Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think you're drawing a false dichotomy. Science is good. I like science. I love to watch the Discovery channel and watch scientific shows. I just don't drink the kool-aid like many do.
On the contrary, I think Kool -aid is what it's all about - you like science, sure, but only so long as it doesn't contradict what you believe on faith. If it does, why ...you sling it out the window, accuse that ONE area of having no evidence, of blind faith, of refusing to look at the counter - arguments (which have been miserably lacking, so far) and in addition to trying to bamboozle us by claiming to be fine with science, you compound the dishonesty by refusing to lake the science on board when presented with it and harp on the rather irrelevant don't knows like cosmic origins and abiogenesis, which is not actually what the Ark and flood debate is about.
You are doing excellently well with a mighty poor hand, Vizio old chum. Excellently well for us, that it.
and...
Quote:
Originally Posted by DewDropInn
Yep. But I'm one of the Christians who keeps getting the ol' stink-eye from the fundamentalists because we paid attention in science class.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
I think you're drawing a false dichotomy. Science is good. I like science. I love to watch the
Discovery channel and watch scientific shows. I just don't drink the kool-aid like many do.
False dichotomy, eh?
The fallacy of false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the 'only other option' is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced. (somewhere off the Internet)
No, that wasn't it. I think the fallacy was yours...something like special pleading...It reminded me of Oprah when she said that she didn't hate men...on the contrary, she loved them...and proved it by having a team of them stripping off on stage.
I wondered how she'd react if I said I loved women and proved it by having some of them do a strip -off.
I'm not sure what the fallacy is, but it looks like a sort of special -pleading dishonest bamboozlement. as I explained above.
And now I'm anticipating some accusation of having to write reams and argue furiously to maintain my denial..
The response is an old axiom of mine..It takes far fewer words to say 'There are fairies at the bottom of my garden' than to give good reasons why there probably aren't.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 08-07-2014 at 10:45 AM..
Actually, yes ... evidence, or the lack of it, IS the issue.
Then why do you keep harping on a single story? The Bible contains hundreds of stories with a lot more detail to examine, but atheists act like belief in God 100% depends on validation of Noah's ark.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
a) The blatant plagiarism from other, older religions and cultures
Vague similarities are not plagiarism, and how do you know these cultures didn't plagiarize from the Bible? Why did the Bible and Christianity survive but the other religions fell into the dust bins of history?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
b) There's no fundamental difference between the God of the Bible and any one of thousands of gods worshiped by humanity
Wrong. The God of the Bible has a personal interest in guiding each person's life down a unique path along with giving us special talents and abilities. God examines a person's inner self and heart. Other religions are action based. Do this action and your god will reward you....Pray facing west 3 times a day etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
c) There is no corroborating historical accounts of Jesus and any of his actions, much less resurrection
Simply wrong. Even if you discard Josephus completely, there are references to Jesus from Pliny the Younger, the Talmud, Lucian etc...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
d) Christianity and its stories are completely contained within a small area of the Middle East (i.e. it was a regional religion)
And funny that the earliest know writings of mankind come from Mesopotamia, the same region.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
e) Only the Book of Enoch is written in the first person, and that book was thrown out of the Bible
Never read Psalms?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
g) The spread of Christianity was largely done through invasion and forced conversions
Doesn't explain the spread of Christianity in South Korea and China.
I'm not embarrassed about being ignorant on biology because that's not my forte. Everyone is ignorant about something. What is shameful and embarrassing is when atheists make hit and run statements like this just to look superior. If I'm wrong then you should educate me with proof. Otherwise this just comes off as an insult.
You, Vizio, and many other fundamentalists have been given reams of evidence in dozens of posts and you treat them the same way you do with anything that threatens to educate you - you ignore them.
It's impossible to explain colour to a person blind from birth.
It's next-to-impossible to reason with a person who shutters their mind against reality.
You, Vizio, and many other fundamentalists have been given reams of evidence in dozens of posts and you treat them the same way you do with anything that threatens to educate you - you ignore them.
It's impossible to explain colour to a person blind from birth.
It's next-to-impossible to reason with a person who shutters their mind against reality.
But some of us soldier on.
If you have reams of evidence, why even ask this question in the first place?
