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.
Isn't the theory of evolution ultimately founded upon the idea that chance can bring about new species, as it did bring about the phenomenon of life, and with humans also consciousness, intelligence and volition?
So if it's just entertainment what was the point of posting it in the religion and philosophy forum?
To lighten things up. The personal antagonism atheists project provokes and ultimately drives threads to closure . . . especially when they are losing the debate. It seems when their comfort level is disturbed and their false sense of superiority is challenged . . antagonism and provocation is the primary line of defense.
To lighten things up. The personal antagonism atheists project provokes and ultimately drives threads to closure . . . especially when they are losing the debate. It seems when their comfort level is disturbed and their false sense of superiority is challenged . . antagonism and provocation is the primary line of defense.
There's no chance of creating any discomfort in somebody who already believes a set of 2000 year old Jewish fairy tales about some carpenter who was born under a star by a virgin then disappeared for thirty years only to return healing by touching, raising from the dead, walking on water, turning water into fine wine, feeding thousands with two fish and five loaves etc.
The Jews wrote that collection of myths and they don't even believe it themselves.
And I'm not an atheist...I'm agnostic. I don't know and you don't either.
There's no chance of creating any discomfort in somebody who already believes a set of 2000 year old Jewish fairy tales about some carpenter who was born under a star by a virgin then disappeared for thirty years only to return healing by touching, raising from the dead, walking on water, turning water into fine wine, feeding thousands with two fish and five loaves etc.
The Jews wrote that collection of myths and they don't even believe it themselves.
And I'm not an atheist...I'm agnostic. I don't know and you don't either.
The difficulty resides in our automatic (and apparently rigid) predilection to engage things entirely in carnal/worldly/historical terms. Once the spiritual nature of the records is fully appreciated (spiritual fossil record) it should become apparent that they record purely spiritual phenomena (mental, cognitive content). The myriad versions over time and societies reflect that an embedded template exists in our spiritual DNA for the evolution of our understanding of God . . . NOT some historical or scientific record. The monolithic focus on the PHYSICAL evolution and historical development of humankind obscures the spiritual evolution (as reflected in the cognitive development of the brain structure and learning) that is recorded.
To lighten things up. The personal antagonism atheists project provokes and ultimately drives threads to closure . . . especially when they are losing the debate. It seems when their comfort level is disturbed and their false sense of superiority is challenged . . antagonism and provocation is the primary line of defense.
I would suspect that your constant denigration of all who disagree with you has more to do with getting your favorite threads closed than any other factor...
I would suspect that your constant denigration of all who disagree with you has more to do with getting your favorite threads closed than any other factor...
You may have a point there . . . I tend to have a low tolerance for arrogance based on nothing.
Isn't the theory of evolution ultimately founded upon the idea that chance can bring about new species, as it did bring about the phenomenon of life, and with humans also consciousness, intelligence and volition?
Ryrge
Well yes, as long as you're not trolling that old "Evolution can't explain the origins of life" stuff. We all agree on that. "Chance" coupled with "predictable molecular interactions", and the right "simple molecular precursors", (and perhaps a passing alien ship pouring the off-world equivalent of a Chia Pet toy into the warm ancient Pacific Ocean)... now that's what gave rise to "life" as we know and define it.
And then..... *mutate*mutate*mutate*... here am you and I! Amazing but logical, don't you agree?
________________________
BTW to clarify in this 21st Century: the words "Evolution" and "Debate" don't really belong in the same sentence. Look up "Oxymorons"
To lighten things up. The personal antagonism atheists project provokes and ultimately drives threads to closure . . . especially when they are losing the debate. It seems when their comfort level is disturbed and their false sense of superiority is challenged . . antagonism and provocation is the primary line of defense.
The last thread I saw close was when you started insulting people, calling them children, inferior, ignorant, stupid. But you never addressing any challenge to your claims. I do feel that I am superior to you at thinking rationally. But this has nothing to do with atheism.. It is your blatant disregard for rational skeptical thought, that shows your overwhelming tendency to fall back on wishful thinking, which leads me to believe such things. Rehashing the argument from ignorance is far from a superior argument.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You may have a point there . . . I tend to have a low tolerance for arrogance based on nothing.
And I'm not an atheist...I'm agnostic. I don't know and you don't either.
Agnostic falls under atheist.
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.