the vast majority of students whose scores are being excluded, AP found. And the numbers have been rising.
Schools receiving federal aid also must demonstrate annually that students in all racial categories are progressing or risk penalties that include extending the school year, changing curriculum or firing administrators and teachers.
The U.S. Education Department said it didn’t know the breadth of schools’ deliberate undercounting until seeing AP’s findings.http://www.nationalvanguard.org/story.php?id=8679
V.L.R.B!!
Outlander,
So I’ll give you another set of analogies. A scientist studying the Aztec or ancient Egyptian religion has no ability to comment on their deities, their rituals, their gods, their conception of the divine?
I’ll take it one step further…an Aztec who became Christian could not then speak about the Aztec religion?
Einstein one of the scientific luminaries of the 20th century, diagreed vehemently with the foundations of quantum mechanics. His critiques shouldn’t have been taken seriously since he never bought into it?
So if I said I was a Christian the critiques, though no different, would carry more weight? I think you need to rethink that position. I’d also suggest that you talk to Marcus Borg, John Crossan, Bishop John Spong about their critiques…Christians to a man..and who essentially say many of the things I said (since I have read them quite vociferously)
For the record, the post at 7:58 is mine. The post by JR at 8:01 is not.
Out? You have a dog in the fight. You have your own beliefs and you are self-assured that they are divinely guided or inspired. Thus you come to the debate prejudiced.
An atheist is EMINENTLY more qualified to critically address religion than a “true believer”.
Oops, That one was mine..mislabelled somehow..act of God I guess.
That’s ok Brian. If someone is gonna use my nic accidentally or otherwise you’d be on my short list.
Go to apcentral.collegeboard.com. Register. It’ll give you numbers of 11th-12th graders. Percentages of 11th-12th graders per state taking AP exams. And numbers scoring 4’s and 5’s by racial-ethnic group. Then go to http://www.ed.gov and look at numbers of white and minority 11th and 12th students in each state and nationally.
If you have a basic 4-function calculator, or MS Excel you can run the numbers. Why do you think I would make this up. I had two kids to worry about, and I found out that Kansas is really a crappy state for AP teaching. Call Mr. Brooks and ask him how many Wichita schools offer 20+ AP course curricula like Tulsa, OKC and Shawnee Mission East.
He said, in a televised BOE-meeting last year, “It’s my understanding that IB (international baccalaureate) courses are more academically advanced than AP courses, in response to a Northwestern High student who proposed giving 5 GPA scores for AP “A’s”, which is the national standard. NW has a small number of AP courses.
Riight, Mr. Brooks. Go to http://www.ku.edu. and www. wustl.edu (Wash U, our region’s premier university) amd compare IB top-score (6-7) vs. AP 4-5 scores for giving students college-credits. You’re “top public school” Wichita East has a”baby steps” college-credit program. Most IB “Higher Level” IB courses don’t generate any advanced-placement university credit at KU (32% vs. 94% for AP), and at Wash U get only minimal credit. AP gets substantial credit, because it is run by the College Board, whose members include KU, KSU and Baker.
The International Baccalaureate Organization has ZERO connections to American colleges and universities. Its headquartered in Switzerland, but has zero connections to Swiss universities. Its president is French-Tunisian, but IBO has zero connections to Fremch universities. See http://www.ibo.org.
If you’re really smart, follow their links and tabulate use your calculator or Excel to tabulate all scores. They don’t even come close to adding up. I really wish they did add up, but they don’t.
In 2002 the National Research Council found deficiencies in both AP and IB. The College Board moved quickly to correct them. IBO North America said, “We’ve already revised curricula, we don’t need to make changes.” What IBO NA was really saying was, “We’re poor, we don’t have the resources to make changes.” In 2004 IBO had 400 American schools. AP had 16,000. IBO had 31 private schools versus 2700 private AP schools. Go ahead and do the math. IBO is a loser, and USD 259 chose IBO’s program. because AP requires self-determination to set up, while IB is a turnkey “We’ll do the thinking, we’lll give you orders,” programme.
“One of the techniques of thought control is to encourage lively debate that keeps to certain unexamined presupposutions. Let’s suppose I get another beer here, Carla, huh, while we’re young?”
Norm Chomsky
Ian
do some research and then may you will gain understanding.
Brian,Once you “outed” yourself (so to speak), I could see–predictably–where things would go (sigh). BTW, what are these Republicans doing, thinking they have any right to talk about the Democratic party? :)—–
Yes, it is NOAM Chomsky. Sorry.
The original point of the thread was Connie Morris objecting to a picture of the Flying Spaghetti Monster on a classroom door.
We have to understand Connie to understand her objection.She is a person who justifies her failings in the past with her proclamation that she has been “born again”Now this gives Connie special dispensation! Not only are we not to address her past but we must regard her more highly for rising above it. The sinner reformed, she now assumes the role of an authority figure! Over us…..
Connies rule book and weapon of choice is the Bible. But the bible was written by men…..godly inspired or otherwise. For its first 16 or so centuries, it was transcribed by individuals one copy at a time. Translated from foreign language and subject to each scribers editorial bent, one wonders just how much of it’s original “truth” was lost in time and translation.
But 90% of the American public regards the Bible as relevant. A smaller percentage presumably including Connie, Nathan, and Outlander and perhaps Heartlander regard it as the literal word from on high.
This would not be troubling, were that the long translated and editorailized words of the bible were not used so often to elevate some and denigrate many.
Heart has posted of Man as divinely created given the achievements of man that differ man from animals.
I do not wish to demean the Bible, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or any such beliefs that give folks comfort…..as long as they do not give some comfort to some at the expense of others misery.
I offer to Heart the 29th scroll of the articles of ape law from the fictional movie “Planet of the Apes”
Beware the beast man for he is the Devils pawn.Alone among God’s primates, he kills for sport, or lust, or greed.Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brothers land.Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert of his home, and yours.
Shun him. Drive him back into his jungle lair. For he is the harbinger of death.
And if that is any less relevant than a book diluted through 2000 years you are free to tell me why.
JR,
Lets look at some of your baseless accusations about the Bible:
“Translated from foreign language and subject to each scribers editorial bent, one wonders just how much of it’s original “truth” was lost in time and translation.”
Not much at all JR. When the dead sea scrolls were unearthed in the mid 1900’s they compared it to the current translation of the Bible and found it to be like 99% accurate.
It is a popular myth that many non believers try to portray about the Bible being constantly retranslated over and over again one copy at a time till it has become less accurate, kind of like the game telephone. That is all it is though, just a myth.
“This would not be troubling, were that the long translated and editorailized words of the bible were not used so often to elevate some and denigrate many.”
Elevate some and denigrate many? Would you actually care to share who these some are verses the many?
“And if that is any less relevant than a book diluted through 2000 years you are free to tell me why.”
The Bible was not diluted unless you have some proof I and the many other theologians and historians have missed?
Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of Judas
Gospel of Mary Magdalen
In one old scroll Nathan, (sorry I do not know which) Christ is a homosexual.
Your bible is no more than an editorial Nathan.
JR..I have one question for you: Do you claim the three “Gospels” you mention to be truth?
In a court of law, if you have 5 witnesses, do you accept the testimony of one, or of the 4 that agree and are consistent?
Men and nations have tried to destroy the Bible for centuries. They are all dead and gone.. the Bible lives on and continues to be a powerful force in the world.I’m afraid if it were just an “editorial”, it would not have survived the first century. Why does man choose to hate God? Why do we deny the very thing that gives us hope? Without hope we are dead. If the Word of God was removed from the world, then we may as well be animals, roaming about fulfilling our selfish carnal desires. What kind of a world would that be?
Good to see you again kssam. You are one of the faithful whom I respect.
To answer your question, I don’t claim ANY of the gospels published or otherwise( there are many more in this category than I mentioned) to be truth. They are stories nothing more.Time and translation make the 4 that agree no less relevant than the one that does not…..to address your example.
Their good or lack thereof comes from how they are interpreted and acted on. You Sam interpret them in very good ways.(See? It’s subjective. My opinion) Fred Phelps uses the same words and finds quite a different instruction.
I would not destroy the Bible. It was the first printed book.You’ll not find censors or book burners among MY fellow travellers. It is one of the oldest of our histothologies. (My word for history/mythlogy) But my take on the Bible is that it has lessons to teach, not prejudice to enforce.
JR..Your last statement is one we ALL should agree on!
By the way.. if this wasn’t such a great country, people like Fred Phelps would be silenced… so we need to take his kind with a grain of salt!
Nathan,
Cite your sources since your data are suspect.
“When the dead sea scrolls were unearthed in the mid 1900’s they compared it to” the current translation of the Bible and found it to be like 99% accurate.”
This is patently false for several reasons. First, I’m sure you meant to say when compared to the Books of the OT since the Dead Sea Scrolls were written and lost before the NT was even in existence. Since the NT makes up more than 1% of the Bible, the statement is false on its face.
Second, you say compared to the “current translation of the Bible”. Which one? In which language? Surely you can’t mean the KJV since it is well known that it was translated by a committee influenced by the King, and certain crucial passages were changed or even excluded. I know of at least 20 different English translations in use today. They all translate passages and meaning in different ways. So what EXACTLY do you mean by 99% accurate.
It is also known that versions of the Gospel change with the date of their writing. The earliest versions of Mark known end with an empty tomb…. The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.
This section has to do with the great mandate to go out to preach to the world. It is obviously a later Christian addition.
So, again, please cite your sources, what you mean by 99% accurate translation (words, thoughts, meanings), in which language, in which century, etc.
Brian: One last comment on this. It’s not that you don’t have the right to voice your opinion on this issue. And you are obviously an informed person. It is just that, as an atheist, you have rejected as false ANY side of salvation issues. How then can you be taken seriously as an advocate of an idea that you have personally rejected?
And Nathan,
Don’t forget things like the punctuation problem…JESUSISNOWHERE…who decides how this should be broken up.
“Errors of hearing are particularly common when words have the same pronunciation as others but differ in spelling (as in English: “their, there”; “meet, meat”). This kind of error increased in frequency in the early Christian Era because some vowels and diphthongs lost their distinctive sound and came to be pronounced alike. For example, the Greek vowels ?, i, and u and the diphthongs ei, oi, and ui all sounded like the ?? (as in “feet”). Remarkable mistranslations can occur as, for example, in I Corinthians, chapter 15, verse 54: “Death is swallowed up in victory”—becomes by itacism (pronunciation of the Greek letter ?) “Death is swallowed up in conflict” (neikos). Another problem of itacism is the distinction between declensions of the 1st and 2nd persons inthe plural (“we” and “you”) in Greek, which can sound the same (hemeis, “we”; humeis, “you”), because the initial vowels are not clearly differentiated. Such errors can cause interpretative difficulties.”
Encyclopedia Britannica
This thread reminds me of an encyclopedia salesman that called on me decades ago. Bombarded me with questions like why does a black cow eat green grass and produce white milk? Why is the sky blue, etc. etc. A whole lot of sophistry.
Out,
I’m not advocating anything except that science (the world as it is) should have precedence over 2,000 year old dogma when there is a conflict, and that Christians like Nathan consider the implications of their belief.
I will also refer you to my earlier comments about Einstein and quantum mechanics. Your thesis is just a non-starter.
Imagine for a moment, that Nathan and a Hindu work side by side together in an Inter-Faith Ministries project for years, helping the needy and helpless of Wichita. They do exactly the same things. By Nathan’s reading of the Bible, I think he would say the Hindu has no chance at salvation. Think about that for a moment. Does it jive with the idea of a just and merciful God?
Imagine further future society in which the name Jesus has been expunged from the NT. Kind of blacked out like current national security documents. Since I don’t know the name “Jesus” but I carry out what the book says, am I still damned?
Imagine one further thing. I am an ancient Jew and I see Jesus himself from a distance helping the poor and needy and I decide to do as He did. For reasons beyond my control I never meet him or learn his name. Because I don’t know his name, Im damned? Silly.
Brian…Imagine a world where every single human being has sinned and is eternally separated from a Holy God. No matter how good you become or how much you do for others, a perfectly just God MUST condemn you or He is no longer just! Now, let’s say that God sent his only son to die on a cross as a sacrificial atonement once for all of your sin. That same God asks of you only one thing.. to BELIEVE. How simple and easy.. NOONE deserves Salvation, but God gives it as a gift. How could He be more merciful?
KSSam,
Standard Christianity. Fine for you. Let me ask you though..God sent His Son as a sacrifice. Answer for me, since a sacrifice requires the killer (for lack of a better term) and the victim, who was the killer or killer(s) OF Jesus? I believe your answer will be (or should be) “we killed Jesus” or “the Romans killed Jesus as a proxy for mankind”. Doesn’t this kind of strike you as odd…God became angry at disobedience and had us kill (sacrifice) a human for it.
BTW, why should “belief” enter into it at all? What does God care if we “believe” it or not? The act was done, mankind is redeemed..end of story.
Sam you might also consider the following anecdote. If a man can do it surely a merciful God could.
A precious story pictures a mother pleading with Napoleon to spare her condemned son’s life. The emperor said the crime was dreadful; justice demanded his life. “Sir,” sobbed the mother, “Not justice, but mercy.” “He does not deserve mercy,” was the answer. “But, sir, if he deserved it, it would not be mercy,” said the mother. “Ah yes, how true,” said Napoleon. “I will have mercy.”
Sam, you might also consider
St. Isaac the Syrian said once:
“Never say that God is just. If he were just you would be in hell. Rely only on His injustice which is mercy, love and forgiveness.”
“Have mercy upon me, O God … according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.” (Ps. 51.1)
So views can be different. What one should take away from this is exactly that…no one has THE answer..not the Calvinism you and Nathan lean towards, nor the Catholic Church, nor any of the others. To think that the nature of God can be defined or is known in its entirety to any one person or group at any time is folly.
Brian: I am puzzled. Do you think (or more importantly, believe) that God exists or not? If not, why are you advancing an argument about His nature?
I am beginning to doubt your atheist credentials.