Now here is a question for you. Do you think there are well educated scientists who are more intelligent than you or other atheists and also happen to be a Christian?
Now here is a question for you. Do you think there are well educated scientists who are more intelligent than you or other atheists and also happen to be a Christian?
Sure! There are a lot of scientists who are believers, not just in Christianity, but all manner of religions.
What you don't see is very many scientists who study paleology, biology, or botany who reject evolutionary explanations for biological diversity. The vast majority of Christians, particularly educated ones, find no conflict between their beliefs and our best scientific understanding of the world around us, life developing over a huge timescale. This is because many believers understand that at best science and religion should be seen as non-overlapping magisteria, and where they do overlap, empirical evidence must trump doctrine.
If you have reams of evidence, why even ask this question in the first place?
Now here is a question for you. Do you think there are well educated scientists who are more intelligent than you or other atheists and also happen to be a Christian?
Of course. And the vast majority of Christians aren't biblical literalists. They realize a world-wide flood was impossible, that evolution is a fact, and that much of the bible is allegorical.
What I don't believe, is that more than a handful of scientists in the world believe what you and Viz do. They are too intelligent and well-educated.
Of course. And the vast majority of Christians aren't biblical literalists. They realize a world-wide flood was impossible, that evolution is a fact, and that much of the bible is allegorical.
What I don't believe, is that more than a handful of scientists in the world believe what you and Viz do. They are too intelligent and well-educated.
And I'm not an Atheist or Agnostic.
If you believe the bible is allegorical then you have to believe Jesus Christ was a liar:
"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."
Matthew 24:37
Jesus certainly didn't treat the Bible as a work of fiction. If you believe Jesus is wrong here then I don't see how you can call yourself a Christian.
I certainly think your belief that only a small handful of scientists believe in a literal Bible is a myopic viewpoint based on wishful thinking. Just look on Amazon, and you will find plenty of books authored by extremely well educated people in support of Creationism and a literal Genesis. Here is one I found within seconds:
Walt Brown received a PhD in mechanical engineering from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), where he was a National Science Foundation Fellow. He has taught college courses in physics, mathematics, and computer science. Brown is a retired Air Force full colonel, West Point graduate, and former Army Ranger and paratrooper. Assignments during his 21 years of military service included: Director of Benet Laboratories (a major research, development, and engineering facility), tenured associate professor at the US Air Force Academy, and Chief of Science and Technology Studies at the Air War College. For much of his life Walt Brown was an evolutionist, but after years of study, he became convinced of the scientific validity of creation and a global flood. Since retiring from the military, Brown has been the Director of the Center for Scientific Creation and has worked full time in research, writing, and teaching on origins. His biography is in "Christian Men of Science: Eleven Men Who Changed the World" by Mulfinger and Orozco.
And looks like the book is endorsed by:
Dr. Kent Davey, Senior Research Scientist, University of Texas
Dr. Stuart Patterson, former Academic Dean andProfessor of Chemistry, Furman University
Well there's three down in my first search. How many equals just a handful?
Last edited by jeffbase40; 08-07-2014 at 02:17 PM..
If you believe the bible is allegorical then you have to believe Jesus Christ was a liar:
"As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."
Matthew 24:37
Jesus certainly didn't treat the Bible as a work of fiction. If you believe Jesus is wrong here then I don't see how you can call yourself a Christian.
I certainly think your belief that only a small handful of scientists believe in a literal Bible is a myopic viewpoint based on wishful thinking. Just look on Amazon, and you will find plenty of books authored by extremely well educated people in support of Creationism and a literal Genesis. Here is one I found within seconds:
Dr. Kent Davey, Senior Research Scientist, University of Texas
Dr. Stuart Patterson, former Academic Dean andProfessor of Chemistry, Furman University
Well there's three down in my first search. How many equals just a handful?
I don't call myself a Christian. What Jesus was purported to have said by those dozens of ancient dudes who wrote about him decades and centuries after his death means little or nothing to me.
According to the American Association for the Advancement of Science as of 2006 there were approximately 5.8 million science and engineering researchers in the world.
I'll go easy on you and say 1% would represent a handful.
Last edited by TroutDude; 08-07-2014 at 03:39 PM..
Reason: There was an extraneous there, there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
