spore vs jesus
- Started
- Last post
- 107 Responses
- teleos0
erik: the imperialistic prohibition of Christianity influencing society doesn't seem to have helped things over there. But I suppose that's a bit subjective. The US produces over 80% of the world's medications. Beyond being elitist, was there another point you were trying to make?
- teleos0
I'll not shutup, Nairn. You fascist.
And I do not claim that science has all the answers, I'm just willing to follow the current evidence where it leads. And it leads to intelligent causation/agency. If the evidence ever leads elsewhere, I'll give it a chance to convince me otherwise on the origins issue.
- It only leads that way if you want to see it that way. 'Fascist', eh? haha, who's quick to label now, you terrible bore?Nairn
- mikotondria30
@flagellum:
Yes, and I contend that RIGHT NOW there are people far smarter than you (and me), with a far better understanding of ALL those subjects than you, working on them right now.
You seem content to sit on the sidelines and just point and jeer at those involved in furthering REAL understanding.
Maybe after a lifetime of studying, in depth, at the highest levels, at least one tiny portion of one of the meta-topics your mention above, maybe THEN you can say with some weight that you believe the questions are unanswerable and cite a 'creator', (plus a full explanation of what that exactly you mean).
But only then.
And if your answer to what you believe that creator to be is something like 'a supreme and divine 'thing' that I can't fully explain', then I will punch you in the face.- *metphorically, of course.mikotondria3
- metaphorically, even,
mikotondria3
- unit70
Sigh, it's just the same old nonsense and outright lies from discipler, more or less exactly, as it was in all the years i've been a lurker here... He's been called out on them so many times, i'm sure he knows he is lying too, but feels obliged to cling to them to stop his narrow world from collapsing altogether. Sad Really...
But I at least would have thought in all these years the arguments would have developed based on experimental evidence gathered by the IDiots? Oh yeah, they don't do any... Well, why would you if you knew the answer before you even asked the questions.
Just goes to show that any conclusion can be reached by reasoning alone if you start from false postulate.
I wouldn't bother replying to me flagellum (funny how you dropped that moniker after the example got smashed to pieces on the dover trials) I really have nothing to add to this discussion but contempt for you and your opinions.
- morilla0
I say whatever helps them sleep at night. Just don't push your shit on me.
- teleos0
haha... please don't hurt me metaphorically.
"working on them" - Philosophical Naturalism of the Gaps.
See the trouble is that throwing time at these issues won't get you anywhere. Novel information always, in every realm of experience, comes from a mind. Not from blind, unguided mechanisms from 19th century creation myths like Darwinian Evolution. There's no free lunch. Time does not buy you more specified information. It will only shuffle existing information. There must be an originating top down source. You would do much better to begin thinking of biological life as a big front-loaded algorithm. A huge program with functions executing at given intervals in time. That is certainly more in line with the empirical evidence. All the information was present at the beginning. Pretty creative eh?
Life = Front-Loaded Program
- TheBlueOne0
In my limited understanding of the Biblical tradition, and other religions in the same tradition as well (judaism, Islam), the terrain of the Divine is found solely in my relation with others. God is found in our relationships with others and we are judged on the same.
For example, Christians say many, if not all, of the old testament Jewish "laws" about diet, clean and unclean, etc. and so forth are no longer considered necessary and are discarded - fulfilled by the simple laws of Jesus.
Even then, the God of the Old Testament warns in the Book of Job for Humans to not get all uppity and presumptuous about how the whole universe is supposed to work anyway - makes it an non-religious question - "Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, 38:2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 38:3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
38:4 Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding."
God is basically saying "Hey puny human, who the hell do you think you are as to use my name in your descriptions of how you think the universe I made works."
I'm pretty agnostic, and god is more conceptual to me than as a personal supreme being, but I hardly think that science is trying to answer the "why" question about existence..just "how". God, in the book of Job, seems to get pissed off at presumptuos humans about ascribing their own notions of "why" to it all.
Creationism smacks of looking for the "certainty" of the "why" of the universe.
This concentration on the physical nature of the universe smacks me more of paganism than the Christianity spoken of by Christ in the New Testament.
- so teleos, gird up those loins - I think you're god is going to ask for an accounting of why you're so concerned with this...TheBlueOne
- theres a lot of smacking going on in your argument. sounds pleasurable.cannonball
- teleos0
blueOne - your unilateral declaration of victory in the comment bubbles on my 4 points above have awarded you a big nasty: FAIL. You may have one more chance if you'd like, but don't do it in the comment bubbles.
- ok. So does that comment make you a fascist as well?TheBlueOne
- nice avoidance of content there. just what you accuse us of.spifflink
- Nairn0
Whatever - aside from my little unintended stint as 'detritus' on here, I've never hidden my real self from my stance in any argument or situation, for which more than one or two people dislike me.
You're usually pretty quickly on to these Christian-tinged threads when they pop up - so I ask you this - who are you really? And why the need for a facade?
I completely disagree with Gramme, but ultimately quite like the guy and respect him, despite the polarity in our beliefs - but you?
Why do you hide? Why do you spend so much time fighting with people who are mismatched to your theological slugging on a design board? What's your motivation and purpose? Do you feel better about yourself? Do you think you're saving anyone?
Why don't you just follow dear Jesus' lead and just do good by your brothers and sisters?