Brian..Think about it.. if Jesus is God’s son, he could have stopped the crucifixion in a moment. “Man” did not kill Jesus… God killed Jesus, and Resurrected Him.
Yes.. it is extremely odd.. it is not the way we as humans would deal with the situation. It was “of God”, not “of man”.
Mankind is NOT redeemed without a response. The “gift” must be accepted, otherwise, it is not a gift, it is a requirement void of free will.
Great Napoleon story, but I believe God’s perfect justice required retribution, and Jesus paid that price. If it were ONLY mercy… then once again, no free will. Our free will and acceptance gives glory to God, which was His only purpose for creating us in the first place.
Having said that… there is a scripture in Exodus 33 where God says “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” This may be a slippery slope, but I personally believe that God can see “Jesus in your heart”, and I believe it could be possible that God could consider that as “accepting Jesus”. This could only be in the cases of those who have never even heard of him. I am not privy to divine wisdom, so I could be wrong on that, but it seems consistent with his character to me.
Not having much in the way of theological knowledge (I was raised Roman Catholic, to a degree! :-), I’ve stayed out of this one.
One question comes to mind, though. Even on a young-Earth creationist timetable, millions of people lived and died before the lifetime of Jesus. They could hardly accept as a personal savior a man-god who hadn’t even been born yet!
Do they get a free pass?
Outlander,
Since the conversation has strayed from the original topic..that being common descent/biblical literalism and is now in the arena of the inerrancy and accuracy of peoples’ reading of the Bible and its meaning, I am simply playing “devil’s advocate” to those who espouse certain positions. The answers, imho, have not reflected well on the responses nor on the respondents’ own understanding of their beliefs or the beliefs of others.
You know, the Romans considered the rest of Europe as “barbarian” because of their lack of culture, learning, lack of an established system of law and justice, yet they actively participated in the pairing of gladiators for murderous (sometimes) combat. They didn’t see the amazing change of places when that aspect of their culture was considered. I’m merely pointing out positions and facts from modern research and 2,000 years of Christian culture. You’d think that Christianity began and ended with Luther and Calvin by most of the responses here.
The tradition is far longer, and diverse than these guys seem to think, nor do they seem able or willing to investigate the depth and beauty and sometimes the ugliness of many Christian theories or dogmas.
Frankly, you’re free to believe whatever you want of me…seems to be some sort of Christian thing about “classifying” people into the categories of their Christian belief or heresy..Go figure.
The bounds for this discussion have not been set up.
Brian,
At first you came into this discussion using the Bible as your source.
As time has progressed it turned out you are an atheist.
You have constantly changed the argument from at first being what a Christian is, to what is required for salvation, to the diety of Christ, the accuracy of the Bible, and now the very essence of Christianity itself.
I don’t have a problem with this at all. It is that at first I thought we were going to be able to discuss what the Bible says or what Jesus has said, or what Christians actually say…
In reality you simply deny any/all of it anyhow.
So it is not that you have no place to discuss this because you are an atheist. I debate with atheists all the time.
It is that you have been somewhat Disingenuous in this argument.
Everytime someone engages in a discussion about the current topic it simply turns into you simply saying it is our belief or whatnot…
You started this conversation talking about how I am un-Christlike when you don’t even believe what Christ says, question the very translation of what he said, then even use the things Christ did (which you still question the translation of) to try to make a point about salvation (which you don’t even believe)…
This is why this discussion with you has been somewhat misleading by you from the beginning.
So what do you want to debate Brain?
It seems as if you are simply trying to do or say whatever you can at this point to show how Christianity is wrong as a religion.
That is ok. I can debate that.
Outlander,
Since the conversation has strayed from the original topic..that being common descent/biblical literalism and is now in the arena of the inerrancy and accuracy of peoples’ reading of the Bible and its meaning, I am simply playing “devil’s advocate” to those who espouse certain positions. The answers, imho, have not reflected well on the responses nor on the respondents’ own understanding of their beliefs or the beliefs of others.
You know, the Romans considered the rest of Europe as “barbarian” because of their lack of culture, learning, lack of an established system of law and justice, yet they actively participated in the pairing of gladiators for murderous (sometimes) combat. They didn’t see the amazing change of places when that aspect of their culture was considered. I’m merely pointing out positions and facts from modern research and 2,000 years of Christian culture. You’d think that Christianity began and ended with Luther and Calvin by most of the responses here.
The tradition is far longer, and diverse than these guys seem to think, nor do they seem able or willing to investigate the depth and beauty and sometimes the ugliness of many Christian theories or dogmas.
Frankly, you’re free to believe whatever you want of me…seems to be some sort of Christian thing about “classifying” people into the categories of their Christian belief or heresy..Go figure.
Nathan,
I’ve never said Christianity is wrong. But, if you insist, why don’t you start by citing the sources for that junk on the accuracy of the Bible you posted.
Brian..By the way.. I do NOT believe in pre-destination in a Calvinistic sense. I believe God has a plan for our lives, but he allows us to CHOOSE to follow or not.Rage..Read my last paragraph above.. this is another reason I believe that way. The patriarchs did not know Jesus, although they knew ‘of’ a Messiah to come.
Brian,
Sure you said Christianity is wrong.
Christianity is the belief that Jesus is God, died for our sins, and that belief in him leads to salvation.
Is that wrong or right?
Last I checked you have been questioning every aspect of that here and are an admitted atheist.
So if you are now saying it is not wrong, then how do you justify being an atheist knowing it is right?
Rage,
The Catholic Catechism actually has an answer for that.
I’m not going to quote it though, since the mere fact that an “atheist” knows a bit about Christianity seems toi be driving some people here nuts.
Nathan,
You’re such a fucking bore. Go pick up a fucking book on Christian traditions. You’ll find many that don’t accept the Trinity, you yourself probably don’t accept the sacraments or if you do only a limited subset of them, some Christians don’t believe that Jesus was both perfectly God AND perfectly human simultaneously.
So the hell what? Just because you’ve been enculturated in a certain way in a certain church since childhood doesn’t mean everyone has. Go find out what a copt is, or an Assyrian Catholic, or maybe even what a Melkite or a Maronite is.
Brian..Most atheists I know have more Bible knowledge than alot of Christians. I know that is a sad commentary for Christians, but it is true.
Brian,
You only assume I don’t have any experience or knowledge or studying in Christianity.
I have been involved in many different church denominations.
I have studied apologetics, I have studied the Bible, I have studied many other religions including many differing sects of Christianity.
My point is that having a discussion with someone like you who both uses and refutes the Bible at the same time to make an arguement is not going to get anywhere.
Brian,
Perhaps we can start here:
So tell us what you believe then.
You claim you did not say Christianity is wrong…
Please share what it is you do believe.
I have told you what I believe.
Nathan,
You’d have been right at home at an ancient Church council condemning people with different views as heretics.
You have not answered a single question posed to you either. Where did you get the information on the Dead Sea Scrolls? No need to answer..I’m sure it was just hearsay and there is no source, but you’ll never admit it. Humility is the beginning of compassion and mercy. Obviously I have things to work on. You, on the other hand, won’t even state forthrightly that you basically made that stuff about the Scrolls up to fit your needs.
Enough of this for me.
Fairy Tales For Adults 101?
Evolutionary theory posits that evolution confers survival advantages. What survival advantage is there in rich guys spending a half mil to buy Hattie cruisers to catch 20 marlin a year in Florida?
Researchers at leading universities and NASA labs are trying to devise propulsion systems to send a probe to Proxima Centauri, which isn’t believed to have any planets, much less habitable ones. Where is the survival value in that?
In San Diego, a retired nuclear sub commander is teaching kids science. He KNOWS science. His sub had really cool state-of-the-art gear, like SQUID (superconducting quantum interference device). He could make 10 times as much money working as a defense industry exec. He’s not teaching for personal survival, he’s teaching because he loves science, and passing on his knowledge.
Consider art. Is that a survival trait? Doubtful.
Again, you need to read Nobel-winning physicist Rober Laughlin’s A Different Universe. Amazon has it. He explains that reductionism is outdated science. The physicists introduced reductionism in the 16th century, the chemists adopted it in the 18th. Linnaeus the taxonomist introduced it to biology in the 18th century, but biologists, being slow in science (they were what was then called natural historians), didn’t really pick it up until the 19th and 20th centuries. Darwin was a reductionist. Schoolchildren are being taught obsolete reductionist “science”, not just in biology, but chemistry and physics as well. I guess it doesn’t matter for Kansas, because the state is becoming an irrelevance anyway.
I didn’t vote for Connie Morris, nor would I if she ran here. A lot of Western Kansans did, though. Nobody ever taught them modern science.
All the above……
Because one religious nut didn’t like a picture.
THink on that. Reflect on it. It explains an awful lot of history and speaks to us as to current events as well.And God remains silent.
Dr. Laughlin explains that quantum mechanics is not indeterminate, it’s determinate. It isn’t a crapshoot. The crapshoot comes in trying to measure sub-atomic events. This is because to measure them, you first impact on the events you are trying to measure–you can’t do pure observation–and then you have to use macro-scale instruments. Information gets changed, and lost in this process. So the statistical-probability basis of qm is really due to measurement efforts’ influence. He should know: his Nobel was in quantum physics.
JR,
All that above because you think having a poster of the diety of the FSM is ok, but having a poster of Christ is not.
Of course there is going to be an argument.
Brian,
I told you I am not going to answer anymore of your questions because you keep changing the discussion.
I did not make anything up. The only part I made an error on was the OT and NT. Yes the dead sea scrolls were only of the OT.
Not intentional deception. A mistake.
Here’s a great quote from Laughlin:
Physical scientists do not like absolute pronouncements about what is and is not true. We know that measurements are never perfect and thus we want to know HOW true a given measurement is. This is a good practice, for it keeps everyone honest and prevents research reports from degenerating into fish stories.
Our lofty attitude, however belies something considerably easier to understand: the impulse to measure things accurately is the same impulse to make do-it-yourself repairs. The real allure is not high ideals at all, but shiny, complex machines bristling with wires and dials, and staying up all night drinking coffee and manning the computer while the stereo blasts rock-and-roll in the background. It is monster X-ray tubes, smoking soldering irons, nuclear reactors with holes in them for neutrons to come out, highly dangerous chemicals, and helpful signs saying things like, “Do not look into the laser with your remaining good eye.”
It is also fundamentally a matter of problem-solving strategy, tne notoriously gender-linked personality trait that is the source of all those jokes about wives who cannot read maps and husbands who refuse to ask for directions. It is why buildings and academic majors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have numbers rather than names. Accurate measurement is simply natural behavior for people who see nothing strange in creating building ten, building thirteeen, and course eight.
“Had the Pleistocene savanna contained trees bearing birth-control pills, we might have evolved to find them as terrifying as a venomous spider.”
http://members.aol.com/bobdevney/DEVAD32.html
Just a thought, heartlander, courtesy of pyscho-linguist Steven Pinker. Even “punctuated equilibria” don’t happen overnight.
And that notion that EVERY sustained trait must be due to natural selection is not an argument ANYONE is, in fact, making. In fact, I challenge you to name a single scientist who has made this argument (and, NO, I’m not talking about the early 20th-century eugenicists–I mean NOW–or even the past, say, 50 years!).
All of the above was a quote. I remember studying embryology. Haekel’s onto recapitulates phylo was really primitive. We were looking at information emergence: How does a single cell generate not just more single cells, all containing the same genetic code, but differentiation into a complex multicelled organism, such as a frog, chicken or human being? It seems that NEW INFORMATION IS CREATED. We pondered this amazing thing in the 70’s as information theory was being formalized. We still don’t have answers.
Somebody earlier mentioned male nipples. Useless? Actually, they have very dense nerve networks, and they convey erogenous pleasure when stimulated. I don’t know what this has to do with survival, but they ARE functional, at least in some of us males. = )
I’m gonna skip the chance to explore the concept of “graven images” which I could have easily went to from the beginning.
The picture of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is still on that door as of last report. I would bet it is on a few more doors since then too!
Because of the very necessary wall of separation of church from state, Christian or other religious icons will not be displayed in that school or in any government place now or ever. They will remain in the houses and hearts that are their proper venue.
So let it be writtenso let it be done
RAMEN!
We found out in the 70’s that bacterial plasmids could be traded and in particular, genes conveying antibiotic resistance could be shared, thus making an antibiotic-vulnerable strain resistant, courtesey of another strain. But then what do you think happened after several dozen generations of cultivation in the absence of the AB? The gene was dumped. It was a useless load. Interesting lesson: evolution doesn’t occur if it isn’t useful. You can have back-evolution.
No, actually, heartlander, I asked you a question. Care to answer it?
Or do you think it’s an unfair question?
Oh God,
Not the “new information is created argument”. Once in a while it would be good to pick up a science book on the subject rather than pick up some street version of HEV (human evolution deficiency) virus.
There are several pathways that lead to the creation of “new information”. First you must define what you mean by information. I’m sure you’re using it here in the sense that Shannon used it when referring to the statistical nature of the transfer of iformation in communication theory. Behe has picked up this concept and completely misapplied it.
We have observed the evolution of
* increased genetic variety in a population (Lenski 1995; Lenski et al. 1991)* increased genetic material (Alves et al. 2001; Brown et al. 1998; Hughes and Friedman 2003; Lynch and Conery 2000; Ohta 2003)* novel genetic material (Knox et al. 1996; Park et al. 1996)* novel genetically-regulated abilities (Prijambada et al. 1995)
A mechanism that is likely to be particularly common for adding information is gene duplication, in which a long stretch of DNA is copied, followed by point mutations that change one or both of the copies. Genetic sequencing has revealed several instances in which this is likely the origin of some proteins.
The process of mutation and selection is observed to increase information and complexity in simulations (Adami et al. 2000; Schneider 2000)
In any event
I thought the main topic of this thread was Connie Morris’s effort to revoke a teacher’s 1st Amendment right to free speech? It seems that many on this blog are hell bent on preaching their version of christianity. For shame……that isn’t what the core issue is about. I found rather humorous the person who made the claim that the FSM is an actual “deity”! LOL I can’t believe how many losers there are in this state.
Pretty tall talk from somebody who thinks he’s a sci fi character with a worm up his ass.
Very enjoyable discussion, gentlemen! I salute you all and especially Brian.
Nathan (I believe it was) answered the question I was going to ask about ‘free will’ and God’s all-knowing. Not completely answered for me, but something to ponder.
Now a new question: If Christ died to absolve our sins, is this all sins, from the time of our birth to our death? If so, why must we repent? And why are we judged on our sins, since absolving would mean they no longer exist? And would this mean from the moment the sin is committed?
Does anyone get my drift?
Brian, I wasn’t aware of the Catholic Church’s change regarding Christianity not being a pre-requisite for salvation. When my father (Catholic) married my mother (Protestant), she had to join the Catholic Church. The one thing she disliked about the Catholic Doctrine was being told that her Protestant parents would not be allowed into Heaven. But I’ve since heard it switched around: Protestants don’t believe Catholics are allowed in Heaven. (I’m laughing at the whole mess.)
Yes, atheists, as a rule, have more knowledge of the Christian faith (and others) than most Christians do.
RD,
How do you get that “as a rule” ateists have more knowledge of the Christian faith than most Christians?
Here is a good link for your question about sin:
http://pentecostalevangel.ag.org/Articles2002/foundational_three.cfm
Nathan, I wouldn’t touch that link with a ten-foot poll. Stupid, I’m not.
Why did you ask the questions if you don’t want answers?
“Why did you ask the questions if you don’t want answers?”
Hey, good point, Nathan. Now answer mine: Why didn’t Saddam use his WMDs?
My apologies, Nathan. I was in a rush. I really will check out the link when I get some time later tonight. I’m not promising I’ll accept the answers, but the question is one that has always puzzled me, so I’m willing to hear one opnion. I’m sure there are many.
And it might have been more acceptable to you if I had said that most, if not all, of the atheists I know are more knowledgable about the Bible than most Christians I know.
I’m constantly amazed that Christians cannot make the distinction between core, fundamental Christian doctrine and dogma associated with a particular raeding of the textx. Imagine a Bible washing up onto an island of English speakers who have never seen one. Imagine further that some numbnutz has changed the name of Jesus to “Greg” in every passage. The natives would read the text, and perhaps try to follow its teachings. However, there is no guarantee that they would arrive at the concepts of Trinity, the coexisting divine and human natures of Jesus, or any of the rest. These are inferences made from the text by allegedly “inspired” church councils. They are not part of the texts at all. Nor is the Pauline interpretation of Jesus as the scapegoat for mankind’s sins.
So now, this tribe is discovered caring for the sick and needy, helping those in need, worshipping their God, and His son “Greg”. They are baffled by the talk of Trinity, the controversies surrounding the nature of some other guy named Jesus, etc.
The “standard” Christians would say their religion is in error, because they don’t worship Jesus or follow any of the dogmatic pronouncements.
But it is clear to the disinterested outside observer that neith the name Jesus or “Greg”, nor the traditions associated with the Trinity, sin, and all the rest have anything to do with the core of being a Christian. A Christian is a followetr of Jesus or “Greg” who tries, to the best of his/her ability to put into practice what the master taught.
That’s why, to Nathan’s horror, there can be Christians who don’t see the deat of Christ as a scapegoat as the important aspect of Christianity. They see the LIFE of Jesus and his teachings as a direct line to the master, without all the Pauline BS in between. An interesting group on this front is the Jesus Institute and the Westar Seminar.
Brian: That’s pretty convoluted stuff. Your example using “Greg” instead of Jesus is silly. And your assumptions have no basis as far as to what “standard” (whatever that it) Christians would think in that circumstance. But as long as it is a hypothetical, I understand the point you are making regarding the differences in biblical interpretations by different branches of Christianity (for what that’s worth). It is not without some merit, although not to the extent you portray.
I am assuming that by “Pauline”, you mean “of Paul” or something like that. However, your charactarization regarding Paul’s interpretations regarding Jesus as “not part of the texts at all” is simply and profoundly wrong.How can you argue this when Paul’s writings are a big part of the text of the New Testament?
“Pretty tall talk from somebody who thinks he’s a sci fi character with a worm up his ass.
Posted by: Bambo | April 18, 2006 at 08:56 PM ”
From the ad hominim attack about my screen name, you must be one of the morons who votes for the likes of Connie Morris, Kathy Martin, etc. FYI, Apophis is a name from Egyptian mythology. I see that you do watch television too. Is that where you acquired your education, from Jerry Falwell? Or perhaps was it Fred Phelps? It is very common for the RWingnuts to make asinine attacks like you did. My talk isn’t “tall”, it is reality Bambo. I am a bit more familiar with the particulars of this story than you could ever imagine. I for one do not “talk tall”, I participate in actions that at least attempt to make changes. Our great country is NOT a theocracy contrary to what the likes of you really want. I find it first amusing, then troubling how this blog bird-walks from the essential issues. All I read from the fundamentalists is the same theocratic rhetoric. That’s all it is. They claim a “war against Christianity”, but in reality there is a war between these self -righteous fundamentalists and the freedom loving citizens of our great state and country.
For all who think their religion is the one and only religion, I give to you Adherents.com. Scroll down for an alphabatized list of every religion known to man. I suspect you might be both enlightened and amused:http://www.adherents.com/index.html#GroupNameIndex
Outlander,
Paul never knew Jesus…nor did he even know many of the detailds of Jesus’ life. This is clear in the fact that his writings do not refer to many “later” Christian traditions about Jesus. Paul never mentions many of the “miracles” Jesus allegedly performed. He didn’t know about them. Therefore, there were clearly accretions to Christian tradition after paul. Further, not all the letters attributed to Paul were written by Him. So these alone throw a little bit of doubt into the claim that Paul had “the” answers”.
Further, there were/are still competing theories to Paul’ls theological speculations. For example, gnostics (yes, they still are around) interpret paul very differently.
Of course there are modern criticisms..John Shelby Spong, a bishop in the Anglican Church points out…
1. Theism, as a way of defining God, is dead. So most theological God-talk is today meaningless. A new way to speak of God must be found.
2. Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt.
3. The biblical story of the perfect and finished creation from which human beings fell into sin is pre-Darwinian mythology and post-Darwinian nonsense.
4. The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ’s divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible.
5. The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity.
6. The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed.
7. Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history.
8. The story of the Ascension assumed a three-tiered universe and is therefore not capable of being translated into the concepts of a post-Copernican space age.
9. There is no external, objective, revealed standard writ in scripture or on tablets of stone that will govern our ethical behavior for all time.
10. Prayer cannot be a request made to a theistic deity to act in human history in a particular way.
11. The hope for life after death must be separated forever from the behavior control mentality of reward and punishment. The Church must abandon, therefore, its reliance on guilt as a motivator of behavior.
12. All human beings bear God’s image and must be respected for what each person is. Therefore, no external description of one’s being, whether based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, can properly be used as the basis for either rejection or discrimination.
Outlander,
And as far as the though or “gedunken” experiment I presented, it was meant to illustrate a point, not to be taken as seriously. You might want to criticize Einstein’s use of gedunken experiments too. He imagined people inside an elevator that was accelerating forever. To them, it feels like gravity. GMC70, from outside the elevator, fires a bullet into the elevator. It enters through one wall and leaves through the other. The elevator occupants, who don’t know they’re moving (they just think they feel gravity), note that the bullet enters higher than when it leaves. They conclude that gravity bent the path of the bullet..this leads to the idea of gravity bending light.
What a stupid thought experiment, you might say, but it turned out to be correct.Light does bend in a gravitational field…because the effects of gravity and acceleration are indistibguishable to the subjective viewer.
Brian: I suggest you read “Acts” so that you can get the players and the timeline right.
Of course Paul knew about the miracles Jesus performed. He was a contemporary of the other apostles, including Peter. Paul’s story is one of the most compelling in the Bible. He was a brilliant man, a Pharisee who zealously persecuted Christians until his conversion on the road to Damascus. From there, he was a tireless preacher of the good news.As to Bishop Sponge’s criticisms, well, he is entitled to his opinion. And personal opinions is all they are. They have no further authority or basis since they are not biblical.
I wonder why a misleader like that stays in the Church? Must have a good pension.
Really,
Where is the mention of the marriage feast at Cana? Where is the mention of the raising of Lazarus? Where is the mention of the feeding of the multitudes?
I’d suggest you read some textual analysis of the Bible. Have you heard that when you lay the Gospels down side by side, there are passages lifted word-for-word in the later ones from the earlier ones, leading to the speculation of an even earlier source, called “Q”?
This is only the tip of the iceberg.
You read the Biblical texts like they are a newspaper report of events. How, for example, did people who were not even at the crucifixion, overhear the comments of Roman guards and quote them ver-batim. How did apostles asleep at the Garden know about the passion of Christ that evening.
Try looking into the writing styles of the ancient Near East. You’ll discover that they were symbolic stories more than anything else.
Mark was written AFTER Titius destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem. The Temple consisted of a main sanctuary to God, the Holy of Holies, and 2 side sanctuaries, one to Moses and one to Elijah.
Lo and behold, Mark (who was NOT the apostle Mark) writes about the appearance of Jesus flanked by Moses and Elijah. This is a clear, unsubtle, symbol to the dejected Jewish population that Jesus was the NEW TEMPLE. Don’t worry about the old one. In all likelihood, the story is fictional..made up to fit the needs of the time.
Brian: Are you arguing that because Paul did not mention an event in his writings, that he did not know about it? Good grief.Paul was not giving a history lesson in his letters!
No one I know of claims that everything written by the author of a Gospel is the result of being an eye witness to each and every event.
Look Brian, I can research and find answers to everything that you can dredge up from whatever source. However, if I refer you to a good book with those answers, it will save a lot of time for both of us. If I thought that you were interested in something other than the argument, I would happily do so.
Sometimes, though, it comes down to simple faith. When we start thinking that we are the smartest being in the room, well, pride sets in and faith in something you cannot feel taste smell… is nearly impossible. (nothing is impossible with God)
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord
“As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts”
Isaiah 55: 8,9
Outlander,
Better start dredging because I trust the minds of the religious Einstein types more than you, no offense. And I don’t mean information from Christian websites..I mean from scholarly reports.
With regard to your comments about the miracles. Paul was the first written accounts sent around the Mediterranean world to churches struggling to survive and to gain new adherents. None of the gospels had yet been written. And you’re going to just brush off fantastic events that would have concinced many to join these struggling communities as “not wanting to give a history lesson”…sheesh.
You seem to be saying that there is no room for even the slightest bit of reexamination of Christian history in light of the tools the very God you call supreme has given us..radiocarbon dating, archaeology, textual analysis, etc.
Please explain, for example, that there is NO mention of any slaughter of children by Herod in any source other than the Bible. there are also no “extra” tombs of male children in and around Jerusalem from that time. Certainly the slaughter of so many male children would have been big news.
Now, you can go ahead and believe it happened in spite of the textual and archaeological evidence, or you can see it for what it is, an attempt to match the life of Jesus up with the life of Moses, the greatest Jewish figure to that time. Jesus born a king and no one knows, Moses too. Pharaoh hears about it and has children killed…Jesus same story. Moses has to leave his homeland..Jesus too. Moses communes with God. Jesus too. Moses feeds the multitudes..Jesus does too. Moses leads his people to the Promised Land..jesus does too.
You can live in the world of elves, sprites, miracles, demons, and the rest from 3,000 years ago, or you can walk into the light as a modern, educated man (or woman) and use the tools at your disposal to shed a new light and new meaning on a radical philosophy..a philosophy so out of touch with the current thought patterns that it was truly inspired…that philosophy..love your enemies..do good to those who would harm you… is indeed “divine”.
Miracles are, by their nature, “miraculous”. That means that their occurrence is rarer than even the rarest natural event.
As Hume noted, “No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless … its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which it endeavors to establish.”
That means that EVERY nonmiraculous explanation MUST be discredited BEFORE one even thinks about the acceptance of a miracle story.
“From the ad hominim attack about my screen name, you must be one of the morons who votes for the likes of Connie Morris, Kathy Martin, etc.”ROFLMAOApophis, You’re wrong on so many levels.”Is that where you acquired your education, from Jerry Falwell? Or perhaps was it Fred Phelps?”No.”Our great country is NOT a theocracy contrary to what the likes of you really want.”Is that what I really want? Where did I say that?”I am a bit more familiar with the particulars of this story than you could ever imagine.”Am I to assume you’re connected with the school? If that’s the case, enlighten us. I for one, would love to hear any information you have that we don’t.”I find it first amusing, then troubling how this blog bird-walks from the essential issues.”Well, I’m sure we all appreciate your chastisement. I shall take your criticism to heart. If you find it so upsetting, I suggest you not frequent this blog, as it does tend to wander off topic. A lot. It’s known as a free exchange of ideas.Apophis, while I think you take yourself much too seriously, I owe you an appoligy. Your very first post on this blog came across like someone who had something crawl up their @ss, a very much conservative trait. Having read your second post, I see your ideas are not to be lightly dismissed, in fact, I find them quite agreeable.I offer my humble appoligy for having misjudged you. (Which should prove my credentials. Conservatives NEVER appoligize)
Brian: So, you are talking about debating Christianity and then you want to limit the debate to secular opinions? Get serious.
As much as I would like to convince you that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who died for you on the cross, I think we have said enough for the evening.
I will leave you with this. If you are right and there is no God, I will not have missed a thing on this earth because of my belief in Him. I will have lived a moral life based on timeless moral principles and then died and turned to dust.
If I am correct and God is who I believe He is, you can live a moral life, die, turn to dust and because you reject Him…, well, I can’t judge.
We have different paradigms.
Outlander,
I never said limit to secular opinions. For Christ’s sake Bishop Spong is a Bishop in tha Anglican Church.