- erikjonsson0
i guess instead of psychology and philosophy classes they just had you read the bible over and over. If you would have had those classes you would probably have learned that over complicating things like this is a typical defensive measure in witch you take refugee for your insecurity. witch comes out of doubt =)
- teleos0
blueOne - you've taken those references from Job out of context as the context of the book pertains to human suffering and bad advice from peers. But that is a discussion in itself. Also you've equivocated a bit here... I am, in this discussion, not trying to fight for Biblical innerancy or the creation account of Genesis. Nor am I trying to claim I have all the answers, being the puny human that I am. I'm debating the evidence for/against design in nature.
- designbot0
Okay I'm back....once again TBO please do explain this comment
"Jesus was far more violent than Hitler, speaking in the definition of passive, systemic violence"
This statement shows some real ignorance, but I'll let you try in explain if you care to.
- erikjonsson0
It makes me so curious so i have to ask. What is so scary about universe, nature or from a more realistic standpoint, the American countryside that you need a substitute for your own intellect, and even go so far as giving it a name, a beard and a book?
- mikotondria30
It would deplete the notion that something else happens when you die.
- Nairn0
Spifflink - I echo your sentiment about this guy being a plant for some organisation or other. I mooted the same suggestion years ago, wondering whether teleos/flagellum is just some guy sat in a cubicle in some bunker at the Discovery Institute (or whatever it, or any of its cohorts are called), waiting to fight the good fight.
- hahahahaMimio
- I agree. Let's start another evolution thread, discuss it, but totally ignore him.mikotondria3
- i love the conspiracy theories!
Indeed I'm part of an insidious theocratic group...teleos - give back sid meyererikjonsson
- more like a discovery institute chatbot that generates psuedo-random sub-wagnerian theology whenever the key word 'evolution' appears...unit7
- 'evolution' appears
unit7 - unit, am I using to many big words?teleos
- Get the hang of the smaller ones first.
More than required is "too many", not "to many"mikotondria3 - sure, perhaps i can email your programmer for a translation service from gibberish to english.
unit7 - it wouldn't be a conspiracy so much as an astroturfing campaign.spifflink
- TheBlueOne0
@designbot re my phrase: "Jesus was far more violent than Hitler, speaking in the definition of passive, systemic violence"
I shall now explain my ignorance, as you say. But first remove the idea that violence has a moral value as purely negative.
There are two types of "violence" - subjective, immediate violence - the type we tend to think about when we hear the word "violence" - you know the application of force - punching, hitting, shooting, bombing, etc. And the threat of the immediate application of such. It is violence that has an obvious and immediate initiator subject - the mugger, the soldier, an army, a rioter.
then there is negative, systemic violence - violence in a system that is not immediate or applicable subjectively but exists objectively. The violence inherent in a system that keeps substinence farmers or factory workers in their positions, that keeps food away from starving people, etc. That is systemic violence. It effects individuals but doesn't come from a subjective place, but it is very real.
Jesus and christianity was very violent to the existing world order. It did not do so with subjective violence of course (although christianity embraces that later in it's development). Jesus and his message was an incredibly violent figure threatening to the Roman world order and it's Jewish client-state. That is why he was put to death, and he knew this. Now think of hiow much violence and disruption christianity caused the existing world at the time.
Now was this a positive change? Sure. But to the Romans, the threat of Jesus and christianity was to violently overhthrow their exisiting interests and civilization. Gahndi would be equally violent to British colonial rule. Both Gahndoi and Jesus wanted to overturn the social order - which in itself is a violent goal, although one may choose non-violent methods to achieve it, as they did.
Now, on the other hand Hitler utilized copious amount of subjective violence to basically reinforce an existing moral and value order.
For all the talk in this thread of "science", I mean one of the basics is "Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it." You want to change the trajectory of an exisiting society and you need to apply force. You need to change the underlying order. To one person that force is righteous and necessary, to another it is a violent upheaval to their world order.
- teleos0
Indeed, Jesus seems to have turned the world upside down. It's amazing to think that 12 simple men who fled for their lives at his crucifixion were willing to give their lives for the gospel message after witnessing his resurrection.
- Prove that happened.i_monk
- I can only show very convincing evidence. (as with most things)teleos
- It's bullshit. Bodily ascension to heaven my ass. Is Heaven "up"? It's laughable really.Mimio
- mimio - therein lies your core problem. Not digging deeper. "taken into the clouds" was metaphor...teleos
- which was used in describing how God's kingdom would come "on the clouds"teleos
- in other parts of scripture. Do a word study of the greek term: Perusia. It's fascinating.teleos
- hahahah, you're a fucking metaphor, mate.mikotondria3
- some amphibian gave his life in the sea to later evolve into jesus. on a retrospective id stick with a pharao or something more aestheticalerikjonsson
- Acts 1:9-12 (KJV)
"...while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight"Mimio - why would you single out this particular event as unreasonable? And where does it say heaven is "up"?teleos
- funny how the metaphors you like are 'the truth' and the metaphors you don't are 'just metaphors'...
unit7 - The Bible teaches that our hope is a physical hope. That earth will be heaven. See I Cor. 15teleos
- kind of like you read it selectively in order to justify your a prioi opinons, suprise suprise...unit7
- teleos - we agree on this.TheBlueOne
- again. cherry picking. who is giving you the authority to decide which is literal and what is allegorical?spifflink