And you’re right. I’m not trying to convince you or anyone of anything. I’m merely pointing out things to you you many not have considered and that, if you’re honest with yourself, require some explanation.
If you’ve found your answers, good for you. The point is…they are not the answers for everyone..as Nathan would presuppose.
And I’ll leave you with one more quote from the Catholic Catechism…
1782 Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”[53]
So please have the decency to let others act according to their moral consciences.
Guys, excellent discussion! Brian, great critical examination.
Outlander, I find new respect for your biblical knowlege.
A lot of what you discuss I’ve run across before. I read something a while back about how there’s no evidence of Herod’s execution of children.
Concerning the letters of Paul and the subsequent gospels. I read about how writers of that time would have an apprentice, more like an assistant. When the master would die, the assistant would become the master and would continue the writings “In the Name Of” which was lost in translation. This explains the time factor, ie, gospel being written long after Jesus’ time.
Outlander,”Sometimes, though, it comes down to simple faith.
Well spoken. Brian points out the unlikelyhood of biblical events. I guess that’s why we call them miricles. Faith is what you can’t see or touch or prove. And faith is what makes us Christian.
One of the most interesting series I’ve watched lately on TV is the science of the bible on the discovery chanel. The ones on the apostles, and the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were fascinating.
Some of the conclusions are what XXX pointed out as to when they were written. The tie in of Mary Magadelen and Jesus was a story in itself. How the Koran and the bible parallel each other in many ways, I found very enlightening.
If you haven’t watched any of them, I seriously suggest them. They are very well presented.
Thanks to all for the interesting (if sometimes heated) discussion and a special thanks to those offering words of encouragement to both views.
XXX, your observations bring the thread full circle. If “faith” is the determining characteristic to a Christian about what is true, even in the face of physical evidence, then what are we to do about debates like common descent versus intelligent design (AKA creationism).
If it is a small matter of “faith” to say that the fact that no historians record Herod’s atrocity and there are no tombs to prove it either, how, then, is creationism any less a matter of faith (albeit a larger one).
Your comment points to a situation where there is no resolution to these issues – people who put faith above evidence and reason.
Jesus also said
“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’The Wise and Foolish Builders24″Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”
Jesus saw the value of wisdom and intelligence in the choice of a construction site over the value of a ignorance based on shifting sands. Maybe we should put our faith in the fact that God has shown us, over time, an evolving truth, to help us build our faith on rock, rather than on the shifting sands of ancient magic and miracles.
Outlander, sorry to break up the love fest here, but I find this statement troubling.
“I will leave you with this. If you are right and there is no God, I will not have missed a thing on this earth because of my belief in Him.”
Maybe so outlander, but you will have been at cause for OTHERS TO HAVE MISSED THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS!!!!
While your life as part of the majority is sweet, you ignore the fact that you use your “faith” to screw the gay people who live in this state. All based on that famous literal interpretation of YOUR fairytales.
Maybe that is why truth and accuracy count. You use your faith to push your opinions off as fact and to deny others equal protection under the law.
I guess what you do to others in the name of your “faith” is ok, as long as your life is sweet. Never mind that the club you use is faith, not fact. As long as you can be ok, who cares if you use it to hurt others?
“I will have lived a moral life based on timeless moral principles and then died and turned to dust.”
Moral in YOUR opinion. I fail to see how voting hate into the constitution is a moral victory.
And while you are sweetly turning to dust in your grave, the damage your “faith” has done to others will live on.
Nice legacy. But it’s ok as long as you enjoy that restful eternal slumber.
I do respect some of the christians here, but over all, I am reminded of this bumper sticker.
Jesus, save me from your followers.
kfg: You assume quite a bit in your accusations. Go look at old posts to see if I have said anything about gay marriage. I have defended the right of those who do to voice their opinion and to vote their beliefs. I personally didn’t vote in the referendum.
But don’t let the truth get in the way of your attack.
“I personally didn’t vote in the referendum.”
Out, that’s certainly preferable to voting with the 70%, but IMHO you should have voted, and voted “no.”
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” Attributed to Edmund Burke
http://www.wisdomquotes.com/cat_evil.html
Thank you rage.
Outlander, I can post the link again to the thread where you and todd ganged up on me about gay marriage. You certainly did more than defend his right to speak. You mightily defended the right of christians to make their beliefs law.
I guess I might as well start looking up the link now, because he is sure to deny it.
“I will have lived a moral life based on timeless moral principles and then died and turned to dust.”
Moral in YOUR opinion. I fail to see how voting hate into the constitution is a moral victory.
Kfg: The more I think about that quote, the more I wished I had phrased it better. I should have said that I try to live a moral life, because I don’t even come close in the eyes of the only Person that matters.
Thank you for pointing out my arrogance.
Apology accepted Bambo, I am FAR from conservative. This is clearly a constitutional issue. Both the First Amendment and the establishment clause. The fundamentalists need to get over themselves. Their time ruining this state and our republic will soon be coming to an end. Get out and vote!
Brain,
Which is it?
Are you goint to use the Bible to make your points while saying that any of “my” translations of it are wrong?
Are you going to use the Bible to make your points when you questions it’s accuracy and the accuracy of it’s translations?
Since you are talking about Jesus and the Bible again, lets look at them!
John 14:5-7
5 Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?”
6Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
7″If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.”
What does Romans say?
Romans 10:8
“If you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.”
Matthew 1:23
23 BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.”
Brian…To build your house on a rock rather than shifting sand is good, sound construction advise. It was also meant as good spiritual advise.. to build your life on the rock Jesus.Anothr thing.. many things happen that cannot be explained by science; just because miracles cannot be scientifically explained does not mean that they never happened.
farmgrrl….I understand we have treated you badly, and we have made many mistakes along the way, but please don’t let our misguided actions be the reason that you reject the Teacher. If we would all just look at Jesus’ life and live as he did instead of telling everyone else how to live, what a great life it would be. We all have choices, and to be angry and bitter because someone has wronged you, although justified, only aggravates the problem. It is not easy, but a kind word will often lead to open doors that never existed before.
Take care and have a good day my brothers and sisters :)
Kind words dont bring about equal treatment under the law. Dont slap me in the face with one hand and then try to comfort me by a pat on the head with the other one.
So easy to call me bitter. If you are admitting mistakes, why not call me correct?
Wanna kiss and make up with the people wronged by christians? Fine. You first. Repeal the hate amendment and then we will talk.
Otherwise? I am still working with ohters on the backlash. And the numbers of people who see the kansas taliban for what it is is growning.
Do you hear us gaining on you?
Why else are christians whining about a “war” on them?. Heheh. I guess if us “firing” back is war, you all must have conducted a successful jihad. Isnt that what it is called when you take over a secular government to institutionalize your religious beliefs?
Oh yeah, I am gonna keep working, wherever I live. I only hope I live to see the day when the christian taliban death grip on our government is broken.
As far as I am concerned, I have nothing to lose. I mean, what else are you christians gonna do to us that you have not already done?
You have already denied us civil rights for at least one if not two generations, you have reaped the benefits of our tax dollars while your own instutitions pay none, you have made us outcasts for the past, oh, 2000 years, and you ridicule our families and deny our children the benefits and protection of marriage?
Gee… I guess the only thing left that christians can do to us is round us up and send us to the gas chambers. We could always wear pink triangles to identify us if your gaydar fails.
And you should remember that the most dangerous people in the world are the ones who have nothing to lose.
They tend to be bitter like me…
“I understand we have treated you badly, and we have made many mistakes along the way.”
Is that an apology or a platitude?
I’ll be waiting for your letter to the editor admiting the churches screwed us and calling for the repeal of the hate amendment.
And you will know them by their love?
KFG,
Quit pretending like Homosexuality has anything to do with your “civil rights”
When was the last time you had to use the Gay only restroom?
When was the last time you had to sit on the back of the bus?
When was the last time you had to go to an all gay school?
When was the last time you had to drink from the Gay only water fountain?
You can’t get married. That is it.
Ramen KFG
I remember hearing something like this on ‘Answering the Call”
(it is important to know what these people are up to. SO I force myself to listen. It is something of a ritual. TRUE STORY! I clean my bathroom and toilet while I listen to that show!! Gives me a scheduled time and an appropriate frame of reference)
Joe and Terry were talking about their victory with the hate amendment and how they had gone over to console one of it’s gay opponents after it passed. That struck me. They got to pretend at compassion AND rub salt in the wound simultaneously.
Nathan,
You’re a yutz. You only hold the Bible as a sacred text in esteem, yet if someone other than a Christian of your particular beliefs or even an atheist use it to point out things, you somehow seem to think that is inappropriate. In other words, if a Christian from your Church points out a passage, you’ll ponder it and say “ah, profound !!”, but if anyone, and I mean anyone else, points out the same passage, your response is, “well, what can that mean coming from an atheist or a non-Christian.”
Sam, you se, there are those of us who don’t believe in miracles, except perhaps for the miracle of life itself. If something occurs, then we accept it as part of nature and it becomes a NATURAL phenomenon from then on. Ancient peoples (including the ancient Jews) thought solar and lunar eclipses were miracles. We know better now. As I pointed out with the quote from David Hume, you must discount EVERY POSSIBLE NATURAL EXPLANATION BEFORE you accept a miraculous one.
I’ll just let nathans words stand on their own.
Hee hee, so marriage is no more important than which bathroom we use?
So much for sanctity of something you can do drunkin las vegas in front of an elvis impersonator.
And Nathan,
Apologetics, Bible study, and anything else you’ve done DON’T mean a thing when they are done within the framework of your own narrow world view.
If you studied your apologetics and Bible at the Church you attend from the pastor you listen to, then of course you’ll see a complete harmony and reinforcement of your views.
Go takae an apologetics course at a Catholic study group. Go sit in on a B’hai discusssion of the Divine.
Jesus was about EXPANDING the role and understanding of the divine. That’s why criticism of the pharisees plays so prominent a role (BTW, Jesus probably NEVER criticized them as written..the criticisms become more intense with the later books of the Gospel..Mark has some, Matthew and Luke more, John a lot. This has to do with the fact that John was written about 120 AD, well after the death of Jesus, and yet Christians had made little progress in Judea. Ihope you’re not going to say that the “john” of the title was the same apostle John, alive in 120 AD..sheesh).
Brain,
I debate what the Bible says with many people who are not Christians.
I don’t think it is inappropriate at all for someone who is not a Christian to talk about the Bible or use verses.
I think it is intellectually dishonest for someone to both claim the Bible has been translated wrong and is not accurate while also quoting from it to make a point.
I think it is intellectually dishonest to quote the Bible as to some of Jesus teachings and sayings while rejecting or ignoring everything else He said and did.
I love debating with an atheist about the Bible.
I just find it intellectually dishonest for you to try and have a debate about salvation while using the Bible as a source when you don’t even believe any of it.
Brian,
You keep assuming that everything I know is from being told it by my Pastor and being raised in one church.
My views and studies are no less biased than yours are.
Nathan (or whoever can answer)If the Bible has been accurately translated from the original documents. Why do we have so many versions? King James, New International…?
I’m curious on this issue and when I’ve brought it up to various people in the “know” pastors, sunday school leaders etc. I’m treated like a heretic and told that ________ version is the one true version and the others are not.
“I debate what the Bible says with many people who are not Christians.” –Nathan
“Go takae an apologetics course at a Catholic study group. Go sit in on a B’hai discusssion of the Divine.” –Brian
Does anyone see the difference in these statements? Brian suggests nathan listen and learn, and nathan says he loves to debate. Nathan would only “sit in” on those discussions so he could tell them all how they are wrong, he is right, and then he would hammer them about it.
Nice.
Nathan, a little tip here. When you BEGIN the discussion with the idea that the other person is wrong, no matter what they say, that hardly constitutes learning or respect for the other viewpoint.
Maybe that should tell you why WE have no respect for you either.
“I love debating with an atheist about the Bible.”
Um, isnt that kinda difficult when all you do is quote the bible, and then the athiests you are “debating” (read converting) are not allowed to respond to the source because we dont accept it without question?
Circular logic. Rigged debate defined by nathan. Typical.
Still waiting on YOUR research. Links and sources other than the bible? Otherwise, thanks for proving me correct.
Such a pleasure “debating” with you. Did you know there is a difference between debating and evangelizing? Between conversation and conversions?
I thought not.
OMG, Nathan,
That is just a silly position. It is your responsibility to find out the history of the book, and to put that into the context of what is being taught.
I have told you that the ending of Mark (16: 9-26??) is not found in the earliest versions of Mark extant. That should mean something to you. It means that it is a LATER addition.
You should be aware that it is a KNOWN FACT that western versions of Josephus was altered at a later date by Cristians. This is partially clear from the change in writing styles, partially from the out-of-context places some passages were put, and partially from the fact that versions preserved by some Arab sources don’t contain the passages.
You should be aware of the dates of the writing of the Gospels..Mark perhaps as early as 65 but more like 70 to 75, Luke and Matthew in the 90s, John about 120. The writers were NOT the original apostles. This is clear, first of all from the dates of Lk, Mt, and Jn, but also from the fact that 1) one of them had no knowledge of Judean geography at all. If he were marching all over that area with Jesus, how could he have misplaced so many things? 2)Except for Mark, The gospels contain the same information, word for word, in many sections..indicative of the fact that they COPIED it from an earlier source. 3) The gospels were written at leat 30, but up to 90 years after the death of Jesus, and probably the deaths of almost everyone involved with him, for the good or bad. How did the writers, if your claims are true, get quotes from Roman soldiers who had long since returned home and passed away. Who was present at the trial of Jesus and his scourging to fill in the details. Who was interviewed, since no one there was a Christian, Pilate? some of the guards? See #1 above.
You just wanna close your eyes to the fact that there are people investigating the information, writing styles, and veracity of the texts. You wanna continue on believing what you do..that it all occurred EXACTLY as written, and that it’s all true.
Have you read that newly discovered work, called the Book of Pinnocchio? In it a young man is swallowed by a fish, his nose becomes longer as he tells lies, he is miraculously changed from wood to flesh. It’s a fascinating read and contains many morals we should ponder deeply.
TY KFG, Better put and more succinct than mine above :-))
I think you just answered your own question Julie. If you think about it.
That is the problem with RELIGION. Everybody chooses their own rulebook and team.
That’s the beginning of self assured self righteousness…..and alot of attendant intentional, or unintentional collateral damage.
(Kfg Barb bonedig bonedig A b 06 dogs in the moonlight shhhhh!)
Julie, in the church of nathan, only the gospel according to nathan is allowed.
Brian, dont confuse him with facts. Much like his idol, the preznit, he just likes to believe what he believes, regardless of the facts.
Nathan, still waiting for those sources and/or links.
Are you leaving the arena in a huff, wrapped in your selfrighteousness?
Or just tired of casting your false pearls before us athiest swine?
Or just waiting for dad to bail you out? Another fine mess you’ve gotten yourself into jr.
Julie,
They’re full of shit. Go to the website biblegateway.com for about every translation in existence. Youmight also try the website for the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB??) because they annotate the Vulgate translation with historical facts and Church positions. IMHO, no one should attempt to read an unbiased, unannotated, version of any religious text. Julie, you might want to try a book like “Re-Excavating Jesus” by Crossan, et al. He discusses things as a religious scholar and historian and puts them in their proper light.
He doesnt care about any stinkin’ collateral damage JR. Just read his posts.
I can use the same bathroom as julie so I should just quit bitchin’ about marriage.
correction..EVERYONE should try to read an unbiased…. sorry :-(( I guess the Holy Spirit intervened there and took over the pen.
KFG,I’ve been known to use the men’s room if the women’s was full and the pregnancy bladder had to GO!!
Hey – if we bought a wizinator off the ‘net could we use the men’s room – we’d have to stand up to pee (like the guys – so….)
Wizinator – device used to help give negative ua’s. dried urine stored and mixed with water when appropriate. shaped like male anatomy and strapped to the body.
totally off subject – sorry
Julie,
I don’t know why any Pastor would treat you that way.
That is wrong. All of the Pastors I have met would gladly sit down and discuss the differences with you.
Many of the “translations” are not retranslating the original documents intent.
They translate it to English for better understanding.
For instance:
The NIV is more of a paraphrasing of the Bible which makes it easier to read.
The NASB is more of a word for word translation.
The Message is written to emphaize points more extreme.
That is kind of the basics of it.
However, there most definately are versions which do blatantly change certain parts of the Bible for whatever reason.
I would argue that the NASB is probably the most accurate version to date.
It is not so much that any particular version is a different “translation” rather they are all telling the story in different ways for better understanding.
Nathan, If that is true, how can all of the translations be 99% accurate? Apparently, you are acting as the arbiter of the intent of the passage to say that the “meaning” is still there regardless of the words.
BTW, you never gave me a source for the 99% accurate statement. Was that just a divinely inspired number that came rolling off your fingertips as you typed?
tell me EXACTLY, the source, website, book, whatever, where you got this information.
” shaped like male anatomy and strapped to the body.”
Heheh. Ya know Julie, I have worn, er, I mean seen, such things before. But I dont think lesbians call them whizinators.
And what makes you think I dont already whiz standing up? Heheh. just kidding. That is what some neanderthals think anyway. I think don murphy even called me a bull.
I need a t-shirt for the picnic that says “ferdinand the athiest”.
Kinda like Conan the Barbarian.
Hmmm… bone dig… nathan posing as barb… I do recall.
But I think I will save it for when nathan posts his link and source to his long list of palestinian atrocities.
Nathan, do you agree that you leave your mind vulnerable to systemic bias when you
a) Do not read *any* ancient languages, yetb) Claim that any English version of the Bible is “the most *accurate* version to date?”
Do you see any danger here?
“you are acting as the arbiter of the intent of the passage”
Well why not Brian? He is already the arbiter of the intent of the palestinians. And the israelites, and the writers of the bible, so that is a short leap for him.
Unless he has a link to a source he isnt posting, we should just accept his divine pronouncements for what they are. Jesus’ general said it, so it must be true!
You know he doesnt answer questions or post links to his “research”…
Did hank say nathan is a college debater?
I wonder how he manages since all his debates devolve into “the bible said it”.
Is that allowed in college debate? Dont you have to cite sources there? Or do they just accept divine pronouncements?
Nathan,
Check out
http://www.thebeckoning.com/poetry/rilke/rilke3.html
Here are alternate translations of a famous German poem called THE PANTHER by Rainer Rilke. Which one or ones is 99% accurate?
Can you see that to try to quantify the accuracy of a translation with a number is stupid beyond belief. All of the translations capture some aspect of the original, I’m sure, but no one of them is exactly like any other, either in wording or in writing style, or in tone. But we get the overall picture of what Rilke was saying from all of them.
Brian, if he goes with the message instead of the individual words, he has nowhere to stand.
It is the individual words that give him permission to kill not murder, to oppress gay people (bathrooms and drinking fountains aside) and to generally feel sorry for, but superior to, the rest of the unconverted world.
He HAS TO HANG ON to his literal interpretations and their infallibility. Otherwise? He hasnt got a leg to stand on.
Not that he ever lets THAT bother him…
Oh, and on topic here..
RAMEN.
Today is Friday, our holy day as pastafarians.
May you be touched by his noodly appendage!
flike: Interesting point. Yet I will guarantee you that 90% (my figure, off the cuff) of the people who support evolutionary theory, have only a vague if any idea of the science supporting it. It is “Greek” to them. They simply have faith in science.
The point is, no one can know everything. So we all rely on sources that we trust.
KFG,
I’ve been reading all of the other threads too (I agree with you 99% :-}), and it seems that nathan just pulls facts and figures out of his ass based on whatever little knowledge of the actual facts he has.
I think, in a sense, we have ben blessed. We have been allowed to witness the style of thinking and logic that George Bush seems to use.
It has certainly been an eye-popping experience reading his “thoughts”. Y’know, I’ll bet he’s also in a position of authority and power, too. Makes you wonder about job qualifications and the need for ejykashun.
That was me.
KFG,Keep your noodley appendage to yourself! :)I’m a married woman! :)~loltee hee hee
Ah, but you miss the point Outlander. The thing about science is that, if an individual so desired, he could reproduce himself, or have someone else reproduce for him, in the laboratory, the results he doesn’t understand. He could then sit down and get an explanation, and further, if he were so motivated, he could learn the science and mathematics and do it for himself.
Can you same the same for religious faith?
If you can, I’d like to see another resuscitation of a dead man, like Lazarus. This wasn’t a resurrection, since he died again, but I’ll settle for the resuscitation.
I can, however, put a one-celled organism into suspended animation for you and revive it later. I cn even teach you how to do it. Does that make me a Greek god (or more likely a god damned Greek!!).
Heheheh Julie.
I am in a committed, monogamous relationship too, so you are in no danger of me or ANY of my appendages. You are in more danger of heart disease from eating my cooking!
And while I, like you, are for all intents and purposes married, I just dont get any of the legal benefits of marriage. And I dont get to call it marriage, even if that is what it is.
But it is Friday, my holy day, so I will be generous and just say RAMEN. If I had a webcam, you could see me in all my pirate regalia!
Brian, I’ve read this thread with great interest. You guys know far more that I do about scripture, gospel, and what’s behind it. I don’t have the memory to be able to quote scripture like Nathan and Outlander, and I’ve only read the Bible through once.
But I do know something about personal faith. As Christians, we’re called to witness, and I think that’s where the rub comes in. As I’m sure you know, Christians come in many flavors. Depends a lot on who you talk to as to what version you’ll get. You see Christians try to win the argument through logic and Pride. You see arrogant Christians. The whole argument of logic vs faith vs ID vs Creationism vs Evolution is moot if it misses the point of faith and Christianity. It’s all very simple really.
The way to our Father is through his Son.
The rest is wordplay and in a lot of cases, jibberish. Some Christians believe the Bible is the literal word of God. Personally, I don’t see it that way. IMHO, some of it is history, some of it tells a story, and a lot of it is to make a point.
In their rush to make their point, a lot of my Christian Brothers and Sisters miss the whole point of the miracle of faith, ie, I believe something I can’t touch and I can’t see and I can’t prove scientifically or empirically. I don’t feel moved to prove it. I know it to be true as surely as I know the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning.
I also don’t feel a need to cram my belief down your throat. I respect your feelings and your conviction. Faith comes to different people in different ways at different times. Please don’t be offended in the knowlege that I’ll pray for you, not from a position of superiority, but as a fellow human.
I’ve heard a lot of good discussion about what the Bible says and what it means. This has been said before, but it bears repeating.
The Bible isn’t what Nathan and Outlander say it is. It’s not what you or I say it is. It’s what God says it is.
I don’t pretend to know the mind of God.
Gee, I find myself growing strangely excited by KFG and Julie’s discussion (* Y *). I’m a pig !!
Yes, Outlander, we all rely on sources that we trust.
Maybe the lesson here for Nathan is that it’s those he trusts who are letting him down?
KFG,darlin’ you know I’m just teasing :)There is such a thing a “common-law” marriage. You and your “wife” may already qualify. Start calling her your “wife” and buy some property together. If you ever split up and sell the property you’d have to get a “divorce”.A lawyer would be able to give you a better idea on the legal ramifications of it but hey, it’s a start.
XXX,
Well spoken. The crux of the matter is the truth we know is there in the folds of our heart and in the paradoxical nature of the world we live in. It is up to the individual conscience to find the path to the divine..there is no set road that everyone can or must follow. Faith is not an act of will, it is an act of, well, faith.
Flike,
No one is letting me down.
XXX,
I quote what the Bible says. It has nothing to do with “me.”
There are some things which can be debated and I recognize many of them. Some things are not set in stone.
Where do you get the information about your faith from XXX?
XXX,
Do you agree or disagree that Jesus is God and salvation comes through him?
XXX: I appreciate your contributions to this thread on the nature of faith. Well said.
Julie, I knew you were teasing, and I am too.
Common law marriage does not apply to my spouse and I. Read the language of the hate amendment. You and your sister can buy property too, but it doesnt make you common law married.
You ALL did read it before voting, didnt you?
XXX, if I havent said it before, I love you man. Really.
I thought about you, and DD, and CF, and Damoon, and others, and it did give me pause before I wrote. Really.
The key is you all knowing that we all have our interpretations of the truth that we hold dear. NONE of them are based on anything but faith. And that makes them highly personal and a bad basis for secular law. Especially in this so called land of the free.
The other key is that when you say you do not try to cram your beliefs down our throats, I interpret that as you knowing the hate amendment was nothing more than christians doing just that. Just because they could.
It was the work of bullies and bigots and billionaires and must surely be the lowest point for christianity in this century.
Right next to the wingnuts’ jihad on the kansas board of evangelicals. And phill klein.
Ok, maybe there are more examples than anyone wants to admit.
I respect you all for not being toxic christians. I just cant let that stop me from working to overturn the dirty deeds of those who ARE indeed, toxic christians.
Ever hear of the book by that name?
Brian: Sure, science and faith are two different subjects. But the interpretation of the existing evidence is where science and faith butt heads, and probably always will.
With one crucial exception, Outlander: science encourages open debate of *all* the evidence, while religion quashes it.
Outlander,
That’s true…and IMHO, scientific proof should always take precedence over dogmatic beliefs formulated before the science was even in on the subject.
Somehow, Nathan and his ilk take science to be outside the realm of God’s creation. It isn’t. It is another tool given to us by Him.
Again, IMHO, science leads one to a deeper, more humbling, paradoxical, and wonderful picture of the divine. Was it better for Christians in the 14th and 15th centuries toconsider themselves and the earth the center of the universe and God’s creation? Or was it perhaps putting us in our place when we discovered what a tiny speck we are on the outskirts of the Milky Way, and that WE revolve about the sun.
Was it right to put “heretics” to death for their beliefs and to have Christianity established as the State religion, or was it perhaps God’s plan that we all have to PUT UP with one another in a continuing dialog about the nature of divine truth?
In that picture, questioning the results of science relative to religious dogma is a non-starter. Scientists question for themselves, by their own methods and means, granted to them by the divine, the theories and models they arrive at. In our time and place, we should look at these scientific results as somehow ADDING to our belief system, not detracting from it.
So again, back to the original subject: IMHO, NO Holy Book has anything to say about common descent or any other scientific subject.
On the other hand, science may have a great impact on long-standing and dearly held religious beliefs. As Jesus said, you must be willing to give up ALL THAT YOU HAVE to follow him, and that includes those dearly held positions which have been established as untrue.
God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh.
Voltaire
The bible should open your heart, not close your mind.Jay R
:-} JR..
“You ALL did read it before voting, didnt you?”
Well, I did. I, quite frankly, found it shocking that something like that could be submitted to a majority vote. Setting aside the hypocrisy of the time (slavery, etc.), it completely eviscerated the founding principles of this nation (something which I DO know quite a bit about!). Anyone heard of religious freedom—or how about equal protection of the laws?
It also, from my own personal moral standpoint, really sucked.
“On the other hand, science may have a great impact on long-standing and dearly held religious beliefs. As Jesus said, you must be willing to give up ALL THAT YOU HAVE to follow him, and that includes those dearly held positions which have been established as untrue.”
Come on Brian, Jesus was not saying, come, deny what my Word says and follow those geeky guys with the pocket protectors! :)
We have been through this before but I disagree with your point about about science trumping religion. Science is great. It has produced many of the things that make our lives what they are today. However, science is not always exact, particularly when it is trying to figure out what happended in the past. It involves large amounts of guesswork, best estimates, what we think must have happened etc.. It begins with a Godless assumption and works from there.
Science trumping religion. As if scientists are just dishonest ideologues playing mind games and dead-set on destroying religion. Maybe Nietzsche was right.
Galileo wept.
“It begins with a Godless assumption and works from there.”
I guess that would explain outlander’s relationship with me.
It certainly explains my relationship with him!
Out,You might ask physicist Freeman Dyson or geneticist Francis Collins about their “godless assumptions.”
“As if scientists are just dishonest ideologues playing mind games and dead-set on destroying religion.”
Gee rage, you think that is what is thought of gay people as well?
Thanks for your understanding post. You captured our horror pretty well. And you illustrate why the hurt is so deep.
All the kind words from all the king’s men will not put humpty together again.
Outrageous.
The only thing MORE outrageous is that more than 70% of kansas believes it such nonsense should be institutionalized in our state constitution.
Oh but we aren’t backward. Oh no…
Well, as I should have expected, I am attacked for things I didn’t say or mean. Jeesh, you guys make me tired.
I will lay it out so that it is impossible to take out of context or misunderstand.
When I am referring to “Godless assumption, it is in context of scientific theory regarding events that occurred in the past. For example evolution. Clear? OK.
Moving on. In the same context (past history), science does not alway trump religion just because it is science. However, in cases when a fact can be clearly demonstrated by scientic method and it conflicts with religious dogma, science represents the truth.
kfg, I get along with you just fine. It’s just obvious that some topics are much more personal to you. There is no use arguing those things with you and I won’t unless, it is to defend what I perceived as an unfair attack. Almost all my posts begin there.
“When I am referring to “Godless assumption, it is in context of scientific theory regarding events that occurred in the past. For example evolution. Clear? OK?”
Not entirely, Outlander. Many Christians like Francis Collins have no problem with evolution. I won’t assume anything beyond what you’ve said. Care to elaborate?
Outlander,
I personally don’t read the Bible literally. But Jesus did not except himself from whateveer “quaint” beliefs people might develop about him.
In fact, he warned of false prophets coming in His name.
Why would giving up the idea that the world was created in 6 days with man and everything else violate any notion that jesus taught? my goodness, he put the evidence in front of your eyes!
JR, it’s hard to laugh at the comedy when you’re too busy reading the program to watch it.
And nathan, Outlander
You’d have more credibility if you could point to one issue of a worldly/scientific nature that revealed religion has been right about and that science has been wrong on.
On the other hand, shall I list the things that science has been right about that religious interpretations of the world have been wrong on?
Rage: I am aware of that. But Darwinian evolutionary theory does not make any accomodation for the possibility of the action of a higher power. Correct?
“Why would giving up the idea that the world was created in 6 days with man and everything else violate any notion that jesus taught? my goodness, he put the evidence in front of your eyes!”
Brian: Who said that is what I believe? Would you mind sticking to the facts?
Outlander,
No, evolution and science in general have nothing to say about the existence or lack thereof of God. That’s probably where you have been going wrong.
Outlander,
Thios is a thread about the creation/evolution debate, remember?
You have been defending revealed religion as THE truth. You didn’t except creationism from it. Q.E.D.
“However, science is not always exact, particularly when it is trying to figure out what happended in the past. It involves large amounts of guesswork, best estimates, what we think must have happened etc.. It begins with a Godless assumption and works from there.”
If the above post was not proof enough of your doubt, at least, of the chronology of the past developed by science, using I might add, the same science used to develop atomic energy, for example. If you accept that the H-bomb works then you must, by necessity, accept that radioactive dating works. They are based upon the same underlying principles.
Actually, no, Out. It simply doesn’t go there: science doesn’t deal with the supernatural. It can’t. That’s not how science works.
Notwithstanding the redefinition given to us by the Kansas Board of Evangelism, science can only deal with that which is verifiable via natural evidence. Maybe there really was a “burning bush,” but I hardly think we should modify the laws of physics to accomodate it! A miracle is, well, a miracle, ya know? By definition, it breaks the rules.
Science can indeed investigative supernatural claims, but in that event it’s ridiculous (and unscientific) to simply claim that God–or Hera, Vishnu, or the FSM–”did it”–without the slightest trace of evidence!
Nathan, you asked,”Do you agree or disagree that Jesus is God and salvation comes through him?”
I wrote,”The way to our Father is through his Son.”
What part of my statement doesn’t answer your question before you asked?
Your arrogance when it comes to religion is monumental. Note: You can’t discuss religion without pissing everybody off.I can discuss religion with anybody on this thread in a reasonablle manner. When you discuss faith with those not of our faith, the door closes. When I discuss faith, nobody shuts me out because I don’t talk down to people. I don’t judge or criticize, something you might want to try.
“Where do you get the information about your faith from XXX?”
With due respect, it’s not your business nor do you have the right to lecture me about my faith. I’ll stand before one judge, and it won’t be you. You should consider what the Bible says about judgement.
Brian:
So, you would like to put me in the position of defending YOUR interpretation of every religious theory? Get real and goodbye!
I am headed to explore the sweet science of hitting a golf ball square and far.
Not only that, Darwin’s is theory of species origination, not *human life* origination.
Thank you, Brian, for making a point that I’ve tried to make clumsily (and largely unsuccessfully): if you believe the H-bomb will explode then you must believe in the accuracy of radioisotopes used to date things ancient.
It’s modus ponens, ferpetessake:-If the H-bomb explodes, then radioisotope dating is reasonably accurate.-Hiroshima.—————–Radioisotope dating is reasonably accurate.
Outlander,
if you do hit it square and far, it’d be a miracle.
KFG, I confess I didn’t read the “Hate Amendment”. I didn’t have to read it to know it was wrong. I voted against it. Does that make me a bad voter?;-)
Outlander,Some advice:They just sanded the greens at Simm. They’re hell!
X
As ever well said.
Thanks JR.
flike, yw,
Excellent point about Darwin too. My only conclusiosn from all of this are these 2: 1) Some people speak on subjects on which they have done no reading or studying, and 2) they are unwilling to do the reading or studying for fear of the cognitive dissonance that would surely result.
It’s really kinda fun to speak, in a disinterested way, about how science religion, dogma fit into life. It’s interesting to hear how people can read the same things and come away with different conclusions. Those conclusions can be enlightening, like a bolt of lightning, when you hear them.
It’s very disheartening to deal with the Nathans and to a lesser degree the Outlanders of this world. They “win” so many times because reasonable people just walk away from them and go someplace else to be with those with whom they can have a thoughtful discussion..where both camps (for lack of a better description) say “touche” when a valid point has been made.
The USSR, Nazi Germany, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea, are all example of fanatical religious control (yes, communism and naziism exhibit all the characteristics of a religion..think about the ‘cult’ of the leader, the ‘truth’ of the texts, etc.)
Let’s not let kansas fall into that abyss.
XXX,
So you do refer to the Bible XXX when it comes to judgement?
Interesting.
This is a blog. I don’t come here with the purpose of actually converting people.
I speak the truth of the Bible.
When I see people saying false things about Christians and Christianity and the Bible I will say something.
If that makes me arrogant then so be it.
If my speaking the truth of the Bible offends people I can’t help that.
I am not here to win the popularity contest of atheists and pastafarian homosexuals.
Hehehehehehehe, Nathan,
That was SO Christlike. I’ll betcha that earned you a few decades in purgatory. Oh, damn, you’re probably not a catholic, so you don’t believe in purgatory.
Hey, do you take communion? Jesus said “Do this in memory of me”. He used unleavened bread and drank wine. Do you do as he commanded?
Hey X
(BD BD barbathan at a high price)
“Hey, do you take communion? Jesus said ‘Do this in memory of me’.
Brian, you really need the kid with the chimes for the full effect! :-)
Rage,
I was one of the kids WIth the chimes !! LOLOLOL
Wow, good stuff.
XXX, you rock.
Brian, Rage, JR, you too!
“I am not here to win the popularity contest of atheists and pastafarian homosexuals.”
heheh. I dont think there is any danger of that happening.
I didnt even know we had a contest going, but then, I am still in the dark about the gay agenda too, whatever THAT might be.
Brian, I dont think you are a pig :) Just a regular guy….
And on the subject of connie morris….
Tim Cruz, former Mayor of Garden City, is running against her on the D side. Sally Cauble of Liberal (heheh) is running against connie on the R side.
Outlander, you all can vote NO INCUMBENTS by supporting Sally, if you choose.
We can all support NO INCUMBENTS in our primaries and let the BEST people, not the taliban tallywackers, win in November.
TY KFG,You rock too. I hope all turns out well for you and your significant other on all of the issues concerning you mentioned above. Keep us informed about those issues, please.
I guess pig is synonymous with regular guy. No offense intended. :-}
“So you do refer to the Bible XXX when it comes to judgement?”
Well noshit Maynard!
“This is a blog. I don’t come here with the purpose of actually converting people.”
So much for witnessing for the Lord. Ok Nathan, we’ve established that you’re too arrogant to witness to non-believers. So who do you witness to? Believers? Nothing like taking the easy out, huh? You don’t come here with the purpose of actually converting people? It’s a good thing, because with your approach, you don’t have a sno-ball’s chance in hell. No, I suspect your purpose is more along the line of self-agrandisement. “Hey everybody, look at me! Look what a good Christian I am! See how much better I am than you!”
Nathan, the Devil can recite scripture.
“I speak the truth of the Bible.”
In your opinion. But as I’ve said, the Bible isn’t what you say it is, it’s what God says it is.Do you dissagree with that?
“I am not here to win the popularity contest of atheists and pastafarian homosexuals.”
Once again, Nathan wins the hearts and minds of the people.
Faith is a shield. It’s not a club to beat people over the head with.
X
It isn’t just faith X.Nathan is the last word on everything or any subject.
As you say, my friend! Have you noticed how as we age, we get dumber? I just wish I was half as smart as I thought I was at Nathan’s age, lol!
XXX,
If you looked at most of my comments when it comes to Christianity, I only make them after someone like KFG or JR or any other person says something deragatory about it.
My entire point in this thread was to say that if you are going to allow a poster of the FSM, which is an obivous paradoy of religion by making fun of belief in a diety, then you should also allow a poster of Christ if a teacher wants one.
It is easy to bash Christianity in the classroom when the only posters allowed are those which make fun of it.
Do you have any comments on that?
Or did you just come here to team up with the people who routinely bash Christians and Christianity?
Nathan, You are nothing if not persistent. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a parody of Intelligent Design theory, not Christianity. Let me quote directly from their website for you:
“Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.”
You seem stuck on equating Intelligent Design with Christianity. While in fact this is true, NO intelligent design advocate that I know of will publicly admit this, since it would forever undercut their cynical “claim” that ID makes no claim as to the designer.
If you are standing up as an official representative of ID theory and saying that it is indeed nothing more than Christianity trying to dress itself up as science, then thank you so much !! You make the case for us.
You are not telling the whole story Brian.
There is also documented proof of the FSM creating mountains, trees, and a midget.
X? SEE? I TOLD YOU!
JR,
OK,OK,OK, now you’re really pissing me off. You tell only a part of the story and then expect to be believed? What about the correlation of global warming, species extinctions, etc., with the dramatic fall in the number of pirates since 1500? Hmmm, smart guy, hmmm?
“XXX,
If you looked at most of my comments when it comes to Christianity, I only make them after someone like KFG or JR or any other person says something deragatory about it.”
Not quite, Nathan. Remember that I go back a long way on this blog, just like you to the very beginning. I’ve seen you use religion to club posters over the head. I’ve seen you use religion to score debating points. You’ve USED religion to your own selfish ends.
“My entire point in this thread was to say that if you are going to allow a poster of the FSM, which is an obivous paradoy of religion by making fun of belief in a diety, then you should also allow a poster of Christ if a teacher wants one.”
Nathan, do you REALLY consider FSM as some kind of threat to our beliefs? It’s a joke! Ramen! FSM takes nothing away from Christianity. It belittles those who twist and misuse our faith. Your reaction to the FSM poster is very much like the Islamic reaction to pictures of The Prophet.
“It is easy to bash Christianity in the classroom when the only posters allowed are those which make fun of it.
Do you have any comments on that?”
Nathan, I’m not aware of anybody “bashing” Christianity in the classroom as relates to this thread. A poster of FSM isn’t “bashing” Christianity. That’s a straw man gambit. Show me anyplace where Christianity was “bashed” in this issue. The only “Bashing” that took place was when Connie Morris made a fool of herself by overstepping her bounds.
“Or did you just come here to team up with the people who routinely bash Christians and Christianity?”
No. Just like you, I came here to state an opinion. Disagreeing with you doesn’t constitute teaming up with people who routinely bashChristians.Nathan, I’m a Christian. You’ll note that no one on this thread or on this blog for that matter, has ever had a negative word to say to me about my faith, and I’ve stated my belief numerous times.
A question to the folks on this blog…Is there anybody who doesn’t know I identify myself as a Christian?
Funny how nobody fights with me about my faith. Somehow, I don’t bring that out in people. I don’t think there’s anybody who would feel uncomfortable to discuss faith with me.
You on the other hand, seem to incite people. You need to sync your message with your delivery. You may have the best of intentions, but you come across as arrogant. Look over the posts and show me one instance of any blogger thanking you for your opinion or input. If you’re going to hold yourself up as representing our faith, you need to remember who you’re representing and what effect you’re having and what impression you’re leaving. Believe me, it’s not good.
Nathan, I put it to you like this.When I discuss faith, people at least listen to what I say. They may not agree, but they don’t shut me out.
When you discuss faith, you make people mad and you leave a bad impression about Christians in general.
I’m tired of cleaning up your mess.
Fortunately XXX, I was headed to Consolver. It’s in good shape and it was a beautiful afternoon/evening. We will have to tee it up one day soon.
Hello Nathan,
I don’t say that because of your earlier posts. I say it because I know you will be back here.
X? I don’t think I can top that last of yours. I don’t know that I should try.
You could learn alot from X Nathan. I have.
Incidentally X? To answer your question, I did not know until recently that you were a Christian. I remember you posting about it because you were looking for a church. I think I remember Proud lib or someone offering one. I’m not sure. My point here is I did not know because you were not “in your face” about it. So I never really gave it much thought.
Maybe that is telling. If you scroll upthread, you will find me honestly surprised to find that Brian was not a Christian but in fact an atheist. He posted so well to what I understand Christianity to really be. Or maybe I am so outside of that is why I got confused.
Nathan? X brings up the history of the blog. He and you go back to the beginning. ME too. I look sometimes at those old posts. I was more vitrioic back then. I found an old thread the other day on gun control.(I’d put a link here if I had a computer) In in, I posted “Oh ok so now XXX has switched sides” because he came down different from me on the subject. I wasn’t prepared for that. It floored me at the time and I lashed out. See XXX usually agreed with me. He was not supposed to disagree with me! It is us against them! And he was joining “them”.
Do XXX and I argue about gun control anymore? No. He won me over becasue I could see him as reasonable.
Flash forward. Remember the first meet up? I was aprehensive about it. I was not long back from an absence due to the illness and death of my dad. In my mind, Hank and Nathan were the same person.The whole blog thought that when I left. And to my perception, Hank and Nathan were the same person posting separately for the same agenda. An agenda I hated. Nevermind that that misconception had been cleared up while I was away. I knew what I knew. People (Damoon) posted to correct me but I wasn’t gonna buy that. Hankathan was my enemy!
So just before the meet-up, Hank sticks his finger in my eye with a post and I melt down. I think I posted something like “I’ll not share a shelter with him or eat his food!!” I aint coming! And when X finds out what Hank says he won’t come either!”
Now KFG was willing to attend. She expressed sadness that I would not be there.
But it was X who called me out. Like he did with you upthread. He posted that Hank and I went way back and that if I did not attend he would see me as a coward.( I think he called “chickenshit” I’m not sure) I thought long and hard on that day.
In the end, I stepped up and apologized and promised to attend because people wanted to meet me and because I did not want to lose the respect of XXX.
Why do I post all of this? Bare the past and my soul for folks who I have never met and do not know the past of this forum?
I do so because X is right Nathan. You do work against your own faith and you have for a long time. Furthermore, it may be the basis of your faith that “you are always right because God says so” that makes you take a self righteous and dismissive attitue toward posters on other threads.I had one….just one neutral encounter with you. The subject was the environment. We exchanged thoughtful posts…….for just a little while.
I know your ideals are deeply held. I respect that. But others ideals are also deeply held. I only attack your beliefs because you use your them agaisnt others as a weapon to make you always right.
Think on it.
By the way? It’s DEITY not DIETY.
I didn’t think it needed saying, but I realized very earlier on the X was Christian, within my first two weeks here. I trust my high opinion of the man–and many other Christians present here–has been obvious. There still many who haven’t declared their religious “status” and that’s fine. This is a blog, not a church! :-)
Notwithstanding our resident pastafarian KFG :-), I think the resident-atheist count now sits at four: Me, JR, k, and Brian.
Sincerely,An Ethical Heathen
“X? I don’t think I can top that last of yours. I don’t know that I should try.”
Once again my friend, we dissagree.I’d say you did it in spades.
Respect,XXX
Outlander, name a Tee time and place, lol. I’m not any good at it, but I love to play (this is my 3rd year). Actually, my performance is pretty mixed. I had a great game with my irons a few weeks ago with Walker. Week before last, Walker and I went to the range and I had a horrible slice. EVERYTHING sliced! By the way, Walker is a killer on the course.
XXX, JR, Everyone else…
It is no surprise that you like XXX and agree with XXX.
You agree with anyone that doesn’t tell you things you dont want to hear.
Once again, I don’t come here to convert people. XXX might be a great wonderful guy and all, but he is not going to convert any of you to Christianity unless you are actually seeking.
If you look at most of my posts they are only in response to KFG’s or JR’s attack on Pastors, the Bible, Christians, or Christianity.
XXX,
You are a Christian. Please tell me where what I am saying is wrong. I understand you don’t agree with the way I am saying it, but tell me which parts are wrong in your opinion.
When I am actually out talking about Jesus with people I don’t do it anything like I do here.
I enjoy having my ideas debated here. I come here to debate. I like discussing the Bible, presenting verses and seeing what people have to say about it.
I am not trying to ram it down your throats. If I was trying to ram it down your throat I would do nothing but talk about it in every thread.
Seriously, How often do I bring religion up without it being brought up first?
Hardly ever.
So as we see, there is a difference between Christians. To get respect, you have to give respect.
There’s a reason Jesus is refered to as “the Lamb of God”. That’s the path of Christianity I follow.
X
Check out Nathan on the “more mixed signals thread”.
Well XXX,
Maybe for once someday you might actually say something about how KFG and others bash Christians and Christianity…
Instead of going out of your way to correct me.
You wont even tell me how what I am saying is wrong, but you have no problem telling me how my delivery is wrong.
Oh well…
It has been a long time coming.
Nathan is desperate.
I take no pleasure in this.
JR,
There you go again. Is it possible that maybe, just maybe you can make it through a discussion without having to label me as something like desperate?
If you missed the many times I have said it in the past, I will say it again:
I come here for fun and entertainment. The only desperation I have at the moment is for a week off from work.
Nathan,”XXX might be a great wonderful guy and all, but he is not going to convert any of you to Christianity unless you are actually seeking.”
Exactly! It isn’t my place or my aim to convert anybody, only to witness. But wouldn’t it be wonderful if something I said or did, or by some example I set, played some small part in bringing someone to salvation? The greatest oak tree starts with a seed. You can’t plant a seed in a mind or heart that you’ve closed.
“XXX,You are a Christian. Please tell me where what I am saying is wrong. I understand you don’t agree with the way I am saying it, but tell me which parts are wrong in your opinion.”
Nathan, read back as far as you want in these blogs. Then show me where I’ve EVER said that what you’re saying is wrong. I have no problem with what you’re saying in context of religion. Far from it. It’s your delivery that sucks. Your approach is insulting, demeaning, and I repeat, arrogant. You close hearts.
Nathan, Would you consider closing a heart to Christ a sin? Think about that for a minute.
“When I am actually out talking about Jesus with people I don’t do it anything like I do here.”
And why is that? Why should it be different “here”? My friends on this blog are all children of God. Do you deny that? Why?
“Well XXX,
Maybe for once someday you might actually say something about how KFG and others bash Christians and Christianity…”
Saul bashed Christians and Christianity…
Maybe I will say something. Maybe I have. I wonder if turning the other cheek might not be more effective than a bash over the head. If I punch KFG in the nose, do you suppose that will make her a Christian?
“Instead of going out of your way to correct me.”
Isn’t this kind of like the pot calling the kettle black?
“You wont even tell me how what I am saying is wrong, but you have no problem telling me how my delivery is wrong.”
Nathan, that’s because I don’t believe that what your saying is wrong. I’ve never said that. It’s not what you say, it’s how you say it.
You can’t expect me or anybody else to listen to what you say if you have your finger in my eye.
Think about it.
Peace be with you, my brother.
“Is there anybody who doesn’t know I identify myself as a Christian?”
XXX and I laugh about this now, but we tangled BIG TIME over this issue when I first started posting.
Now days? I think he is one of the best posters here. We rarely talk religion, and not because we have politely agreed to disagree. Rather, I dont see him as being toxic. CF is a great poster too, just my kinda guy, and he is a self professed christian as well.
Do they say things I dont like? Of course, just like JR and I dont agree on everything about immigration. Walker and I have tangled before too, but now we like each other a lot (at least I do…?) That is how it is with people who WANT to understand each other. Understanding and tolerance do not equal agreement.
Accepting someone the way they are, and the way they are not, is the essence of true love. I them!!!! It doesnt mean I buy every single thought they have. I am not a ditto head and neither are they.
The idea that those of us who usually agree have some sort of secret cabal going is just NUTS!!
But then, the purple chicken did visit me in a dream last night.
LMNOP
Dammit, it should have said “I heart them”.
And the other side of the coin in this love fest?
F*** with me and you better bring a lunch and a jug of water because it is gonna be a LONG day….
F*** with me doesn not = dont agree with me.
For a definition of F*** with me, see nathan’s posts.
Support TIM CRUZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I’m no psychologist or psychiatrist, but there has always been a certain portion of the Christian population who I refer to as ‘persecution Christians’ and the Churches they belong to as ‘persecution Churches’. The movement towards this type of Christianity in the is growing rather than diminishing. I see this as a somewhat positive sign…suns always shine their brightest before they burn themselves out in a supernova.
‘Persecution Christians’ are those Christians wo, either unwittingly or knowingly, present Christianity to others in such an ill-conceived and bad-mannered way that people shun talking to them. They see this as ‘proof’ of their faith and their devotion to Christ because they are suffering their little form of persecution just as Jesus did. By extension, ‘persecution Churches’ are groupings of ‘persecution Christians’ who reinforce one anothers’ behavior.
I think as XXX has said, these types of Christians miss story for the words. Jesus loved his life. He is often depicted eating, talking, and discussing with friends, and even strangers. The thing about it is, Jesus rarely, if ever, jumped on anyone about anything. He usually aroused such curiosity about his beliefs and behavior that people SOUGHT HIM OUT.
Persecution Christians and Churches LOOK for ways to turn people away (except their own,of course) so that the ‘persecution’ aspect of the belief is fulfilled. I need only point to the incessant carping about others ’siding against Christians’ on this issue or that.
I hope for their sake and for ours that they see that this is NOT what Jesus intended. A ‘brotherhood of man’ doesn’t begin like that, imho.
At 312 posts, this is now by far the most posted thread in the history of the blog.
Probably a hundred posts back I said;
“All this, from a picture on a door”
But look at what that picture generated here. Thought! IDEAS! A discussion on religion that was not coerced but encouraged. And it is not mostly the Flying Spaghetti Monster that is being discussed. Could it be that the FSM is a better advocate for the interpretation of Christianity than some Christians?
Would “Nathans take on Christianity” generate such a response if posted on a blog or a classroom door?Nathan? You’d do well to reflect on XXX’s last few posts. He was not much a part of this “fight”. I can tell he kept up with it. But he rarely spoke up. It is my observation and confirmed by his post that it was you who finally motivated him. In your advocacy for a religion that the two of you basically share, ( I bet you would have gotten around to judging him TOO) you embarrased him his faith as represented by you.
Let these words sink in.
YOU made a man ashamed of his faith.
Some of us know X better than you. I want you to know that the indignation in X’s posts to you is not just rhetoric. It is very real.
“I come here for fun and entertainment”
Your words.
JR,
Although I read X’s words too, they didn’t crystallize with me the way they obviously did for you. As you said, at its best place for discussion and learning. If it’s any consolation to X, I have nothing against Christians or Christianity, even Nathan’s brand. I hope that Nathan’s beliefs mature into those more akin to X’s. So long as Nathan picks up the cell to call 911 for a broken-down motorist, drops a buck or two in the Salvation Army bucket once in a while, helps an old lady across the street, and donates blood once in a while, I don’t really care what his religious views are…he is doing THE WORK (capitalized for a reason).
JR, I’m never ashamed of my faith, just embarrassed by some who claim to represent it.
I am embarrased too.
I am embarrased that the only time XXX speaks up is to condemn a fellow Christian and take sides with 2 people who constantly say bad things about Christianity.
There is only one way things will work here and that is if I just don’t reply to what KFG, JR, or the others have to say about Christianity.
XXX,
Why don’t you be polite and ask both of your pals JR and KFG to now post bad stuff about Christians?
I have asked them to once before.
Lets see who breaks the truce here.
I will not be a “toxic” Christian and “shove” my beliefs down anyones throats.
Can KFG and JR can do the opposite and not bash Christianity?
Lets see who lasts longer…
Then let me see you XXX sit here and take sides.
Nathan, I live by a rule that best suits me. That rule takes no prisoners when it involves friends and the bashing of same. Hell, I’m an old band beeyatch and God has better things to do than look down at me, wondering what I’ve done messed up now.
I heard a song once by David Alvin. one of the verses says, “and I hate your grand cathedrals, where you try and trap God. Because I know God is here in the canyons; in the rattle snakes and the pinion pines.” I think that’s all I need to know about God to know the tree I talk to hears me just as well or better than that twenty foot cross in the grand church you woship in.
But that’s my way, dear boy, and you have every right to practice your religion any way you want, as long as it doesn’t invade my space.
And XXX is not condemning Christians. He is condemning the way they throw their religion in others faces with no respect for others. Somewhat different, wouldn’t you say?
SUPPORT KSFARMGRRL!!!
YOU GO GRRL.
Oh, how I envy and despise True Believers. Theirs is a tree-lined sun-lit boulevard straight to The Maker, while mine is strewn with obstacles hidden behind every corners in this dark valley, so feared that shadows don’t even bother to hide from the torch. Why must I reason with every doors that I knock upon? Why can’t I simply lay myself down and offer my submission at the first gate, and live my life unquestioningly in the faith of my father and of his father before him? Oh, Elohim, why this task of finding my way home so burdensome?
Christianity is such a general term, to the point that many things can be misconstrued as a bashing.
X?
I apologize, that WAS badly worded.I meant you felt pushed to be defensive about your faith because someone was badly representing it.
Nathan? I have routinely apologized to X and other Christians my treatment of Christianity or religion in dealing with you and a few other posters. So far, the only complaints I get come from you and those few other posters. They presume to have some special religious knowledge of which I am not privy. As such I wonder why my words bother them at all.
What? You’re embarrassed for X now? Because he won’t post the way you want him to?I’m thinking he came to this thread because he had trouble with your representation of his faith. (following the thread)You couldn’t make him an ally so you attack him too! And while you’re attacking him you are telling him why he should be on your side! Then you want him to tell me and kfg what to say!
You can’t keep that truce you are talking about Nathan. Your version of faith requires your active intervention of its rules on society and politics at large. I cite your entire career on this blog as evidence. You and your faith cannot be separate from politics.
This thread was about the FSM and a person with beliefs similar to yours. She was exercising her take on religion on others and using her position as a public official to do it. If I can’t question that faith, what am I suppposed to post?
Nathan is (often) in over his head. I guess he missed a couple of days of debate/logic class.
He obviously missed the day when they talked about presenting/citing references when they are asked for.
H must’ve missed the day when they talked about conceding a point to another debater.
And I’m sure he missed the day when they talked about whining not being a valid debate tactic.
On the logic front, I think he missed most of the semester. I doubt if Nathan could tell us what a syllogism is, what the “argument from ignorance”, is, or, as flike alluded to earlier, what ‘modus ponens’ means.
Isn’t if funny how (some) christians just love to have themselves perceived as being persecuted. One fine example is Representative John Hostettler of Indiana. In June 2005 when he said “Haven’t you heard about this war? Christians in America have been persecuted, put down, and kept from practicing their faith for a long, long time now. It’s a wonder that any Christians are left in America, after having their beliefs quashed so thoroughly.” And about a week earlier there were stories in all of the major newspapers and on the television news about how ‘christians’ at the Air Force Academy were harassing cadets of other religions to the point that they either kept their religious views secret, converted, or left.
You want to be persecuted? Meet me by the lions at the zoo and we will do it old school, Roman style.
Brian, A week of begging is not foreplay? { for Nathan }
Ed :-}}
Brian,
Thank you for demonstrating the ad hominem logical falacy…
Wow, Latin!! Maybe you’re not as big a twit as I thought.
nah…
“I am embarrased that the only time XXX speaks up is to condemn a fellow Christian and take sides with 2 people who constantly say bad things about Christianity.”
Nathan, you’ll note that at no time have I condemned you for being a Christian. I have condemned your arrogance, your sanctamony, and your egotism. I condemn your treatment of other people in the name of our faith. As a Christian, I proudly call you Brother, but I will not condone your tactics.
You’ll note that I’ve answered almost every point you’ve addressed to me on this thread. You have not extended the same respect to me. I’ve asked you several questions you haven’t answered. I’ve made many points you’ve ignored.
“There is only one way things will work here and that is if I just don’t reply to what KFG, JR, or the others have to say about Christianity.”
Or maybe your approach should for a change express the understanding, respect, and love for your fellow man that Christ teaches us. What you say about our faith has to reflect what you feel. You lack that ability. I don’t understand that. I’ve met you in person and I don’t see that in you. You’re an intelligent and likable young man. Why aren’t you a positive force in the name of our faith? That JR is a Liberal and KFG is a homosexual should make no difference in the way you treat them as relates to our faith.
“Why don’t you be polite and ask both of your pals JR and KFG to now post bad stuff about Christians?”
Why on earth would I ask anybody to post bad stuff about Christians? Nathan, where did that come from?Believe me when I say that JR and KFC hold their fire more often than not in respect for my feelings and beliefs. I respect them deeply for that. There is a reason that they treat me that way. I hope as you grow older and gain maturity, you’ll learn what that reason is.
“Lets see who breaks the truce here.”
I’m not aware of any truce. A truce is something that’s discussed and agreed to by both sides. Judging by the comments of other posters on this thread, this isn’t a truce, it’s a rout.Since you consider this some kind of debate, let’s check the score.How many posters agree with you? How many have voiced support for you?How many posters agree with me? How many have supported what I’m saying?Do you see a pattern here?
I see 2 choices for you. You can consider yourself “persecuted”.Or you can say, “There’s something wrong with my approach. What do I need to change?”
“I will not be a “toxic” Christian and “shove” my beliefs down anyones throats.”
Good for you Nathan! I mean that. It’s always better to “show the way” through love, compassion, and understanding than to push and shove. You’ve proven your intellect, now show us a Christian heart.
“Then let me see you XXX sit here and take sides.”
I’m on the side of my faith. That doesn’t pit me against any fellow man/woman.
What side are you on, Nathan?
Quite well said, XXX. Yours are, imo, well-said responses sustained over several days now (at least).
As an old agnostic I find myself listening to a message I haven’t heard in a very long time – a very long time. I also find that I really look forward to meeting you perhaps in June.
Thank you very much.
Thanks for the support, flike. And thanks for listening to the message. As I said to Nathan, it’s the seed that counts. I appreciate your open mind.
I find your posts interesting and I look forward to meeting you, too. I have met some of the most interesting and intelligent people through this blog. I can’t wait to add you to that list.
Do you guys mind if I pop the head off a chicken at the bbq and sacrifice it to the FSM? I’m kinda hoping he/she can find me some guitar strings that don’t wear out.
Well I’ve heard of cat gut strings, but chicken guts?
Pretty weak Nathan.
With a fullisade of arguements against you, you respond only to Brian with a one sentence attack.
Brian? You acquitted yourself so well here. My confusion at your being a Christian based on your vast knowledge of Christian principles was genuine. I do hope to meet you in the future.
X? I don’t understand your faith. I attack it only as others use it to attack. But I could listen to your take on God. I know if I disagreed with you, you would not turn your back on me or tell me that I was going to burn in hell.
Nathan?I don’t go about in my life telling people that there is no God and that people who say otherwise are stupid or evil. I did that once. Converted a bible studying Christian friend of mine into an atheist. I have always regretted that. I feel like I took something away from him that gave him comfort. I learned from that.
Maybe I have something to teach you Nathan.
I have two stories here for you Nathan. I hope you respect that I take the time to share them with you.
Old friend of mine 20 years ago. Good guy. Fun and just about as wild as they come. Way more so than me. Joined the army right out of high school. He had a bad marriage and divorce. Then he “found” God. He gave away all his records. (records was how we listened to music back then) his TV most of his stuff. Fine so far. But he had two little kids, twins a boy and girl. I was uncle Jay to them. But there is a moment that sticks in my head after my friend found god.
My friends little girl asked me if I was a bad man. She did this while her dad who was my friend looked on. Knowing where this was going, I answered that little girl, “that’s right”She then asked, “why?” And I answered. “I don’t think the way your Daddy does. When you think different you get called bad.”I don’t know what happened to my friend or his kids. That was the last time I saw them. That little girl is 20 years old now. I never saw her or her dad again.
Story two is my own son.
I’m an atheist. I got there on my own. My experience and my life showed me no evidence of god. I’ll not argue that here.
But I wanted my son to find his own answers. I never spoke to him of God or religion. I did not want to color his mind one way or another. Then he went to a YMCA summer camp. He started asking questions. I told him he should listen to the counselors and ask them questions. One day he came home and asked me if I was “saved”.
So what to do? My 8 year old son was asking me questions that others told him to ask or prompted him to ask. And they had already given him the answer.
I told him that many people believe in the things he was being told. I told him that I did not believe in those things. I did not tell him that his counselors at the camp were bad or wrong.
Long story short? My son does believe in a god. I don’t have many theological discourses with an 11 year old.
My personal take is that “god” is no more real than Santa Clause or the Easter Bunny. But I did not denounce these to my son either.
MY Nathan thinks his grandpa is in a better happier place. To me my dad is dead. I celebrate his life and do my best to live a life that celebrates and honors his. Between the two of us, I hope we find the best of ideas that comfort us.
If I disrespected you Nathan, I would not take the time to type all of this.
As a final thought, you call for XXX to tell me and kfg how to post.
Have I or kfg or anyone else ever posted X to denounce you or tell you to shut up?
I’ll give you an example of a post you have never and will never see.
Sheesh XXX! Why can’t you rein in Nathan? He is out of control! He’s one of yours. Talk to him!
I think this is my longest ever post on the longest ever thread. I hope it makes you think Nathan.
JR, Jesus comes to different people in different ways. I have no problem understanding how you feel. I was an athiest before I was saved. For me, being Christian doesn’t mean forgetting what I was. I never thought being Christian made me better than my non-believing friends. That’s part of why my frinds don’t shut me out because of my beliefs.Friends, You hear us talk about being born again. I wish I could find words to explain that. Everything I was changed when that happened. It was THE defining moment of my life.
JR, I take great pleasure in calling you friend. You may not know it, but in you, I see a foundation. Show me a person with an open heart, and I’ll show you a Christian waiting to happen. It’s not my place to push you toward my belief. It is my place to tell you what my belief is. No one can force you to be a Christian. That would be a blasphmy. Accepting Christ is a personal decision. I can’t make it for you. But I’ll be there if you ask it of me. As I do for all my friends, I pray for you. That’s what real Christians are about.
As I’ve said before, faith is a shield, not a sword. If I’m right (and I am), I hold the key to the Kingdom of Heaven. If I’m wrong, I’ve lost nothing and can say I’ve lead my life as a good and honorable man.
“Sheesh XXX! Why can’t you rein in Nathan? He is out of control! He’s one of yours. Talk to him!”
My friend, read back over this thread. Looks to me like I’ve talked my fool head off, lol!
farmgrrl, JR..If you want to call what I am all about “pretend compassion” then that is fine. If you choose to be bitter and HATE me, that is fine. Just remember, I am not the institution, and I have no say in what is done in political circles, so don’t expect my concern for you to catch on, especially when you reflect back such a militant attitude. I am sorry you are so angry that you lash out at all Christians.Go ahead.. search all the BLOGS, you will not find anywhere that I have attacked anyone, I have only attempted to reflect how I believe Christ would act under the same conditions. I must admit, at the moment I am perplexed, but I realize that He was rejected first, so I shouldn’t be surprised.
Ksam?
I’m perplexed too.
I don’t remember attacking you. I don’t remember seeing kfg attack you.
I have very great respect for you and the work you do. I probably said so somewhere upthread.
“I’m sorry that you are so angry that you lash out at all Christians” …..huh? I was just agreeing X who IS a Christian.”If you choose to be bitter and hate me that is fine”Ksam I’ve honestly no idea where you are coming from here. I’ve never taken issue with any of your posts anywhere to a level that would suggest hate. I don’t think kfg has either.
If I have wronged you in some way I wish you’d tell me where.
JR..You can refer to ksfarmgrrl post April 21, 2006 at 09:44 AM on this thread.You followed with a post that I assumed referred to my post as well. It appears your comment was more in reference to “Joe and Terry”. Please accept my sincere apology.
“Just remember, I am not the institution, and I have no say in what is done in political circles,”
Institutions dont vote. People vote. I have no more control over those political circles than you do. You have a say in church positions, you have a say in how church dollars are spent. You have a vote that is supposed to be equal to mine.
You likely do contribute money to christian causes. Some of that money finds its way into the political arena. Maybe not your personal dollars, sam, but christian institution dollars CERTAINLY find a way to control what goes on in political circles.
kansassam, I have not attacked you personally. As I said on another thread, I dont hate christians, I hate what they do with their religion in the civic arena.
Seems like some christians here get personally offended by the criticism voiced against their religions. Some might even say they take the critique personally because their religion is who they are. It is a part of them so how can they not take it personally?
Following that logic, imagine how I feel on the subject of being attacked for who I am. Why would I take such attacks personally? Why would I lash out at not only the verbal attacks but the civil oppression that affects my life every day?
I have agreed to no truce. Until my love has equal legal footing in the civil arena with your love, I will keep fighting. To the “bitter” end.
In the long run, I dare christians to bet against me in the civil arena. Our day will come since there is a season for everything.
Be glad we will not show you the same justice and “compassion” you christians have shown us.
“I understand we have treated you badly, and we have made many mistakes along the way.”
Is that an apology or a platitude?
I’ll be waiting for your letter to the editor admiting the churches screwed us and calling for the repeal of the hate amendment.
And you will know them by their love?
I stand behind that post. If we have been treated badly, I’ll be waiting for that letter to the editor.
Sam
Well going back upthread to that post, I DID indirectly address you. I agreed with KFGs perception of SOME(many?) Christians reaching out one hand to shake hands while raising another to strike with. And you SHOULD be mindful of that. I was not accusing you of anything. I illustrated with the Wright/Fox example. Only you can know how much it applies to you.There are other examples of the “ugly Christian” on this thread. I wouldn’t call you as to being on their level.
But to follow their logic? I don’t see you denouncing them either. The difference is I won’t condemn you for that alone.
ksfarmgrrl..Your comments are a bit inaccurate..
“Institutions dont vote. People vote. I have no more control over those political circles than you do. You have a say in church positions, you have a say in how church dollars are spent. You have a vote that is supposed to be equal to mine.
You likely do contribute money to christian causes. Some of that money finds its way into the political arena. Maybe not your personal dollars, sam, but christian institution dollars CERTAINLY find a way to control what goes on in political circles.”
You think I have alot more influence than I think I do. I am NOT a member of any church, and all of my money goes to food and clothing for my homeless friends.I have agreed with you before, and still do, that if the church is investing dollars in politics, they are mis-using God’s money. What more can I say, I do make my views known to anyone who will listen… in person.. I doubt that they read these Blogs.
kansassam, I am sorry.
My comments to you were harsher than necessary. I had no idea you did not belong to a church, and I applaud you for your generosity. If you are making your views known to others in any way, I am thankful to you.
It also helps that I just finished reading a bone dig rage posted on another thread. I read the ENTIRE thread from January, and your post really touched my heart.
If that post is still how you feel on the subject, I apologize for every hard time I have given you. Either your views have changed :) or I seriously misinterpreted them.
It set me off to hear someone say they had no influence over their church. It was not a far leap to think of you attending faithfully and putting a little something in the collection plate. Glad to know you put your money to better use :) not that I would tell you how to spend your money.
Sorry that you got the blast that should have been directed to people who pretend their vote doesnt matter, their say in their churches doesnt matter, and they have no control over how things in this state turn out.
I sound the conservatives talking about personal responsibility, dont I?
ksfarmgrrl…my post touched your heart?? better be careful.. people will think you are going soft! Anyway.. i don’t remember what I said, but I’m glad I said it.I must admit. I used to think I knew it all.. but my eyes have been opened and I am seeing the world more as I believe Christ saw it. Anyway, I really do care.. even when we don’t agree. I just pray that somehow I can make a difference.. make things better for someone.. everyone…
Make things better for someone?
I’ll be waiting for that letter to the editor on the hate amendment!
:)
You rock kssam. Really, you do.